Philo Exam Notes

Terms:

1. Normative ethical theory
2. Divine command theory
3. Natural law theory
4. Elenchus
5. Euthyphro question
6. Descriptive/normative claims
7. Rationalism
8. Utilitarianism
9. Consequentialism
10. Hedonism
11. Aggregationism
12. Egalitarianism
13. Ideal observer
14. Experience machine
15. Act/rule utilitarianism
16. Common sense/revisionism
17. Principle of preventing bad occurrences
18. Negative responsibility

1. Normative Ethical Theory:

• Has to do with norms
• Claims what should be done
• Systematic account of should

1. Give meaning of terms (What is good? What is bad?)
2. Apply these notions

1. It is morally wrong to use someone as a mere instrument
2. Pushing the large man off the bridge is using him as a mere instrument

Thus, it is wrong to push the man off the bridge.

1. Divine command theory:

• The content of morality is determined solely by god’s will
• Right conduct is in accord with what god has commanded us to do
• Right/wrong and good/bad all depend on the divine commands
• IE. Morally right is whatever god commands; morally wrong is whatever god prohibits

Note that the traditional conception of god involves 3 central features:

1. Omnipotence
2. Rationality
3. Goodness

Possible strengths of the DC theory:

1. Simplicity
2. Objectivity
3. Consistency with religious faith

Weakness: Euthyphro question

Horn one

Suppose we say that god commands what is right because it’s right

Problem: God’s command is not an essential feature of moral rightness

Same reducto-ad-absurdum:

1. God commands the morally right action because it’s right
2. Moral rightness means “commanded by god”- God commands what is right because it’s commanded by god

Horn two

Suppose we say that the right action is right because god commands it

Problems:

1. Mystery
2. Wrong reasons
3. Motivation
4. Arbitrariness

1. Natural Law Theory

• The content of morality is solely a matter of god’s purposes for us and human reason can understand these
• What is consistent with god’s purposes is right and vice versa
• Basic principle: morally right actions are what accord with or divinely determined purposes; morally wrong is what goes against the purposes.

How do we figure out our purposes?

They are clear inside social roles and social roles do seem to connect well to moral duties. But what is the purpose of humans in general? Aquinas says it can be determined through natural inclinations.

Aquinas’ argument:

1. To act rightly is to act as to promote God-given purposes
2. We have natural inclinations towards those actions that help promote these purposes
3. Therefore, to act rightly is to act with accordance to natural inclinations

What are those inclinations?

1. Self preservation
2. Sexual reproduction, care for offspring
3. The good according to human reason

Assessing Aquinas’ argument:

Concern: Is the link between inclination and function plausible?

        “Are we inclined to do good because its good or is it good because we’re inclined to do it?”

Rachel attacks Aquinas by saying that we have inclinations that are not necessarily good.

Aquinas says that only “natural” inclinations are good and they are good with accordance with our purpose. But how do we identify the natural ones?

Homosexuality: in what way are homosexuals unnatural

Unnatural could mean:

1. Abnormal (statistical infrequency)
2. Not found in animal world
3. Not genetically coded
4. Contravenes with the purpose of sexual organs (Aquinas)

How to combine DC and NL theories? Conclude god’s purposes by scrutinizing holy books.

1. Elenchus: Refutation

• Begin with your beliefs
• Socrates questions beliefs
• One reaches aporia: a state of perplexity

1. Euthyphro Dilemma

“Are morally good acts willed by God because they are morally good, or are they morally good because they are willed by God?”

Euthyphro:

Attempts to satisfy the demand for a definition:

Attempt (1): holy is prosecuting his father

→ does not offer a unified definition of what is holy.

Attempt (2): holy is what is loved by gods

        → gods don’t necessarily agree on all things

Attempt (3): holy is what is loved by ALL gods

        → “is the holy loved by the gods because it’s holy, or is it holy because it’s holy?”

What is the force and meaning of the question?

The question is another way of asking: what are the essential properties of holiness?

Essential property: necessarily associated with a concept/thing

Nonessential property: not necessarily associated with a concept/thing

Dilemma:

Euthyphro said:” the gods love the holy because it is holy”

But this means that “loved by the gods” and holy are not the same

1. The gods love the holy because it is holy
2. Holy means loved by the gods

→ the gods love the holy because it’s loved by the gods!!