Title: Introduction to Philosophy
1The Love of Wisdom
Steven B. Cowan James S. Spiegel
2Introduction to Philosophy
3What is Philosophy?
- Philo Sophia Love of Wisdom
- (love) (wisdom)
- Philosophy is about gaining insights into the
Big Questions which culminate in a life
well-lived.
4What is Philosophy?
- The Big Questions
- What is the meaning of life?
- What are human beings?
- Where did we come from?
- Are we responsible for how we live?
- What happens after we die?
- Is there a God? If so, what is God like?
- What is real and what is mere appearance?
- Can we know the answers to such questions?
- Can we know anything at all?
5Philosophical Method
- The Socratic Method
- Dialectic
- Socratic Ignorance
- The pursuit of virtue
- Defining Terms
- Using Arguments
- Identifying Presuppositions
6Introduction to Philosophy
- Unit 1
- The Study of Knowledge
7A Little Bit of Logic
- The Three Laws of Thought
- Law of Non-Contradiction
- Law of Excluded Middle
- Law of Identity
- Arguments
- Deductive
- Inductive
- Validity a property of deductive arguments in
which, if the premises are true, the conclusion
must be true. - Soundness a property of deductive arguments
that are valid and have true premises.
8A Little Bit of Logic
Some Valid Argument Forms
- Categorical Syllogisms
- All M are P
- All S are M
- ? All S are P
- No M are P
- All S are M
- ? No S are P
III. All M are P Some S are M ? Some S are P
9A Little Bit of Logic
Some Valid Argument Forms
- IV. Pure Hypothetical Syllogism
- If P then Q
- If Q then R
- ? If P then R
- V. Modus Ponens
- If P then Q
- P
- ? Q
VI. Modus Tollens If P then Q not-Q ? not-P
10A Little Bit of Logic
Some Valid Argument Forms
- VII. Disjunctive Syllogism
- Either P or Q
- not-P
- ? Q
- VIII. Constructive Dilemma
- If P then Q
- If R then S
- Either P or R
- ? Q or S
11A Little Bit of Logic
Some Valid Argument Forms
- IX. Reductio ad Absurdum
- Assume P (the claim to be proven false)
- . . .
- Q
- not-Q
- ? not-P
?
Contradiction!!!
12A Little Bit of Logic
The Undistributed Middle All P is M All S is
M ? All S is P Affirming the Consequent If P
then Q Q ? P
Denying the Antecedent If P then Q not-P ?
not-Q Affirming a Disjunct Either P or Q P ?
not-Q
13A Little Bit of Logic
Division False Cause Hasty Generalization Biased
Generalization
False Dilemma Begging the Question Argument from
Ignorance Equivocation Straw Man Attacking the
Person Appeal to Popularity Composition
14The Question of Truth
- Relativism the view that there are no objective
truths. - Subjectivism what counts as true is a matter
of individual preference - Conventionalism what counts as true is a
matter of cultural preference - Objectivism the view that truth is a real
feature of the world that is independent of
personal or cultural preference
15The Question of Truth
Is Anything True?
There are no absolute truths. All truth-claims
are socially conditioned. It is logically
impossible that truth is relative!
16The Question of Truth
Correspondence Theory of Truth A proposition is
true if and only if it corresponds to the way
things actually are. The Coherence Theory of
Truth A proposition is true if and only if it
coheres with the set of beliefs that a person
holds. The Pragmatic Theory of Truth A
proposition is true if and only if it is useful
to the believer in achieving desirable results.
17Can We Know?
- Skeptical hypothesis any logically possible
scenario that we apparently cannot rule out and
would, if true, call most or all of our ordinary
commonsense beliefs into question - If there is a skeptical hypothesis for some
belief p of mine, then I do not know p. - There is a skeptical hypothesis for p.
- 3. Therefore, I do not know p.
18Can We Know?
- Rationalism the view that all knowledge comes
through human reason - Descartes Argument for Material Things
- I have an idea of an absolutely perfect being
(i.e., God). - Only an absolutely perfect being could be the
cause of my idea of it. - Therefore, God exists.
- God, by definition, is not a deceiver.
- God is the cause of all my cognitive faculties.
- Since God is not a deceiver, He would not give me
cognitive faculties that are unreliable. - My senses give me ideas of (alleged) material
objects. - Therefore, material objects exist.
19Can We Know?
