Ethics

Front 1

Whatis the difference between an intrinsic good and an instrumental good? What isthe only thing Kant thinks is intrinsically good? Why does he think that? 


Back 1

. Intrinsic good (Things good for their own sake (goods themselves), Happiness, good intentions)

Instrumental goods (Things that are good for what else they get us, not good in themselves – Physical training, making money).

Kant believes the only thing that can be considered good “a Good Will”, everything else is instrumentally good, and may become bad if they are not guided by a good will. A good will is the most important for its virtue of its willing goodness.

Front 2

Whatare the only kinds of actions that Kant thinks have moral worth? What kind ofactions do not have moral worth (even if it might seem like they should)? Why? 


Back 2

Kant believes that only when people act because of their moral duty that their actions have moral worth. According to Kant someone can never do the wrong thing if you act from duty. Moral worth can only come from acting according to Maxim.

Acting out of selfishness does not have moral duty. When someone acts of self-interest they are not following their moral duty which results in no moral worth. For the reason that selfish person is not acting morally to others they are acting purely for their own benefit.

Front 3

ExplainKant’s distinction between the Categorical Imperative and hypotheticalimperatives. Give an example of each. 


Back 3

. Kantuses Categorical Imperative and Hypothetical Imperatives to specify acting withaccordance of our moral duty.

. Hypotheticalimperative tells us what we need to do to reach a certain end, but does notestablish the end as necessarily good. (If you want to do good in school, thenyou should study hard). Hypothetical imperative does not necessarily need to dogood in school, only you want to.

. Categorical Imperative establish the necessity of its end. An actions asnecessary of itself, without reference to another end (Can someone make a falsepromise when in distress). The C.I tells us what we ought to do, it provides uswith a set of universal moral duties for all rational creatures. The C.I tells us we must respect moral agentsand never manipulate someone.

Front 4

Whydoes Kant think morality needs to center on duty? What problem arises in amoral system not center on duties?

Back 4

If Morality was the center on duty society would conduct its self-based on morals then everyone could trust everyone and everyone would do things to better the majority of the population not, just the individual.

If morality is not the center, then people begin to lose faith and trust in humanity and begin to act selfishly. This results in people worsening their relationships with strangers moving farther away from a utopia. If people do not feel morally responsible for their actions, then they will not properly fulfill their moral duty.

Front 5

Explain why Kant thinks we should not make a falsepromise when in distress. How does this example relate to the CategoricalImperative? 


Back 5

If everyone were to make false promises, they would break their moral duty and destroy the practice of promise making. This would happen because nobody would trust (no moral duty) anyone for the reason that people will falsely promise to do things when it is convenient to do so.

This relates to the Categorical Imperative because when someone lies they are breaking their maxim and universal moral duties. Lying is motivated by selfish concerns and not a concern with duty which make lying in moral.

Front 6

Explainthe Principle of Utility (a.k.a. The Greatest Happiness Principle). What doesit claim is good? 
What actions does it consider to be morally good? 


Back 6

The Principle of Utility is the principletending to produce the greatest’s amount of happiness for the greatest numbers.The right actions are considered morally good they tend to promote happiness;wrong actions tend to produce the reverse of happiness. This claims that goodis pleasure itself, together with exemption from pain”. Utility is what is considered intrinsicallygood. The right actions are morally good actions.

Front 7

ExplainMill’s distinction between higher and lower pleasures. How is that distinctionmade? What does Mill think this distinction helps preserve? (Or, to whatobjection does this distinction help Mill respond?)

Back 7

According to Mill higher quality pleasures are mental pleasures (intelligent pleasures) reading a good book, seeing a good play. Lower quality pleasures (sensual pleasures) Food, sleep, sex are physical pleasures. This distinguishes pleasures that differ in quality, not just quantity. Mill elaborates that mental pleasures are more important and valuable to humans then mere sensations. Animals have physical sensations but human’s minds are more advanced and we do not voluntarily give up our minds in exchange for pleasurable sensations.

Front 8

Whatkinds of actions does utilitarianism claim have moral worth? Why?

Back 8

Utilitarianism advocates for people to engage in the pursuit of pleasure;sensually self-indulgent altruism, that the action chosen would bestmaximizes the well-being of the greatest number. Actions have moral worth whenthey benefit everyone, not selfish actions.

Front 9

Howdoes Mill respond to the objection that utilitarianism’s standards of actionare too high?

Back 9

Millobjects to the idea that utilitarian standards are too high on that, our moralstandards and rules differ and you can not please everyone. Mill responds with thatthe utilitarianism holds that the right action is whatever action best maximizesthe happiness of the greatest number.

