Aqa Moral Philosophy A2

Front 1

ACT UTILITARIANISM: "The theory provides a way to measure morality".

Back 1

COUNTERPOINT: How can you measure something subjective like pleasure?

Front 2

ACT UTILITARIANISM: "Pleasure as a motivation is natural, empirical and instinctive."

Back 2

COUNTERPOINT: But does that mean pleasure = goodness?

Front 3

ACT UTILITARIANISM: "The theory can always generate an answer to a moral dilemma."

Back 3

COUNTERPOINT: True, but the Hedonistic calculus is demanding, time-consuming and most importantly subjective - so answers could differ.

Front 4

ACT/RULE UTILITARIANISM: "Utilitarianism is an egalitarian theory that is concerned with holding everybody's happiness to be equal."

Back 4

COUNTERPOINT: Utilitarianism ignores the integrity of the individual - if you are the minority in a situation, you may fall into Gauthier's veil of morality.

Front 5

ACT/RULE UTILITARIANISM: "It makes sense that we should place value in consequence."

Back 5

COUNTERPOINT: But how do we come to the conclusion that a consequence is bad if we completely ignore the act itself? Surely equal weight should be spread.

Front 6

ACT UTILITARIANISM: "Act utilitarianism demands that everybody works for the good of the greater whole".

Back 6

COUNTERPOINT: Not all moral acts can be completed all the time - this is too demanding e.g. giving to charity. There is room for free-riders.

Front 7

RULE UTILITARIANISM: "Rule utilitarianism is less time-consuming than act utilitarianism as it removes the complicated calculus."

Back 7

COUNTERPOINT: The theory seems to favour the amendment of a rule when it would produce greater utility. You could also argue that it is fairer to judge morality on a situational basis.

Front 8

KANTIAN ETHICS: "The theory is not open to emotional preference."

Back 8

COUNTERPOINT: Should emotion be discounted? This makes the theory seem cold and neglects things like compassion.

Front 9

KANTIAN ETHICS: "It provides an objective measure of morality".

Back 9

COUNTERPOINT: The fact that somebody else has decided said measure makes it subjective.

Front 10

KANTIAN ETHICS: "Deontology treats everybody equally."

Back 10

COUNTERPOINT: By being reason-based, the theory is elitist and suggests that sentient beings like animals are not part of the moral community.

Front 11

KANTIAN ETHICS: "The inflexibility of the theory is a strength because it removes preference and selfishness".

Back 11

COUNTERPOINT: Removing self-interest can lead to empty formalism, and is not a good motivation to be moral.

Front 12

KANTIAN ETHICS: "Moral actions are universalisable and therefore promote equality."

Back 12

COUNTERPOINT: Universalisability is not always a good basis for morality, as it can be manipulated through clever use of language (prudential reasoning). Can consequence really be removed?

Front 13

KANTIAN ETHICS: "The theory is reason-based and is not swayed by desire."

Back 13

COUNTERPOINT: Reasons seems to be a cold and impersonal moral guideline.

Front 14

KANTIAN ETHICS: "We act morally because it is our duty to do so."

Back 14

COUNTERPOINT: Duties can conflict e.g. the Axe Murderer example (must explain why Kant is wrong, as he created this).

Front 15

VIRTUE ETHICS: "Virtues have social dimension - you can act both in self-interest and in the best interests of your community."

Back 15

COUNTERPOINT: What best benefits a community is culturally captive e.g. in Aristotelian times, it was considered beneficial to keep slaves.

Front 16

VIRTUE ETHICS: "People are naturally motivated to be happy."

Back 16

COUNTERPOINT: This may promote a theory that is selfish, as people are trying to flourish for themselves.

Front 17

VIRTUE ETHICS: "The theory establishes virtues such as courage that we can identify in our own actions."

Back 17

COUNTERPOINT: People can misuse virtues e.g. the courageous suicide bomber, the loyal Nazi...