past paper 2
Bentham’s quantitative hedonistic utilitarianism states that an act has ‘utility’ and is morally right if it produces the greatest amount of pleasure and minimises the amount of pain. Similarly, Mill’s qualitative hedonistic utilitarianism also believes that a morally right action produces the greatest amount of pleasure, but the difference is that Mill suggests that there are different types of pleasure, whereas Bentham does not make the distinction. According to Mill, Bentham does not take into account the human nature, where when the basic needs are met, humans would naturally come to prefer other pleasures (for instance, the pleasure of thought). Mill suggests that there are two types of pleasure— higher and lower, in which both have different qualities (hence ‘qualitative’ hedonistic utilitarianism). Whereas Bentham would encourage any acts which would produce the greatest amount of pleasure and minimises the amount of pain, Mill would encourage the acts which produces the greatest amount of higher pleasure when possible, even if it brings more pain with it.
What is the difference between a priori knowledge and a posteriori knowledge
A priori knowledge is knowledge which does not rely on experience but rather through the thought of an individual alone. For example, mathematical equations do not rely on experience but rather logical, mathematical reasoning, such as that one arrives at an answer through a cognitive process (such as deduction) alone. A posteriori knowledge, on the other hand, is when knowledge relies on experience rather than on the thought of the individual alone. For example, a child knows how to ride a bike only after practicing (thus experiencing) riding a bike multiple times.
Explain why utilitarianism has an issue with partiality
Utilitarianism is a moral theory which states that an action is moral if it produces the greatest amount of happiness, such that the theory is based on the following:
Uilitarianism follows Act Consequentialism, in which the moral rightness of an act is concerned with the consequences of the act rather than the consequences itself.
Hedonistic utilitarianism is based on equality, where the happiness of all beings must be valued equally such as that no being’s happiness is valued more than the other.
Therefore, utilitarianism has an issue with partiality as it when the happiness of all beings are valued equally, it requires for the agent to be impartial to the people they have relations with. An issue with this is that impartiality and act consequentialism means that, when the agent performs a morally right act to those they have a relation with, the act is moral not because of the act, but because the outcome produced happiness. Therefore, as utilitarianism requires impartiality, the people involved with the agent is simply used as the means to an end in order to produce a morally correct outcome and would disregard the importance of the relations to the agent, for instance, the moral integrity of the agent that they have a duty owed to those they have relations with.
Define acquaintance knowledge, ability knowledge, propositional knowledge.
Acquaintance knowledge is knowledge which is derived from the familiarity of the individual with the subject, such as knowing a place or a person. Ability knowledge is the knowledge of how to do something, such as riding a bike. Propositional knowledge is knowing a factual knowledge about the world, such as that “I know that 2+2=4”.
Explain the view that belief is not a necessary condition for knowledge
While the Justified True Belief (JTB), otherwise known as the tripartite account of knowledge, suggests that propositional knowledge requires that S believes that P, it is arguable that belief is not needed for propositional knowledge. One argument is that, given the account of Infallibism, knowledge is infallible, such as that a knowledge is true and therefore cannot be false. However, belief is not infallible in the sense that it can be either true or false, and thus S is certain the P is true. However, a belief is not always true (it is infallible), such as that it is possible to doubt a belief. Therefore, defining propositional knowledge as a Justified True Belief is not necessary when knowledge