Phi Moral Theory

Front 1

Arguments are

Back 1

basic units of reasoning

Front 2

Parts of arguments

Back 2

Premises-reasons for accepting conclusion
Conclusion-that which is supported by premises

Front 3

Argument test

Back 3

is there a statement or conclusion with other statements offered as reasons to believe that the conclusion is true?

Front 4

Argument indicator words before premises

Back 4

since, because, whereas

Front 5

Argument indicator words before conclusion

Back 5

so, thus, therefore, hence, it follows that

Front 6

Argument indicator words within conclusion

Back 6

must

Front 7

Argument validity refers to

Back 7

proper form with premises and logical conclusion, need not be true

Front 8

Argument validity will have

Back 8

1-conclusion follows from premises
2-in every situation where premises are true, conclusion also true
3-if premises true, conclusion must be true
4-not possible for premises to be true when conclusion false

Front 9

A sound argument is

Back 9

a valid argument with all true premises

Front 10

For argument analysis we must

Back 10

attack or defend its soundness by attacking/defending individual premises

Front 11

Philosophy is

Back 11

an exercise in reason, esp the study of general & fundamental problems such as knowledge, reality, values and existence

Front 12

Philosophy is also

Back 12

one way to investigate morality, or "how we ought to live" -Socrates

Front 13

A minimum conception of morality is

Back 13

at the least, the effort to guide one's conduct by reason (do the action that has the best reasons for doing) while giving equal weight to each individual's interests affected by one's decision

Front 14

Cultural Relativism is

Back 14

the theory or observation that different cultures have different moral codes

Front 15

Conscientious moral agent impartially concerned with interests of everyone

Back 15

Accomplishes by sifting facts, examining implications, revising beliefs if necessary

Front 16

Cultural Relativism opposite of

Back 16

Objectivity & Universal Moral Truths

Front 17

Cultural Relativism belief 1

Back 17

Different societies have different moral codes

Front 18

Cultural Relativism belief 2

Back 18

Moral code of each society determines right/wrong within each society

Front 19

Cultural Relativism belief 3

Back 19

No objective standard can be used to judge one’s societal codes as better than others; no overarching moral truths

Front 20

Cultural Relativism belief 4

Back 20

The moral codes of our society are not higher status, only one of many moral codes

Front 21

Cultural Relativism belief 5

Back 21

Must always be tolerant of other culture’s moral codes, no judgment possible

Front 22

Cultural Relativism flaw 1

Back 22

Not possible to criticize customs/practices of other societies as morally inferior to ours

Front 23

Cultural Relativism flaw 2

Back 23

Cannot criticize code of own society; conforming to society’s moral codes is only “right” practice

Front 24

Cultural Relativism flaw 3

Back 24

Moral progress not possible, reform or challenge of status quo verboten

Front 25

Subjectivism is

Back 25

Belief that subjective experience is fundamental measure of moral opinions; there are no objective rights/wrongs

Front 26

Subjectivism according to Hume

Back 26

The sentiment or feeling of disapproval toward an action is basis for moral code, not reason

Front 27

Subjectivism weakness 1

Back 27

No disagreement possible

Front 28

Subjectivism no disagreement example

Back 28

Person A feels homosexuality is morally unacceptable
Person B feels homosexuality is morally acceptable
Truth of utterances acknowledged, but circularity of subjectivism prevents disagreement

Front 29

Subjectivism weakness 2

Back 29

Implies we are always right Equates honest expression of feeling with moral correctness

Front 30

Subjectivism always right example

Back 30

As long as sincerely expressed, “correct” when Michele Bachman says “I disapprove of homosexuality”

Front 31

According to Emotivism, moral language is not

Back 31

Fact-stating language to convey information or make reports

Front 32

Emotivism posits that language is

Back 32

A means for influencing people’s behavior & for expressing an attitude

Front 33

Stevenson’s Emotivism says there are 2 types of disagreement

Back 33

Disagreement in belief & disagreement in attitude

Front 34

Emotivism moral disagreements are

Back 34

Disagreements in attitude only

Front 35

Both Simple subjectivism and emotivism imply

Back 35

That our moral judgments are beyond reproach

Front 36

Subjectivism is attractive because

Back 36

Reasoned answers in ethics are difficult

Front 37

Many people think moral judgments are improvable because

Back 37

1) Not same as scientific proof, but ethically reasoned arguments and principle
2) There are many simple truths ethicists agree on, but ethical debates often begin with most difficult & complicated issues such as abortion
3) Many confused by distinction between proving an ethical opinion & persuading others to accept

Front 38

Many Americans think that morality domains only function from a

Back 38

Religious context

Front 39

Divine
Command Theory says

Back 39

God decides what is right and wrong

Front 40

Socrates Euthyphro question

Back 40

“Is conduct right because gods command it, or do gods command it because it is right?”

Front 41

Euthyphro problem means

Back 41

Does God make moral truths TRUE, or merely recognize that they are?

Front 42

If right conduct is right because God commands it then

Back 42

Conception of morality mysterious, method unknown
God’s command arbitrary
Provides wrong reasons for moral principles

Front 43

Proof of flawed theory: if God didn’t exist then

Back 43

Child abuse would not be wrong

Front 44

Or if God in his wisdom commands us to do certain things because they are right then

Back 44

There is a standard of rightness independent of God’s will, existing prior to God’s commands. This is impious, and rejected by theologians (Aquinas)

Front 45

Dominant Christian Theory of Ethics is

Back 45

Theory of Natural Law

Front 46

Part 1 Theory of Natural Law worldview derived from Greek view that

Back 46

Everything in nature has a purpose

Front 47

Aristotle said that 4 questions will enable one to understand anything

Back 47

What is it? What is it made of? How did it come to be? And what is it for?

Front 48

Christian thinkers added to all values and purposes that

Back 48

They are thus because God intended or made them for (human use)

Front 49

Part 2 Theory of Natural Law includes oughts implying

Back 49

Unnatural acts are immoral, deviant, basis for Catholic Church moral theology

Front 50

Part 3 Theory of Natural Law right & wrong are determined by

Back 50

Dictates of reason, which God has given believer & nonbeliever alike the power to understand