Front 10

Inwhat way does Mill believe that the moral standard of utility is sanctioned(i.e. what is the basis of the moral standard of utility)?

Back 10

The ultimate authoritative premise of the moralstandard of utility is “the conscientious feeling of mankind. It is nothing butshared, contingent feeling.”

Front 11

Explain what the ideal of the “man of reason”represents, according to Held. What problem does she think comes out of thisideal?

Back 11

The individual who overcomes the emotional disposition of the mind associated with sexism towards the female.

The problem is the history of ethics was constructed from a male’s point of view, and was built on gender inequality. Instead held believes, entirely new approaches are necessary, based on what have been traditionally considered female concerns. We consider reason to be more important than emotions.

Front 12

What do both deontological (Kant) andconsequentialist (Mill) moral theories have in common, according to Held? Howdo the two theories differ in Held’s view?

Back 12

Both Mill and Kant share a “reliance on universal principle as the appropriate source of moral guidance, and both share the view that moral problems are to be solved by the application of principles (Categorical Imperative and Principle of Utility) to particular cases.

Helds idea criticizes the universal rules and encourage “the adoption of more context-respectful approaches”. “actual relationships between embodied persons, and with what these relationships seem to require”.

Front 13

Whatare the general features of a feminist approach to moral matters, according toHeld? (i.e. What will it emphasize and respect, in contrast to traditionaltheories?)

Back 13

Placing emphasis on thedevelopment of the moral emotions, in contrast to the moral theories placing reasonfirst. Respecting and emphasizingemotions, instead of seeing it as something to be overcome.

Front 14

Towhat potential objection to a feminist approach to ethics does Held respond?How does Held respond to this objection?

Back 14

Theobjection to the feminist approach is placing emphasis on the emotions willresult in a relativistic situation ethic.

Held objection is she does not believe this isnecessarily true, as “some feelings can be as widely shared as are rationalbeliefs. Feminists typically aremore acutely aware of the network of intersecting interests in any situation,including the emotional, social, and political aspects.

Front 15

Explainthe traditional public-private distinction that Held examines. What sorts ofactivities are appropriate to each sphere? Why is the distinction problematic,according to Held?

Back 15

Feminists challenge is thedistinction between the public and the private spheres. “That what occurs inthe household occurs as if on an island beyond politics.

The feminine has beenassociated with the private, domestic sphere that is concerned with theemotions and biological activity, in contrast to the public, rational, male-dominatedsphere concerned with justice and morality.

Front 16

Explainthe difference between the terms “person” and “human being,” as outlined byMidgley.

Back 16

Aperson is a subject with legal rights, a juridical person, a rationalbeing, capable of choice and therefore endowed with dignity, worthy of respect,having rights. A human being is not subject to legal rights (in historywoman, slaves). Basically a person is important and a human being is notimportant.

Front 17

Explainhow Kant established the intuitive equivalence between humans and persons,according to Midgley. On what quality does the equivalence rely? What is onepotential problem with how this equivalence is justified (with the quality onwhich the equivalence relies)?

Back 17

Kant established the equivalence by a person is a rational being,capable of choice, having rights, with dignity. On that is regarded always asan end in itself. Humans are lacking rationality

Midgley believes the problemis Kant view is black and white with his comparison of persons and things.Things can properly be used as means to human ends, Things have no aims oftheir own. They are not subject but objects.

Front 18

Inwhat way is cruelty to animals wrong, according to the Kantian viewpoint? Whydoes Midgley think 
that view is unsatisfying?

Back 18

Cruelty is to be avoided because of its potential side-effects. If weare cruel to animals, we could end up being cruel to humans, also being cruelto animals is a indirect justification cause we don’t consider the viewof the animal.

Since we hunt and show emotiontowards animals we do not just consider them mere things but we consider themto be another. Historically humans have been considered distinct frombeasts, Midgely states that animals have very similar traits to humans they aresocial, intelligent, capable of language.

This is a view according to Kantianwould break a Categorical Imperative because abusing animals defy moral laws,would lower our maxim and be a motive for selfish concern and C.Irequires us to treat humans and persons the same. Or else this would violateour duties.

Front 19

According to Midgley, what quality should set thelimits of moral concern? Why does she think that? 
Howextensive would that quality make the domain of moral concern? 


Back 19

Moral limits should be set to what is able tosuffer. Animals should be entitled to basic consideration. Animals should havemoral limits not just on an intellectual capacity, but emotionalfellowship.