- Empiricism the view that all knowledge arises
from sense experience - Distinction between Sensation Reflection
- The Representational Theory of Perception
- Humes Skeptical Critique
- We can only know our sensory impressions.
- We cannot know causal connections.
- We have no metaphysical knowledge.
20Can We Know?
- Do We Need Certainty?
- 1. If there is a skeptical hypothesis for some
belief p of mine, then I do not know p. - Degrees of Certainty
- 3 Beyond all doubt
- 2 Beyond a reasonable doubt
- 1 More probable than not
- 0 Equally probable and improbable
21What is Knowledge?
- Different Kinds of Knowledge
- Procedural Knowledge
- Experiential/Acquaintance Knowledge
- Propositional Knowledge
- I know that bachelors are unmarried.
- I know that the Earth is spherical.
- I know that Cowan is really cool.
22What is Knowledge?
- The JTB Account
- S knows p if and only if
- S believes p,
- p is true, and
- S is justified in believing p.
- The Gettier Problem It appears that there are
counterexamples to the JTB account that show that
justified true belief is not sufficient for
knowledge.
23What is Knowledge?
- Solutions to the Gettier Problem
- Strengthening the justification condition
- Adding a fourth condition
- The No-False-Belief condition
- The Defeasibility condition
- Replacing the justification condition
(reliabilism)
For S to know p there must be no true proposition
q which, if S were to come to justifiably believe
q, he would no longer be justified in believing p.
24What is Knowledge?
- Internalism vs. Externalism
- Internalism the view that in order for a belief
to be justified, a person must have cognitive
access to the justifying grounds for his belief - Externalism the view that in order for a belief
to be justified, it is not necessary that a
person have cognitive access to the justifying
grounds for his belief but only that his belief
be produced in an appropriate way
25What is Knowledge?
- Virtue Epistemology
- Intellectual Virtue an intellectual habit
that predisposes a person to acquire beliefs in
such a way that their beliefs are more likely
than not to be true - S knows p only if p is acquired through
- an act of intellectual virtue.
26What is the Structure of Justification?
Foundationalism
- A belief p is justified for a person S if and
only if (1) p is a properly basic belief for S
or (2) p is ultimately based on a properly basic
belief for S. - Classical Foundationalism
- A belief B is properly basic for a person S if
and only if B is (1) self-evident to S, (2)
incorrigible for S, or (3) evident to the sense
of S. - Modest Foundationalism
- A belief B is properly basic for a person S if it
is (1) evidently true to S and (2) S is unaware
of any undefeated defeaters of B.
27What is the Structure of Justification?
The Regress Argument for Foundationalism
Suppose one says that p is justified by q, and q
by r, etc. Then, either 1. The regress comes
to an end with a justifying belief x that is
itself unjustified, 2. The regress continues
infinitely, 3. The regress is circular, or 4.
The regress comes to an end with a
justifying belief x that is itself justified
immediately apart from other beliefs. Problem
The myth of the given
28What is the Structure of Justification?
Coherentism
- A belief p is justified for S if and only if it
fits within a coherent system of beliefs of S. - Problems
- The isolation problem
- The alternative coherent systems problem
- The regress problem
29What is the Structure of Justification?
Contextualism
A belief is justified relative to a specific
context beliefs that are justified in one
context might not be justified in other
contexts. The Relevant Alternatives View A
belief p is justified for S in a specific context
if S can rule out all the relevant alternatives
in that context.
30What is the Structure of Justification?
Problems for Contextualism
- If a person is not justified in a broader
context, why would he be justified in the
narrower context? Wouldnt justification in the
latter presuppose justification in the former? - Contextualism seems committed to the view that an
epistemic regress comes to an end with justifying
beliefs that are unjustified. - Contextualism assumes that knowledge requires
absolute certainty.
31What is Science?
- The definition problem
- The presuppositions of science
- The laws of thought
- The general reliability of sense perception
- The law of causality
- The uniformity of nature
- Values
32The Nature of Scientific Theory
Scientific Realism
- The view that scientific theories properly aim
to provide a true account of the physical world. - Inductivism
- The process of confirmation
- The problem of induction
- Falsificationism
33The Nature of Scientific Theory
Scientific Non-realism
- Truth is not the real aim of science.
- 1. Instrumentalism The aim of scientific
theories is not to describe the world but to
solve problems. Theories are preferred because
of their usefulness. - Problem Why are some theories more useful than
others?
