-
Which of the following best describes the relationship between utilitarianism and consequentialism?
Utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism.
-
What does it mean to say a policy is optimific?
It yields the greatest balance of benefits over drawbacks.
-
What is our one moral duty, according to utilitarians?
Maximize well-being
-
Which of the following might utilitarianism sometimes require?
- Harming one person to benefit another.
- Performing actions that benefit fewer people than we possibly could.
- Performing actions that generate less happiness than we possibly could.
-
What is necessary in order to gain moral knowledge, according to most utilitarians?
Accurately predicting the consequences of an action.
-
Which of the following do most utilitarians believe determines the morality of actions?
The actual consequences of the action.
-
What determines the morality of the intentions behind one's actions, according to utilitarianism?
The expected consequences of the action.
-
According to the text, what do most utilitarians believe about conventional moral wisdom?
Conventional morality is mistaken in some ways but is mostly correct.
-
What attitudes do most utilitarians take toward moral rules?
Moral rules can be helpful but can be broken if doing so is optimific.
-
What attitude do most utilitarians take toward non-human animals?
If an animal suffers to the same extent as a human, the animal's suffering is equally important.
-
Consequentialist
ethical theory sharing the idea that the morality of actions, policies, motives, or rules depends on their producing the best actual or expected results
-
optimific
producing the best possible results.
-
5 step process to determine whether an action is optimific
- 1. Identify what in intrinsically good
- 2. Identify what is intrinsically bad
- 3. Determine all of your options
- 4. Determine the value of its results
- 5. Pick the action that yields the best balance ratio of good to bad results
-
act utilitarianism
A version of consequentialism that says that only well-being is intrinsically valuable, and so says that an act is morally right just because it maximizes overall well-being
-
principle of utility
The ultimate utilitarian moral standard, which says that an action is morally right if and only if it does more to improve overall well-being than any other action you could have done in the circumstances.
-
absolute
never permissibly broken; violating an absolute moral rule is always wrong.
-
moral community
the set of those beings whose interest are intrinsically important. Membership signifies that you are owed respect, that you have moral rights, that others owe you moral duties for your own sake.
-
The Argument from Marginal Cases
- 1.If immoral to kill, eat, experiment on marginal human beings, then immoral to treat non-human animals this way.
- 2. It is immoral to kill, eat, experiment on marginal human beings.
- 3.Therefor is is immoral to kill, eat, experiment on animals.
-
Which of the following best represents John Stuart Mill's view of pleasure?
Some pleasures are "higher" than others and thus more valuable.
-
Why is the lack of a method for measuring well-being a problem for utilitarians?
It renders utilitarianism incapable of giving concrete advice.
-
What is a decision procedure in ethics?
A method for making moral decisions.
-
How would most utilitarians characterize the principle of utility?
It is a standard of rightness.
-
What is supererogation?
Doing something that is admirable and praiseworthy but not morally required.
-
According to the text, how should we regard utilitarianism's commitment to impartiality?
It is in some ways a strength and in others a weakness.
-
Which of the following would the utilitarian regard as wrong in all possible circumstances?
Performing an action that is not optimific.
-
Which of the following responses to the problem of injustice in non consistent with utilitarianism?
Justice is intrinsically valuable.
-
What is the primary motivation for rule consequentialism?
It is thought to solve the problem of injustice.
-
What is the attitude of most consequentialism toward rule consequentialism?
Other versions of consequentialism are preferable to it.
-
Argument Value Measurement
- 1. Utilitarianism is true if a precise unit of measurement can determine the value of action's results
- 2. There is no such unit of measurement
- 3. Therefore, utilitarianism is false
-
decision procedure
Any method designed to guide us in successfully deliberating about what to do.
-
standard of rightness
A rule that gives conditions that are both necessary and sufficient for determining whether actions (or other things) are morally right.
-
supererogation
Praiseworthy actions that are above and beyond the call of duty.
-
vicarious punishment
The deliberate punishment of innocent victims, designed to deter third parties.
-
exemplary punishment
Punishment designed to make an example of the one who is punished.
-
Argument for injustice
- 1.Correct moral theory never require us to commit serious injustices
- 2. Utilitarianism sometimes requires us to commit serious injustices
- 3. Therefore, utilitarianism is not the correct moral theory
-
Rule consequentialism
Theory that says that actions are morally right just because they would be required by an optimific social rule.
