iSearchNotes is a FREE service that allows College Students to
Search and Share Class Notes.
1. What is the “state of nature”? According to Hobbes, what facts about human life lead to a state of nature?
The "state of nature" is the idea of what it would be like if there were no way to enforce social rules. If there were no government institutions- no laws, no police, no courts, what would it be like? Hobbes thought there were four facts about human life- the equality of need (we all need the same basic things to survive), scarcity (what we need does not exist in abundance), the essential equality of human power (even the strongest can be brought down by others acting together), and limited altruism (we can't assume others will step aside when their interests conflict with ours).
2. Explain the Prisoner’s Dilemma. What lessons does Rachels think we learn from the Prisoner’s Dilemma?
The Prisoner's Dilemma provides a situation in which you live in a totalitarian society, and you are arrested and charged with treason. You are innocent. They tell you they have also arrested a man named Smith, who is supposedly your accomplice. They demand you confess, you protest- You don't know Smith. They offer you plea bargains. If you confess, and Smith does not- they will release you. Smith gets ten years. If Smith confesses and you do not- he's released and you get ten years. If you both confess- you both get five years. If neither confess- you both get let go.
We are to learn that in every situation, you can do what will benefit yourself, or you can be concerned with other's welfare, too. However, others have that same choice.
3. What is the Social Contract Theorist’s basic view of morality?
Their basic view of morality is that morality consists in the set of rules, governing behavior, that rational people will accept, on the condition that others will accept them as well.
4. What are some advantages and difficulties of the Social Contract Theory?
It provides plausible answers to difficult questions, such as-
What moral rules do we follow? We follow the rules which facilitate harmonious social living. We couldn't live peacefully if murder, assault, theft, lying, etc... were allowed.
Why is it rational for us to follow moral rules?
We agree to follow the moral rules because we benefit from living in a places when the rules are accepted.
However, not everyone will follow the rules. This is the main problem.
Some individuals cannot benefit us, such as human infants, nonhuman animals, future generations, and oppressed populations. They wouldn't benefit from a system of rules.
5. According to Social Contract Theory, under what conditions is civil disobedience morally acceptable?
Civil disobedience if morally acceptable when the disadvantaged are denied the benefits of social living, they are released from the contract that would otherwise require them to follow society's rules.
6. What is the difference between a dutiful act and a supererogatory act?
A dutiful act is something that is your responsibility in the first place, whereas a supererogatory act is 'going beyond the call of duty'.
7. What is the principle of utility?
The one ultimate moral principle in the Utilitarian Approach. It is the requirement, in all circumstances, to produce the most happiness that we can.
8. What role does the distribution of happiness play in the classical utilitarian’s calculations?
The distribution of happiness plays a big role in determining what choice to make in any situation. How much happiness or pain people will face can affect one person greatly, while others may not be affected at all. It doesn't matter how many people are involved, if one person benefits from it greatly, then the action should be taken.
9. The utilitarian sees the racist, sexist and speciesist as making the same kind of mistake: explain.
10. In what way do utilitarians and Christians typically differ over the issue of euthanasia?
Christians believe life is sacred and only God should have the power over someone's life (aside from capital punishment and war). However, utilitarians believe that if someone is in wretched pain and the unhappiness outweighs their happiness in life, then that person has a right to die.
11. What reasons would a utilitarian give for permitting marijuana use and legalization?
Utilitarians would say that marijuana causes pleasure in people who use it. People enjoy getting high. Marijuana does NOT cause violence. Also, it enhances other aspects in life which may be pleasurable, such as sex, eating, etc...
12. Did Bentham and Mill hold that animals should always be treated like humans? Explain.
Bentham and Mill argues that whether an animal is human or nonhuman is just as irrelevant as whether she is black or white. Don't animals suffer, too? They are entitled to moral concern.
13. What is the difference between act and rule utilitarianism?
Rule utilitarianism is the set of rules we should follow to maximize happiness. Individual acts are then judged right or wrong according to whether they are acceptable or unacceptable by these rules. Rule utilitarianism- what rules tend to promote the most happiness? Act utilitarianism- making choices base on the consequences of one particular act.
14. Explain the objection that utilitarianism conflicts with our sense of justice.
Justice requires that we treat people fairly, according to the merits of their particular situations. Utilitarianism requires that we treat someone unfairly, if the good consequences outweigh the bad.
15. Explain the objection that utilitarianism conflicts with our sense of justice.
See above.
16. What is the principle of rational benevolence?
Rational benevolence is the idea that we should at good generally, maximizing everyone's happiness (not just those close to us).
17. Explain the difference between consequentialist and deontological ethical theories.
Consequentialism: A type of ethical theory stating that to act morally we must base our actions on their probable results or consequences, rather than out of duty, in cases where duty and promoting good consequences come into conflict.
Deontology: A type of moral theory stating that morality consists in doing one’s duty, rather than in considering the consequences of one’s actions, in cases where duty and promotion of consequences come into conflict.
18. Did Kant base his ethical theory on our sentiments or our reason?
Our reason.
19. What is the difference between a hypothetical and a categorical imperative? Provide an example of each.
A hypothetical imperative tells us what to do provided that we have the relevant desires, whereas a categorical imperative based on moral obligations, no matter what your desires are. For example, a hypothetical imperative- If you want to go to college, you ought to take the SAT. A categorical imperative- You should help people no matter what your desires are.
20. State the categorical imperative (first version) that for Kant is the supreme principle of morality.
"Act so that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in that of another, always as an end and never as a means only."
21. Briefly, how might we test to see if an action of ours conforms to Kant's categorical imperative?
We can test this by asking ourselves- "What rule would I be following if I actually did this"? This would be the maxim of your act. Then ask yourself whether you would be willing for your maxim to become a universal law. if so, your maxim is sound, and your act is acceptable. If not, it is forbidden
22. What is negative responsibility?
Negative responsibility is the responsibility for something which is not caused directly by the person but which the person fails to prevent from happening.
23. List a couple of objections to Kantian absolutism.
*It's odd to us as humans to understand something absolute- we find counter examples
*Save a life by lying? Still can't lie!
*No real background- Not based on religion or other long-lasting foundations.
24. Explain how a Utilitarian and how a Kantian would respond to the scenario described in class rescue mission 1 and rescue mission 2.
Utilitarian- Save the 5 lives in mission 1 and kill the man in mission 2 to save the other 5 lives.
Kantian- Save the 5 lives in mission 1 and save the man in mission 2 because killing an innocent person, no matter what, is unjust (even if 5 people die).
25. According to Rachels, what are the core ideas of Kant’s ethical philosophy?
Kant's ethical philosophy was founded on reason, what's rational, with absolute rights and wrongs, as well as being a form of deontilogical ethics.
26. What is Kant’s second formulation of the Categorical Imperative?
Respect others. Never use a person as an end to a mean.
27. Explain how a utilitarian justifies punishment.
Utilitarians believe that punishment provides comfort and gratification to victims and their families. Also, punishment (by imprisonment and execution) would take criminals off the street. Thirdly, punishment deters would-be criminals.
28. Explain how a Kantian justifies punishment.
Kantian justifies punishment because of the belief that since they committed crimes, they should be punished (and for no other reason). They should be punished proportionately to the crime committed. He believed that if the guilty were not punished, then justice is not done. Kant viewed capital punishment was a way of respecting the criminal as a person. Recall that for Kant your desires cannot be the motivation for your ethical actions.
29. As with the last test, you should familiarize yourself with the quotes from Hobbes, Mill, Kant, etc that appear in our textbook or in the lecture notes.
Your support will help spread the extreme awesomeness that is iSearchNotes!