34The Nature of Scientific Theory
2. Kuhns Philosophy of Science
- Scientific observation is theory-laden.
- The history of science proceeds through paradigm
shifts. - Paradigm a theoretical model and set of
problem-solving techniques which guide scientific
inquiry - Rival paradigms are incommensurable.
35The Nature of Scientific Theory
Objections to Kuhns View
- Kuhns view cant explain the progress of
science. - Kuhns view cant explain why some scientific
theories are rejected after crucial tests. - Kuhns view undermines itself.
36The Nature of Scientific Theory
3. Feyerabends View of Science
- Science as mythology
- The tyranny of science and the social ideal of
methodological neutrality - Problem Feyerabends view cant explain
the progress or practical achievements of
science.
37The Laws of Nature
Perspectives on the Laws of Nature
- The regularity view (Hume) The laws of nature
are mere descriptions of physical regularities. - The instrumentalist view (Dewey) The laws of
nature are useful fictions. - The necessitarian view (Chalmers) Regularities
in nature are due to (logical or causal)
necessity. - The theistic view (Swinburne) The laws of
nature are an aspect of divine providence.
38Science and Theology
- Two Kinds of Naturalism
- Metaphysical naturalism
- Methodological naturalism
- Theistic Science
- Problems with methodological naturalism
- Intelligent design theory
39Introduction to Philosophy
Unit 2 The Study of Being
40Obstacles to Metaphysics
Kantian Epistemology
- His Copernican Revolution
- Distinction between noumena and phenomena
- Noumena the unknowable real world beyond
the mind - Phenomena the knowable world of appearances
organized by the mind. - Problems
- Noumena/Phenomena distinction is self-defeating.
- Leads to radical relativism and antirealism.
41Obstacles to Metaphysics
- Logical Positivism
- Elevates science as a privileged way of knowing
and seeks to eradicate speculative metaphysics - Verification Principle A proposition is
meaningful if and only if it is empirically
verifiable in principle. - Problem Verification principle is self-defeating
42What is the Nature of the World?
- What is the underlying stuff of reality?
- The problem of the one and the many
-
- Three Major Views
- Dualism
- Materialism
- Idealism
43What is the Nature of the World?
Dualism
- Reasons For
- Solves the problem of the one and the many
- The difficulty of a materialist view of the mind
- Evidence for Gods Existence
- Supports life after death
- Biblical evidence (Gen. 11 Matt. 1028 2 Cor.
58, etc)
44What is the Nature of the World?
Dualism
- Reasons Against
- The interaction problem
- Ockhams Razor
45What is the Nature of the World?
Materialism
- Hard determinism
- Atomism
- Reasons For
- Ockhams Razor
- Problem of the one and the many
- Mind-body problem
- The origin of the universe
- The Progress of Science
46What is the Nature of the World?
Materialism
- Reasons Against
- Inconsistent with Christian belief
- Ockhams Razor???
- Evidence for God
- Mind-body correlation does not imply materialism
- Undermines responsibility and life after death
- Requires nominalism
- Progress of science requires scientific realism
47What is the Nature of the World?
Materialism
- Plantingas Argument Against
- If materialism is true, then our cognitive
faculties aim at survival not truth (because
materialism assumes Darwinism). - If our cognitive faculties aim at survival not
truth, then we have good reason to doubt that our
beliefs are true (because false beliefs can
ensure survival as well as true ones). - If we have good reason to doubt that our beliefs
are true, then the materialist has good reason to
doubt that materialism is true. - 4. Therefore, if materialism is true, then the
materialist has good reason to doubt that
materialism is true.
48What is the Nature of the World?
Idealism
- Reasons For
- Ockhams Razor
- Avoids the interaction problem and problems with
a material view of the mind - Consistent with Christian theism, moral
responsibility, and life after death - Does not require nominalism
- Matter is unnecessary and leads to skepticism
- Matter is absurd
- The Master Argument for the inconceivability of
matter
49What is the Nature of the World?
Idealism
- Reasons Against
- The Direct Realist response?
- Its possible to defend the coherence of matter
- The Master Argument is invalid
- Common sense?
50Are There Universals?
Platonism (Realism)
- The view that universals are real
- What is a universal?
- Abstract entities
- Multiply instantiable
- Eternal and necessary
- Kinds of Universals
- Properties
- Relations
- Propositions
51Are There Universals?
Platonism (Realism)
- Reasons For
- A straight-forward explanation of resemblance
- A ready account of predication
52Are There Universals?
