Intrinsic Good and Evil Acts; Voluntary and Involuntary Acts; Kant on Will

docx

School

University of Mary *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

308

Subject

Philosophy

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

3

Uploaded by MegaKoalaPerson1061

Report
Ethics INTRODUCTION: Today we examine moral wrongs. These are evil human actions for which we are responsible. Importantly, not all human actions are subject to the same degree of moral praise or blame. For example, John kills an innocent person by irresponsibly speeding through a neighborhood, while Joe kills an innocent person in order to rob him. John and Joe have both killed innocents, yet the conditions under which John does so makes him less morally responsible than Joe. In the first reading for this assignment, we will look the philosophy of Immanuel Kant. Kant famously believes that the only thing of unconditional moral worth is a good will and that duty is the primary ethical concept. In the second reading, Aquinas introduces his definition of evil and good and the conditions that a human act must meet in order to be the proper object of moral evaluation. In my lecture, I will present some work by a philosopher named David Oderberg. Oderberg offers a more detailed explanation of Aquinas’ view (which he takes from Aristotle). Following Aristotle and Aquinas, Oderberg also introduces conditions that lessen moral responsibility. In the final reading we return to Aquinas to answer the question we engaged last time: can an action be intrinsically wrong in its species? ASSIGNED READING: Selections from the Groundwork , Immanuel Kant on a Good Will On Evil, Q.II, A.2 ‘Does Sin Consist solely of the Will’s Act?’ - read only the second paragraph of the Answer (p. 97) On Evil , II, A.4 'Is Every Act Morally Indifferent?' o Read the Answer and objection 5 with reply On Evil , II, A.5 'Are Some Acts Morally Indifferent?' o Read the Answer REFLECTION QUESTIONS: 1) What was the most important thing that you learned from our previous class session? Why do you find this important? I appreciated the content surrounding community. I think it is important for all people to understand that a community is not just an aggregate of individuals, but a group of people seeking some common understanding. This knowledge can help us identify our own communities, whether they serve us, and if we should continue to engage in these communities. 2) What is one question you have that stems from the previous class session or reading? READING QUESTIONS: 1) Kant denies that virtues (“qualities conducive to the good will itself”) have any inner unconditional worth. Why? Kant believes that when virtues stand alone, they are just an idea. That is, virtues must be acted upon in order to have real value.
2) Kant claims that the only unconditionally good thing is the good will or volition and not the success or effects (consequences) of an action. What makes the will good? Kant states that a will is made good depending on the connection of the will to some moral law and the motivation behind the will. 3) What is the difference between doing something “in conformity with duty” and doing something “from duty?” Doing something “in conformity with duty” is when you fear being punished if you do not perform the task. Doing something “in conformity from duty”, on the other hand, is doing something because you believe it to be a moral obligation. 4) What is the difference between a hypothetical and categorical imperative? A hypothetical imperative are commands that one follows in certain circumstances, based on personal goals. Categorical imperatives are commands that a person follows regardless of circumstances—these depend on moral principles. 5) Explain how one might will a maxim to become a universal law for Kant. The universalizability principle from Kant states that, "an act only in accordance with that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it become a universal law.” In other words, this means that if you commit an action, then the action should be replicable by others. 6) Explain what it means to treat a person as an end for Kant. To treat someone as an end, according to Kant, is to treat them with dignity and recognize their inherent worth as an individual.. 7) How does Aquinas define “evil,” “sin,” and “moral wrong”? Give your own examples of something that would be evil but not sin, and something that would be sin but not morally wrong (See II.2 Answer). Aquinas defines evil as a “severance” or removal from the good. A sin is a “deliberate divide from the divine moral law”. A moral wrong is anything that deviates from the natural law, which he believes to be an expression of God’s will. Something that would be considered evil is a small child, like a toddler, picking up and pointing a gun. This is not a sin, because the toddler has not sense of his actions. Something that is a sin is lying, but lying can sometimes be considered not morally wrong if it is done to protect someone. 8) Explain Aquinas’ argument that some acts are intrinsically good and intrinsically evil (See II.4 Answer ). Some acts can be considered intrinsically good if they arise from the divine principle and evil if they exclude the human principle. Human actions share in the divine principle through natural order, for God impresses all creatures with a desire for the good. This means that acts are evil when they refuse the natural order, which is an extension of God’s will and the divine principle. 9) How do consequences (a kind of circumstance of an action) affect the goodness or evil or an action (see II.4 Reply to objection 5)? Consequences do not determine the overall goodness or evilness of an action. The moral worth of an action is inherent, and consequences may vary. 10) Explain the difference between moral acts as regards their species and moral acts as regards their individual acts and why this distinction is significant to Aquinas’ answer to this article’s question (see II.5 Answer ).
Moral acts as regards to their species gives “a circumstance gives the species of good or evil to a moral action, in so far as it regards a special order of reason.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help