Philosophy

Front 1

Consequentialism

Back 1

One state of affairs is better than another if it involves less pain than the other

Front 2

Hedonism

Back 2

One state of affairs is better than another if and only if the distribution of pain and pleasure over time is considered more desirable

Front 3

Hedonistic Consequentialism

Back 3

We always ought to act to bring about the state of affairs with the best possible distribution of pain and pleasure

Front 4

Utilitarianism

Back 4

One always ought to act to bring about the state of affairs with the greatest possible distribution of utility

Front 5

Moore's Skepticism

Back 5

Here's one hand, here's another hand, there are at least two external objects in the world, an external world exists.
If S doesn't know that not-sp, then S doesn't know that q
S doesn't know that not-sp
Therefore, S doesn't know that q
Moore's response
If S doesn't know that not-sp, then S doesn't know that q
S knows that q
Therefore, S knows that not-sp
(1) the premises must be different from the conclusion, (2) the premises must be demonstrated, and (3) the conclusion must follow from the premises

Front 6

Categorical Imperative

Back 6

Form of Universal Law-Act only on maxims that you can at the same time will into universal law
Form of Humanity-Act always in such a way that you never use another person only as a means to an end

Front 7

Nagel's Moral Luck

Back 7

Violate the Principle of Control
1. Luck in how things turn out: Consequences of circumstances (Lady in street vs. not in street)
2. Constitutive luck: Personality determines how much blame is assigned. Environmental effects, upbringing, and other uncontrollable influences affect personality.
3. Luck in circumstances: The circumstances determine how much blame is assigned (people in Germany vs. out of Germany)
4. Luck of determinism: Actions are determined through external events out of our control, therefore we have no responsibility for them

Front 8

Principle of Control

Back 8

You're not responsible for something out of your control

Front 9

Hume's Induction

Back 9

We induce things based on the logic that the future will resemble the past, or that the future will resemble the past because it always has thus far.
Response:
The future is a matter of fact, not relation of ideas, because we can picture it chaotic just as we can picture it uniform. By trying to justify this the argument becomes circular because we justify matters of fact with matters of fact. Induction is therefore not justified

Front 10

Feinberg's Egoism

Back 10

Analytic statements-statements who's truth is determined by the words defining them
Synthetic statements-Statements whose truth is derived from empirical evidence
States that egoist uses equivocation by redefining "selfish" as "motivated"
The real interpretation of psychological egoism is "Motivated actions are motivated," which is an uninteresting tautology

Front 11

Gaucon's Morality

Back 11

Moral uprightness is based in narrow self interest.
We create laws that reward restraint from narrow self interest and call them "morally upright" and call violations of these laws "immoral"
If we could kill without punishment, we would do so, as it represents the best case of our own welfare. But we settle for what gets us the most good without suffering the evil consequences

Front 12

Divine Command Theory

Back 12

Euthyphro
Is the pious loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved by the gods?
Whatever God commands must be good, even if we see it as bad (kill) (it may appear to be immoral but is immoral in the bigger picture)
Morality is no longer dependent on God, defeating divine command theory (God is not omnipotent either)

Front 13

Williams Counter to consequentialism

Back 13

Consequentialism demands that moral agents sacrifice commitments in order to pursue the most beneficient course of action
Fails to take note the difference that the author of a consequence can make (committing a crime considering someone else would have done it or done it to a more serious degree)

Front 14

Achilles and the tortoise

Back 14

The quickest runner in a race may never overtake the slowest, since the quickest must always reach the point where the slowest started, thus the slowest may always have the lead.
Lewis Carroll writes that modus ponens deductions make regress problems. If we accept a principle, we have to propose a prior principle, and then propose a prior principle to accept that principle. This is nullified in a formal system where modus ponens is an axiom

Front 15

Justified True Belief

Back 15

S is justified in believing P is true if and only if
P is true
S believes that P is true
S is justified in believing that P is true
Gettier argues that justified true belief can appear to not be knowledge.
Man with 10 coins in his pocket gets job

Front 16

Categorical Imperative

Back 16

Asserts authority in all circumstances, both required and justified as an end in itself.
If truth telling is universal, would lying to a killer about his prey be wrong?

Front 17

Nagel's Dream

Back 17

We could question whether everything in this world is just a product of our mind, that we are the only one's who exist. But there is no argument because if it is true there is no way to tell