Nominalism
- The view that there are no universals only
particulars exist - Extreme Nominalism
- Denies the existence of properties, relations,
and propositions altogether - Reduces predication to assertions of set
membership - Reduces resemblance to shared set membership
- Problems
- Reduction to set membership fails to preserve
meaning - The Companionship Problem
53Are There Universals?
Nominalism
- Moderate Nominalism (Trope Theory)
- Admits the existence of properties, but sees them
as abstract particulars - Reduces predication to membership of tropes in
sets of tropes - Reduces resemblance to similarity of tropes,
making resemblance a brute fact - Problems
- Making resemblance a brute fact is implausible
- Making resemblance a brute fact suggest that
judgments concerning resemblance could be
conventional
54Are There Universals?
Nominalism
- Nominalism and Ethics
- All version of nominalism reject the existence of
universal essences such as dogness, humanness,
etc. - But this means that there is no objective
definition of concepts like humanity (i.e.,
what counts as human is merely conventional) - But this means that human rights and who has them
is conventional. - But this means that morality is conventional.
55Are There Universals?
Conceptualism
- Views universals as mental concepts
- Problems
- Implies that if there were no mental concepts,
there would be no properties - Cannot explain resemblance
- But these problems can be avoided on theism!
- But then it seems that conceptualism becomes a
form of Platonism!
56What is a Particular Thing?
- The Bundle Theory
- Particulars are bundles of properties.
- The Substratum View
- Particulars are bare substrata that bear
properties. - The Substance View
- Natural-kind particulars are irreducibly basic.
57Do We Have Souls?
Mind-Body (Substance) Dualism
- The view that the mind and body are two distinct
substances - Arguments For
- Argument from Subjectivity
- Argument from Qualia
- Argument from Intentionality
- Arguments Against
- The Problem of Causal Overdetermination
- The Interaction Problem
- Possible Response Occasionalism?
58Do We Have Souls?
Physicalism
- The view that the mind is fully explainable in
terms of natural processes - Five Versions
- Philosophical Behaviorism
- Strict Identity Theory
- Eliminative Materialism
- Functionalism
- Property Dualism
59What is Personal Identity?
The Memory View
- A person at a certain time is the numerically
identical person at a later time just in case he
has memories of that earlier time. - Problems
- Transitivity Problems
- The Circularity Problem
60What is Personal Identity?
The Physical View
- Personal identity depends on maintaining
relevant physical characteristics. - The Body Criterion A person at a certain time
is the numerically identical person at a later
time just in case he is the same body at both
times. - The Brain Criterion A person at a certain time
is the numerically identical person at a later
time just in case he is the same brain at both
times. - The Causal Continuity Criterion A body (or
brain) is the same body (or brain) from one time
to a later time just in case the parts that
compose the body at the later time are causally
continuous with those parts that composed the
body at the earlier time.
61What is Personal Identity?
The Soul View
- A person at a certain time is the numerically
identical person at a later time just in case he
is (or has) the same soul at both times. - Problems
- The Fission Problem
- An Arbitrariness Problem
62Do We Have Free Will?
- Incompatibilism The view that freedom and
determinism are not logically consistent -
- The Consequence Argument
- If determinism is true, then our actions are the
consequences of the laws of nature and events in
the remote past. - It is not in our power to change the laws of
nature. - It is not in our power to change events in the
remote past. - If our actions are the consequences of the laws
of nature and events in the remote past, and it
is not in our power to change these things, then
we cannot do otherwise than what we do. - If we cannot do otherwise than what we do, then
we are not free. - Therefore, if determinism is true, then we are
not free.
63Do We Have Free Will?
Incompatibilism
- Hard Determinism determinism is true human
freedom and responsibility are illusions. - Libertarianism determinism is false human
beings have the power of contrary choice. - Problems
- Makes it impossible to hold people accountable
for their actions. - Contrary to Scripture.
64Do We Have Free Will?
Incompatibilism
- Libertarianism determinism is false human
beings have the power of contrary choice. - Reasons for
- Consequence Argument
- Introspection Argument
- Scripture?
65Do We Have Free Will?
- The Libertarians Dilemma
- 1. If a persons actions are determined, then her
actions are not under her control (because she
lacks the ability to do otherwise). - 2. If a persons actions are undetermined, then
her actions are not under her control (because
they happen by chance). - 3. Therefore, whether a persons actions are
determined or undetermined, they are not under
her control.
