Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
10 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
hedonism. hedonistic argument for death
|
H- the only things relevant to my well-being are pleasure and pain, pleasure being good for me and pain being bad for me.
- happiness, benefit, and harm can be expressed in terms of the net balance of pleasure (good) to pain (bad) - when i am dead i wont experience any pain. so death is not bad for ME |
|
|
the deprivation theory (of why death is bad)
|
- death is bad for you if it deprives you of pleasure you could have had if you were still alive
- DT would respond to the temporal argument by saying that its hard to pinpoint when exactly death harms you |
|
|
the symmetry argument
|
- there is nothing bad for me about my pre-natal non-existance
- pre-natal non-existance is relevantly like post-mortem non existance - so, there is nothing bad for me about my post mortem non-existance |
|
|
the paradox of egoism. ethical egoism
|
- everyone should pursue their own happiness exclusively
- mill thinks that egoism wont work because if you do things only as a means to making yourself happy you will end up less happy |
|
|
the ideal of finality
|
- some of the goods in life are "more final than others"
-- least final goods= things that are good only as a means to ends (only for their effects) -- partially final goods= things that are worth choosing for themselves (not just effects), but also for something else (their effects) -- goods that are final without qualification= things that are worth choosing for their own sakes, not because of anything else - the BEST GOOD are things that are final without qualification> ONLY MORAL CONTEMPLATION FITS THIS CATEGORY because its value does not derive from anything else |
|
|
utilitarianism
|
- an action is morally right only if it produces the greatest amount of happiness. where happiness is understood in terms of the net balance of pleasure over pain.
|
|
|
the idea that distribution doesnt matter
|
- utilitarians do not consider the distribution of something
- an outcome is good in proportion to the total amount of happiness it creates - DOES NOT consider loyal obligations or equal distribution - not "how is" but "HOW MUCH" |
|
|
consequentialism
|
- an action is morally right only if it produces the best outcome, impartially assessed
- does not consider the means to producing the outcome, just the outcome itself - ex) justifies organ theft because its outcome saves more people |
|
|
diminishing marginal utility
|
- the idea that the more of something that someone obtains, the more its value to that person diminishes
- benefitting those with the least will make the biggest difference (cant do this with equal distribution) - supports the idea that equal distribution will not always produce the greatest amount of happiness |
|
|
the idea of a "deontological rule"
|
- moral rules that explain a persons duty or obligation
- sometimes it is morally wrong to perform an action, even if it produces the best outcome - objection to consequentialism - sometimes an action is bad enough in itself ex) believe there are deontological rules that prevent a person from committing organ theft > it is just simply morally wrong to kill an innocent life, despite the outcome |
