TI Exam #1
Lecture 1:
1. What does the word philosophy mean? Lover of wisdom. Philia means lover and sophia means wisdom.
2. How is philosophy different from opinion? Philosophy involves the use of reasonings, facts, or analogies as evidence for why our position is right or wrong. Ex. Pineapple on pizza is wrong as an opinion, while something like “ God can’t exist if there’s evil in the world" is philosophical.
3. Why do philosophy? It’s a good tool for understanding the world, our place in it and the things around us like facts vs opinions.
4. Be able to define metaphysics, epistemology, social philosophy, and ethics.
Metaphysics- the stuff we cannot define with physics. Concepts like being, time, space, and knowing.
Epistemology- Used to describe how we know the things we know. The study of knowledge. How we differentiate between justified beliefs and opinions. Ex How do we know climate change is real?
Social Philosophy- Study of coercive institutions like society, religion, and politics.
Ethics- The study of right and wrong. What it means to be a good person and rules for right and wrong.
5. What are the three branches of ethics we discussed? Be sure you can define them. (make these into writing out the questions when practicing)
Metaethics- Studies the status of moral values and words. Studies how he determines the meaning of different words and concepts used in ethics.
Duty Theories- We have certain duties we have to follow and if we don’t we’re in the wrong. Ex. Duty to not cheat on your partner
Normative Ethics- creating a system/ moral standards for right and wrong to follow.
The study of how to apply ethics into real world situations. You can’t have a system if you don’t pick one, you have to
Lecture 2:
6. Define supererogatory and use it in a sentence.
To do something above and beyond what is required. Acts that are above and beyond our duties that are morally required.
Ex. Volunteering at the shelter every weekend is a supererogatory act of kindness, as it goes beyond what is expected of them.
7. What is "common sense morality?"
It is pre-theory actions that can be gut-feelings or reactions that people use to make decisions.
8. What is the problem with "common sense morality?"
Common sense morality can become a problem when there’s no critical thinking behind decisions. (finish later)
9. We discussed four potential problems for morality. Describe two of them.
Morality is too demanding. People can feel that morality can place demands on them that feel burdensome and unreasonable.
Morality is alienating. If you spend too much time trying to follow moral standards, it can isolate you from the people around you and consume you.
Morality makes no room for special obligations. Morality can sometimes fail to consider how some decisions have more weight to them than others, like ones that involve someone close to us vs a stranger.
Many moral systems believe that morality can be captured by a set of rules or guidelines on how to act in certain situations but morality is a lot more complex than that.
10. We talked about four ways in which moral norms are different from other norms. What are they?
There are obligation norms and value norms considered with moral norms. Obligation norms are norms we’re obligated to do because they judge our moral actions. Value norms are what we consider good or bad.
Moral norms consider intentions behind actions.
You don’t earn credit for doing something you didn’t want to do in the first place, like cheating. Similarly, you don’t get praise for doing something you wanted to do.
Moral norms and other norms are different because other norms focus on behaviors while moral norms dig deeper into the reasoning behind actions and if the action aligns with their moral values.
Lecture 3:
11. What is the "problem of evil?"
If there is a God that is all-knowing, powerful, and good, then why is there evil in the world?
12. Be able to define omniscience, omnipotence, omnibenevolence, and theodicy.
Omniscience- the state of knowing everything
Omnipotent-having unlimited power
Omnibenevolence-being all good
Theodicy- an attempt against God having these 3 attributes due to the presence of evil.
Lecture 4:
13. Define "moral tragedy."
When someone encounters a difficult dilemma where their actions have bad moral consequences.
14. Define utilitarianism.
The goal is to maximize happiness and minimize suffering. Consequences of the action matter the most.
15. Define deontology. (duty-based theories)
The intent of your decision matters the most. “Are you doing things that align with your moral duties?” It’s not saying they don’t care about consequences, they just make their decisions based on their duties.
Moral Relativism Youtube Lecture and Assignment:
16. According to Benedict, how does cultural diversity support the ideas of moral relativism?
Cultural diversity supports Benedict’s idea that what is considered normal and abnormal in society changes throughout cultures.
17. How does Benedict define “normal” behavior in society?
Benedict defines “normal” as socially acceptable behavior to perform in your culture. He does not think this “normal” is the same across cultures.
Lecture 5:
18. How does the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy define moral relativism?
Moral relativism is that moral judgements are relative to a specific culture and are not universal. These judgements are also not the absolute truth but are impacted by our moral standards.
19. How does Midgley define moral isolationism?
She defines moral isolationism as the idea that cultures are so isolated and different from each other that we’re not allowed to make judgements of other cultures. It argues that something is only weird in one culture and it would be considered normal in another but we can’t understand it.
20. How does Midgley argue that moral isolationism makes no sense at all?
She argues that many people are comfortable with making positive judgments about another culture so she argues that if we can praise a culture we should be comfortable with doing the opposite. She says it does not make sense that we can only give positive judgements and that some criticism is necessary for a culture to adapt and be better.
21. Midgley asks us four questions about moral isolationism. What are those four questions and how does she answer them?
Does the isolation barrier work both ways? Are other cultures allowed to criticize us?
She says that other cultures do criticize us so no it does not work both ways.
Do the isolating barriers block praise as well as criticism?
She says that no, we should be able to praise and criticize another culture. It does not make sense to be able to only do one and not the other.
What is involved in judging?
Judging is just forming an opinion and expressing it. We do it all the time and it’s not wrong as long as we’re not spreading hate, misinformation, or prejudice.
If we can’t judge other cultures, can we really judge our own?
Judgements of other cultures can allow us to change the way we do things in our own culture and adapt. We can use judgements as a mirror to compare how we do things and how we could improve cultural norms.
Essay Question Options
22. According to Benedict, what is moral relativism and why should we accept it? According to Midgley, what is moral isolationism (moral relativism) and why shouldn't we accept it? With which theory of morality do you agree and why? (Note: it is logically impossible to agree with both.)
Benedict argues that moral relativism is the idea that moral judgements vary based on moral standards and that norms are different across cultures. Her support for moral relativism advocates that we should appreciate cultural diversity for growth and because it emphasizes that each culture defines its own moral standards.
Midgley argues that moral isolationism (moral relativism) discourages us from trying to understand other cultures. She explains how people who follow moral isolationism accept that other cultures are too complicated to understand and since moral norms vary from culture to culture the only one we can truly understand is our own. She argues that we can’t accept it because it leads to us not being able to improve as a culture and adapt our moral principles. If we can’t judge other cultures then we can’t have moral reasoning.
I find Midgley’s argument more compelling. I think that it is important to appreciate and consider cultural diversity, however, I do not agree that we should not even try to understand other cultures because they are too complex. This is how moral isolationism encourages us to think, but we are all connected on this earth and have similarities across cultures so I don’t think it is too complex to try to understand a different culture.
In our class discussion, we talked about how we admire different things among cultures, like better transportation systems in Europe. Using Midgley’s point of view, we could take this judgement and use it to better our own culture. If we were to follow moral relativism like Benedict, that would lead to us accepting we can’t understand all of the context behind their transportation system and therefore can’t be in a position to judge it as a positive or negative thing.