66Do We Have Free Will?
Compatibilism
- Free will the ability to do what one wants
to do. - Response to the Consequence Argument
- The conditional analysis of ability to do
otherwise. - Challenge to the assumption that freedom and
responsibility require the ability to do
otherwise. - Frankfurt-type Counterexamples
67Is There Life After Death?
- The Argument from Substance Dualism
- The Argument from Theism and Ultimate Justice
- The Evidence of Near-death Experiences
68Is There Life After Death?
- What about Reincarnation?
- Evidence For Apparent memories of past
lives. - Problems
- Alternative explanations for apparent memories
- Concerns over personal identity
- Concerns about justice
69Does God Exist?
- Anselms Ontological Argument
- I have an idea of the greatest conceivable being
(GCB). - That which exists in reality (and not only in my
mind) is greater than that which exists only in
my mind. - If the GCB exists only in my mind, then the GCB
would not be the GCB (because I can conceive of
it existing in reality, not only in my mind). - ? The GCB exists in reality.
70Does God Exist?
- Aquinas Cosmological Argument
- There is an order of causes in the world.
- Nothing can be the cause of itself.
- Hence, everything that is caused is caused by
something else. - There cannot be an infinite regress of causes.
- ? There must be a first, uncaused cause.
71Does God Exist?
- Paleys Teleological Argument
- A watch has many complex working parts and is
intelligently designed. - The universe has many complex working parts.
- ? The universe is probably intelligently designed.
72Does God Exist?
- The Fine-tuning Argument
- The fine-tuning of the universe is due to either
necessity, chance, or intelligent design. - The fine-tuning of the universe is not due to
necessity or chance. - ? The fine-tuning of the universe is due to
intelligent design.
73Does God Exist?
- The Kalam Cosmological Argument
- Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
- b) The universe began to exist.
- 1. If the universe had no beginning, then an
actually infinite number of events would have
occurred prior to the present moment. - 2. It is impossible that an actually infinite
number of events occur prior to the present
moment. - ? Therefore, the universe had a beginning.
74Does God Exist?
The Kalam Cosmological Argument c) The cause of
the universe was God.
Eternal Changeless/Immutable Immaterial
Uncaused Enormously Powerful Personal Good
75Do We Need Arguments for God?
- Evidentialism the view that it is wrong or
irrational to hold a belief without sufficient
evidence. - Implication Belief in God is wrong or irrational
unless based on good arguments. - Problem Based in discredited classical
foundationalism. - Reformed Epistemology the view that belief in
God can be properly basic. - Objections
- Reformed Epistemology would allow any belief to
be properly basic (The Great Pumpkin Objection). - Reformed Epistemology makes belief in God immune
to criticism.
76What Is God Like?
- Views on Divine Omnipotence
- Aquinas Omnipotence is the power to do anything
that is logically possible. - Ockham Omnipotence is the power to do anything
at all, even to defy the law of
noncontradiction. - Problems with Ockhams View
- Even to pose the possibility of violating the law
of noncontradiction is nonsensical. - It assumes the laws of logic are distinct from
God.
77What Is God Like?
- Views on Gods Relationship to Time
- Atemporalism the view that God transcends time
God is not essentially temporal - Arguments for
- Scientific evidence for the relativity of time
- Biblical evidence that time had a beginning (1
Cor. 27 2 Tim. 19, Titus 12)
78What Is God Like?
- Views on Gods Relationship to Time
- 2. Sempiternalism the view that God is
essentially temporal God is bound by time - Arguments for
- Only temporal beings can be truly personal.
- God relates to human beings in time (Jer. 187-8
Exod. 3214 Jonah 310, etc.).
79What Is God Like?
- Views on Gods Relationship to Time
- 3. Omnitemporalism God is timeless without the
universe and temporal with the universe (Craig) - Arguments for both atemporalism and
sempiternalism count in favor of omnitemporalism. - Problem This view seems to imply that God
changes (from an atemporal to a temporal being)
upon creation of the world.
80What Is God Like?
- The Problem of Divine Foreknowledge
- If God foreknows all future human actions, then
how can we be free? - If God knows today that Jones will mow his lawn
tomorrow, can Jones be free with respect to
mowing his lawn tomorrow?
81What Is God Like?
Proposed solutions to the problem of divine
foreknowledge
- 1. Compatibilist solution Human freedom is
compatible with determinism. - Problem This approach is dependent on the
definition of freedom as the ability to do what
one wants.
