Study your flashcards anywhere!

Download the official Cram app for free >

  • Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
Reading...
Front

How to study your flashcards.

Right/Left arrow keys: Navigate between flashcards.right arrow keyleft arrow key

Up/Down arrow keys: Flip the card between the front and back.down keyup key

H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key

image

Play button

image

Play button

image

Progress

1/41

Click to flip

41 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
descriptive claim
a claim is descriptive if an only if it says something about how the world IS
normative claim
a claim is normative if and only if it says something about how the world OUGHT to be
objective claim
a claim is objectively true if and only if it is true independently of whether anyone believes it
subjective claim
a claim is subjectively true if and only if its truth depends on the beliefs of the person making the claim
ethical subjectivism
a normative ethical theory. claims that an act is morally right if and only if the person judging the action approves of it (normative claims are only subjectively true or false)
consequentialism
a normative ethical theory. includes GHP(j.s. mill) and ethical egoism. (wiki) refers to thos moral theories that hold that the consequences of a particular action form the basis of any valid moral judgment about that action
social contract theory
(hobbes) a normative ethical theory. an action is morally right just in case it abides by the social contract. also said as: an action is morally wrong just in case it is a violation of one's covenants
divine command theory
a normative ethical theory. an action is morally right if it's something God approves of and visa versa.
intrinsic value
something has intrinsic value if and only if it is valuable for its own sake, rather than as a means to something else.
instrumental value
instrumental value is given to something if and only if it has value as a mens to something else that has value.
greatest happiness principle (utilitarianism)
(j.s. mill) a type of consequentialism (a normative ethical theory). an action is morally right if and only if it produces at least as much happiness (or more happiness) as the relative alternative.
forward-looking moral consideration
a forward-looking moral consideration is any factor relevant for determining whether an action is morally right that concerns the consequences of the action.
non-forward looking moral consideration
a non-forward looking moral consideration is any factor for determinig whether an action is morally right that do NOT concern the consequences of the action.
state of nature
a state in which there is no goernment and people are free to do whatever they want. a state of total perpetual war. everyone against everyone else
covenant
a mutual promse between two or more people to do or not to do something
hobbe's first natural law
seek peace if possible, as long as others are willing too. defend myself otherwise.
hobbe's second natural law
be willing to give up my right to everything, so long as others do too; retain as much of that right as you're willing to let others retain. (golden rule)
hobbe's third natural law
keep your covenants
death sub p
the process of dying
death sub s
the state of being dead
being alive
subject to experiences(good and bad), subject to thought, having emotions, engaging in any kind of activity.
organic survival
continued existence of functioning body, doesn't require any experiences, thoughts, emotions or activities.
argument from disagreement
(russ shaefer-landau)

1. there is disagreement among reasonable, well-informed people of good will about normative claims.

2. when there is disagreement about some subject matter among " then there is no objective truth about the subject matter.

3. therefore, there is no objective truth about normative claims.
argument from atheism
(russ shafer-landau)

1. if morality is objective, then god exisits.

2. god doesn't exist

3. morality isn't objective.
euthyphro argument
(russ shafer-landau)

1. if god doesn't have reasons for his judgements then morality is not objective and DC is false.

2. if god does have reasons then objective morality is independent of god, and so DC is false.

3. either god has reasons or he does not.

4. therefore, DC is false.
hobbe's argument for the right to everything in the state of nature
(hobbes)

1. every person has a right to do whatver they need to in order to defend themselves.

2. in the state of nature, any action can be justified as necessary for self defense.

3. so, in the state of nature, every person has the right to everything.
argument from non-forward looking moral considerations (against utilitarianism)
(js mill)

1. if ghp is correct then all moral considerations are forward looking ones.

2. not all morally relevant considerations are forward looking ones.

3. so ghp is not correct.
epicurus's argument
1. death is bad for the person who is dying only if it is an unpleasant experience

2. while a person is alive, death is not an unpleasant experience for him/her.

3. once a person is dead,death is not an unpleasant experience for him/her.

4. therefore, death is not an unpleasant experience for the person who dies.
lucretius's argument
1. it isn't bad to be born later than you might have been, even though this deprives you of pleasure.

2. being born later than you ought have been is just like dying earlier than you might have.

3. so, dying earlier isn't bad for you, event hough it deprives you of pleasures.
deprivation argument
(nagel)

1. being alive has intrinsic value.

2. death deprive syou of something valuable.

3. it is bad for you to be deprived of something valuable.

4. therefore, death is bad for you.
the argument from disagreement and the argument from atheism trying to prove what?
(landau) trying to prove ehtical subjectivism. mill thinks they all fail?
what is landau's response to the argument from atheism?
the euthyphro argument. it's against premise 1 of afa. says that DC is false.
according to mill what are the only things that have intrinsic value?
happiness and pleasure.
what is ethical egoism? is ghp ethical egoism?
(js mill) ethical egoism: the morally right thing to do is to maximize one's own happiness. NO!!
what is psychological egoism? is ghp psychological egoism?
(js mill) psychological egoism: people always act with the intension of maximizing their own happiness/pleasure. NO!!
consider the case w/ the hitler boy and how it causes a problem for ghp. what does mill conclude?
ghp is based on consequences whether they are immediate or very far in the future. mill concludes that although it is objectively morally wrong to pull the lever and save the kid, it is understandable that one would act in that way b/c they did not know all the consequences.
consider the case w/ L and R in which you are babysitting L. what does mill conclude you should do according to ghp?
saving l is morally right.
hanging judge
(js mill) small town, you find out the convicted is innocent but the real killer is now dead. saying he's innocent will lead to riot, chaos, suffering etc. ghp says to not overturn conviction even though it's the morally right thing to do.
what are the three basic ideas of the state of nature?
1. competition (resources, mates)

2. desire for glory (power, famous, feared)

3. diffidence aka timidity/mistrust (we know others will try to kill us)
what are the three objections to the deprivation argument?
1. only experiences can be good or bad for you; deprivation of something cant be bad (epicurus)

2. everything that harms you must harm you at some point in your life; but death sub s doesn't harm you in any point of your life (epicurus)

3. being born later than you might have deprives you of life, but that isn't bad for you. (lucretius)
what are the counter examples to objections 1 and 2?
1. broken promise: friend promises to do something and then doesn't, but you never find out, so no bad experiences follow from breaking the promise.

2. losing ones lifes work: smith, is a great writer who's only dream in life is to create works of art. after death smith loses credit for his work and though to be a plagarist.

both are counter examples.