-
optimific social rule
A rule whose general acceptance within a society would yield better results than any other such rule
-
Rule to recognize an optimific social rule.
- 1. describe rule
- 2. Imagine society everyone endorsed rule
- 3. Would society be better off with this rule or another.
-
According to Kant, what is the main problem with the golden rule?
It makes morality depend on a person's desires.
-
What does Kant mean by a maxim?
A principle of action that one gives to oneself.
-
What is the fundamental principle of morality according to Kant?
Act only on maxims that are universalizable
-
Which of the following best characterizes Kant's moral theory?
It is inconsistent with consequentialism.
-
What did Kant believe is the relationship between rationality and morality?
Rationality requires us to be moral.
-
What is a categorical imperative, according to Kant?
A command of reason that does not depend on our desires.
-
What is a hypothetical imperative, according to Kant?
A command of reason that depends on our desires.
-
Which of the following did Kant believe to be the central moral virtue?
Integrity.
-
When did Kant believe that it is permissible to lie?
Never
-
According to the text, what is wrong with the principle of universalizability?
It permits the actions of principled fanatics.
-
golden rule
says that your treatment of others is morally acceptable if and only if you would be willing to be treated in exactly the same way.
-
self-regarding actions
Actions that affect only oneself.
-
principle of universalizability
Kant's thesis that an act is morally acceptable if, and only if, its maxim is universalizable.
-
universalizable
the feature of the maxim that indicates that every rational person can consistently act on it.
-
Universalizable test
- 1. Form maxim-intent, and why
- 2. Imagine world all support maxim
- 3. Can goal be reached in such a world
- If yes it is universalizable
-
amoralist
Those who do not care about living up to the moral views they sincerely hold.
-
Amoralist Challenge
- 1. People have reason to do if it get what they care about
- 2.moral duty can fail to get what they care about
- 3.therefore, people lack reason to do moral duty
- 4. people lack reason to moral duty, violating duty is rational
- 5. Therefor, rational to violate moral duty
-
hypothetical imperatives
A command of reason that requires a person to take the needed means to getting what she wants.
-
categorical imperative
a command of reason that requires a person's obedience regardless of whether such obedience gets him anything he wants.
-
Argument for Irrationality of immorality
- 1. If rational, then consistent
- 2. If consistent, obey universalizability
- 3. If obey universalizability, act morally
- 4. Therefore, if rational, then act morally
- 5. Therefore, if immorally, then irrational
-
Which of the following is Kant's principle of humanity?
Always treat a human being as an end, never as a mere means.
-
When Kant talks about humanity, to whom is he referring?
All and only those beings that possess autonomy and rationality.
-
What is autonomy?
The ability to decide which principles will govern your life.
-
What is the only thing that has value in all circumstances, according to Kant?
the good will.
-
When did Kant think that actions are truly praiseworthy?
When they are performed from the good will.
-
What is motivating a person who acts from the good will?
An understanding of what is morally required.
-
What principle did Kant think tells us what criminals deserve?
Lex talionis
-
Which of the following characterizes cases of moral luck?
The morality of an action depends on factors outside on one's control.
-
Which of the following claims, if true, would refute Kant's theory?
People are not autonomous.
-
Which of the following claims about non-human animals did Kant not endorse?
It is permissible to treat them in any way we like.
-
principle of humanity
one must always treat a human being as an end, and never as a mere means.
-
good will
the ability to reliably determine what your duty is, and a steady commitment to do your duty for its own sake
-
moral worth
the praiseworthy feature of an action that fulfills one's moral duty.
-
5 problems of humanity
- 1.vague
- 2. no advice on what people deserve
- 3. assumption of autonomy may be false
- 4. moral luck
- 5. why those lacking rationality and autonomy deserve respect
-
lex talionis
The law of retaliation, the principle that says that a wrongdoer deserves to be treated just as he treated his victim.
-
Argument against Automony
- 1. choices are necessitated or not
- 2. If necessitated, then out of control, lack autonomy
- 3. if not necessitated, then random, lack autonomy.
- 4.Therfore, we lack autonomy.
-
moral luck
A case in which the morality of an action or a decision depends on factors outside of our control.
-
Argument Against animals
- 1. If principle of humanity true, animals no rights
- 2. If animals no rights, morally accept to torture them
- 3. Therefore, principle of humanity true, morally accept to torture animals.
- 4. It isn't
- 5. Therefore, the principle of humanity is false
|
|