82What Is God Like?
Proposed solutions
- 2. Open theist solution God does not know all
future events free human choices cannot be
foreknown. - Problem This does not square with the biblical
evidence for exhaustive divine foreknowledge of
human actions (e.g. Isa. 469-10 Ps. 139, etc.).
83What Is God Like?
Proposed solutions
- 3. Ockhamist solution Gods beliefs about
future events are caused by those events. - Problem The causation relation does not change
the fact that Gods infallible knowledge of a
future human action guarantees that it will
occur.
84What Is God Like?
Proposed solutions
- 4. Molinist solution God possesses middle
knowledge he knows all counterfactuals of human
freedom and thus indirectly knows all future
human choices. - Problem The grounding objection
85What Is God Like?
Views on Divine Emotion
- 1. Divine impassibilism God does not experience
emotion. - Arguments for Appeals to divine perfection,
divine immutability, and scripture (Mal. 36,
James 117, etc.) - Problem Seems to undermine divine personhood
86What Is God Like?
Views on Divine Emotion
- 2. Divine passibilism God experiences emotion
in a temporal way. - Arguments for Appeals to divine personhood,
divine omniscience, and Scripture (Exod. 414
Prov. 112, etc.) - Problem Seems to contradict divine immutability
87What Is God Like?
Views on Divine Emotion
- 3. Divine omnipathism God eternally experiences
all emotion. - Arguments for Appeals to reasons for both
passibilism and impassibilism - Problem Creates difficulty in accounting for
divine happiness.
88How Can God Allow Evil?
The Logical Problem of Evil
- If God exists, then he is omnipotent, omniscient,
and omnibenevolent. - An omnipotent being has the power to prevent
evil. - An omniscient being has the knowledge to prevent
evil. - An omnibenevolent being has the desire to prevent
evil. - Therefore, of God exists, there is no evil.
- Evil exists.
- Therefore, God does not exist.
89How Can God Allow Evil?
The Logical Problem of Evil
(4) An omnibenevolent being has the desire
to prevent evil.
(4) An omnibenevolent being has a prima facie
reason to prevent evil. (4) An omnibenevolent
being has a morally sufficient reason to permit
evil, and thus an ultima facie reason to not
prevent evil.
90How Can God Allow Evil?
The Evidential Problem of Evil
- If God exists, there would be no pointless evils.
- There are pointless evils.
- Therefore, God does not exist.
91How Can God Allow Evil?
The Evidential Problem of Evil
- There are pointless evils.
- The Noseeum Inference
- (1) I do not see an x.
- (2) Therefore, there likely is no x.
- Rowes Noseeum Inference Concerning Gods
Reasons for Evil - (1) I do not see a reason why God would allow
instance of evil x. - (2) Therefore, there likely is no reason why
God would allow instance of evil x.
92How Can God Allow Evil?
The Evidential Problem of Evil
The Noseeum Rationality Principle A noseeum
inference is reasonable when it would be
reasonable to believe that we would see the item
in question if it existed. --Per Daniel
Howard-Snyder
Turning Rowes Argument on its Head (1) If God
exists, there would be no pointless evils. (2)
God exists. (3) Therefore, there are no pointless
evil.
93Introduction to Philosophy
Unit 3 The Study of Value
94How Should We Live?
Two Kinds of Ethical Inquiry
- Metaethics examines the meaning of ethical
concepts and seeks to discover whether or not
they refer to objective truths. - Normative Ethics seeks to ascertain our ethical
duties in light of metaethical commitments. - An Ethical Theory is a coherent set of beliefs
about the foundation, nature, and goals of
morality designed to enable us to make reliable
moral judgments.
95How Should We Live?
Ethical Relativism
The view that there are no universally true moral
values 1. Cultural Relativism the view that
moral values are the products of the customs,
tastes, and standards of a culture, and thus are
not objectively true
- The Plurality Argument
- Moral values differ from culture to culture.
- Therefore, there is no objective moral standard.
- Problematic Implications
- We could never criticize another culture.
- Moral progress would be impossible.
- All moral reformers would be corrupt.
96How Should We Live?
Ethical Relativism
2. Moral Subjectivism the view that moral
values are relative to each persons subjective
preferences.
- Humes Argument for Subjectivism
- All truths are either relations of ideas or
matters of fact. - Moral judgments are neither relations of idea nor
matters of fact. - Therefore, moral judgments are not objectively
true. - Problematic Implications
- No one would ever be mistaken in his moral
judgments. - People dont really disagree about moral issues.
- No behavior can be objectively praised or
condemned.
97How Should We Live?
Other Forms of Moral Skepticism
Emotivism the view that moral statements are
mere expressions of emotion Nihilism the
denial of all meaning and value in human life
98How Should We Live?
Ethical Objectivism the view that there are
universally true moral values
- 1. Ethical Egoism the view that people ought
to always pursue their own self-interest (Rand) -
- Problems
- Problem of clashing self-interest
- Problem of justice
- Epistemological problems
99How Should We Live?
2. Classical Utilitarianism (Bentham Mill)
- Principle of utility always act so as to
promote the greatest pleasure for all involved - Pleasure-pain calculus assess utility using
Benthams seven criteria (intensity, duration,
certainty, propinquity, fecundity, purity,
extent) - Qualitative hedonism distinguish between higher
and lower pleasures
100How Should We Live?
2. Classical Utilitarianism
- Problems
- Problem of justice
- Problem of rights
- Difficulty in anticipating consequences
- Unreasonable demands
101How Should We Live?
3. Kantian Ethics
- A deontological approach
- Emphasizes proper motive in action
- The good will the will that acts for the sake
of duty alone acting out of respect for the
moral law. - Involves categorical not hypothetical imperatives
- The Categorical Imperative (1st Form) Act only
on that maxim whereby you can at the same time
will that it become a universal law. - The Categorical Imperative (2nd Form) Act so as
to treat humanity, whether in ones own person or
in that of another, always as an end and never as
a means only.
102How Should We Live?
3. Kantian Ethics
103How Should We Live?
3. Kantian Ethics
- Problems
- Overemphasis on moral autonomy?
- Ignores legitimate concern for consequences?
- Vagueness in formulating maxims
- Why care about rationality in ethics?
- Is acting for the sake of duty alone an
appropriate motive?
104How Should We Live?
4. Rule Utilitarianism
- Seeks to avoid problems of classical
utilitarianism and Kants pure deontology. - Rather than maximizing happiness with regard to
individual acts, we should follow those rules
that, when followed, tend to produce the most
happiness for the most people. - Problems
- It collapses into act utilitarianism
- How do we decide which rules will produce the
most happiness? - How do we resolve conflicts between rules?
105How Should We Live?
5. Virtue Ethics
- Focuses on character traits in moral evaluation
rather than on principles and actions. - Being moral is about being a certain kind of
person more than abiding by principles - A good act is the act that a virtuous person
would do. - Strengths sanctions morally appropriate forms
of partiality and provides personal motivation
for acting rightly. - Problem It cannot provide specific moral
guidance or resolve moral dilemmas.
106How Should We Live?
Natural Law Ethics
- A non-naturalist theory
- A teleological theory in which moral laws are
discerned through rational reflection on Gods
design for human beings. - Some Principles
- Good is to be pursued and evil avoided.
- Sanctity of Life
- Principle of Double Effect
- Some Problems
- It may not provide clear direction on many moral
issues. - It fails to provide a strong concept of duty.
- It presupposes the existence of essences.
107How Should We Live?
Divine Command Theory
- The view that right and wrong are determined by
Gods will (X is right X coheres with Gods
commands). - Benefits
- Provides a basis for moral obligation
- Provides moral motivation
- Problem The Euthyphro Dilemma morality is
arbitrary - Response False Dilemma
- Modified Divine Command Theory Right and wrong
are grounded in Gods immutably good nature, and
His commands are one way we know whats right and
wrong. - The Golden Rule
- What does its application presuppose?
- How must it be qualified?
108How Should We Live?
Toward a Complete Ethical Theory
- Moral objectivism
- The moral relevance of consequences
- The principle of universalizability
- Sanctity of human life
- Importance of moral character
- Natural law as a source of moral principles
- Divine commands as a source of moral principles
- The Golden Rule
- Why be moral?
- Because of the recognition of the authority of
an omnipotent, holy God and his promise of
rewards and punishments
109What is a Just Society?
Three Important Concepts
- Justice
- Remedial
- Commercial
- Distributive
- Rights
- Negative or Positive
- Moral or Legal
- Law
- Natural Law Theory
- Legal Positivism
110What is a Just Society?
Theories of the State
- 1. Anarchy
- Anarcho-socialism
- Anarcho-capitalism
- Absolute anarchy
- Problems
- The problem of motivation
- The problem of human nature
111What is a Just Society?
Theories of the State
- 2. Monarchy
- Absolute monarchy
- Limited monarchy
- Problems
- The problem of finding a worthy leader
- The problem powers corrupting influence
- The problem of succession
112What is a Just Society?
Theories of the State
- 3. Social Contract Theory
- Social Contract Absolutism
- Modern Liberalism
- Problems
- The problem of placing too much power in the
hands of amateurs - The problem of the tyranny of the majority
113What is a Just Society?
Views on Distributive Justice
- Libertarianism The view that government should
be small and that its primary responsibility is
the protection of individual liberties strongly
rejects the redistribution of wealth by
government - Problems
- An imbalanced emphasis on the value of personal
autonomy - An arbitrary restriction to considerations of
resource transfers over resource holdings. - Results in extreme disparities between the
wealthy and the poor.
114What is a Just Society?
Distributive Justice
- Socialism The view that private property should
be prohibited and that all resources should be
held in common by members of the society - Problems
- An unrealistic optimism about human nature.
- Prone to degenerate into totalitarianism.
115What is a Just Society?
Distributive Justice
- Welfare Liberalism The view that attempts a
middle ground between libertarianism and
socialism, seeking to uphold personal liberties
while limiting socio-economic inequalities. - John Rawls Theory of Justice Proposes that the
most just society would be one founded on
principles chosen behind a veil of ignorance - The Principle of Equal Liberty
- The Principle of Difference
116What is a Just Society?
Problems with Rawls Theory of Justice
- Vagueness in applying the theory.
- Presupposes that people behind the veil of
ignorance would desire to minimize risk rather
that maximize gain. - Assumes that fairness in selecting principles
guarantees the fairness of the principles.
117What is a Just Society?
Some Theological Reflections
- On Distributive Justice
- The importance of caring for the poor
- Personal responsibility in meeting ones own
needs - Communitarianism?
- On Religion in the Public Square
- Argument from Pluralism
- Argument from Secularism
- The Pragmatic Argument
- On Civil Disobedience
- When the state commands what God forbids or
forbids what God commands - No precedent or permission for violent opposition
118What is Art?
Definitions of Art
- Any human-made object
- Whatever is presented as art
- The product of the artistic process
- Whatever brings aesthetic pleasure
- The paradigm case approach
- Definition criteria vs. Identification criteria
119What is Art?
The Function of Art
- Mimesisart as imitation (Aristotle)
- Expressionismart as expression of emotion
(Collingwood) - Formalismart as significant form (Bell)
- Marxisimart as ideology and political power
- Christian aestheticsimago Dei and world
projection (Wolterstorff)
120Are There Standards for Art?
Two Perspectives on Aesthetic Truth
- Aesthetic subjectivism the view that aesthetic
judgments merely reflect personal preferences
about art - Aesthetic objectivism the view that beauty and
other aesthetic qualities are objective facts
about art objects.
121Are There Standards for Art?
Objective standards for judging art and artistry
- Genre specific vs. non-genre-specific standards
- Aesthetic virtuesdiligence, veracity, boldness,
etc.
122Art and Ethics
Three Perspectives on Art and Ethics
- Aestheticism The view that art and the artist
are insusceptible to moral judgment. Art and
ethics never conflict, because the creative
artist is above morality. (Wilde, Dewey) - Moralism The view that moral-spiritual value is
the sole criterion for assessing art. The only
relevant judgments of art are ethical in nature.
(Tolstoy) - Ethicism The moral qualities of an artwork
contribute to or detract from the overall quality
of an artwork. (Gaut)
123A Christian View of Aesthetic Value
Why should the Christian care about aesthetics?
- The Genesis creation account (it is good)
- Bezalel and Oholiab (Exod. 35)
- Gods naturethe beauty of God, glory as an
aesthetic quality, etc.(Augustine, Aquinas,
Edwards)
124Some Practical Guidelines
- Depiction of evil vs. endorsement of evil
- Necessary depiction vs. gratuitous depiction of
evil - Depiction in service of a noble theme vs.
depiction in service of a trivial theme - Provision of insight into truth vs. obscuring of
truth - Final justice and personal redemption vs. moral
lawlessness and personal hopelessness - Objective content of the artwork vs. subjective
response of the audience
125(No Transcript)