HW2 Chpt 4 & 8 Eth Subjectivism & Utilitarianism

doc

School

Broward College *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

1001

Subject

Philosophy

Date

Dec 6, 2023

Type

doc

Pages

Uploaded by EarlEnergyMoose44

Name: HW Chapter 4: Ethical Subjectivism Ethics HW on Ethical Subjectivism (Note: Ethical Subjectivism is a WEAK and potentially dangerous type of justification for moral claims. Use this HW to explore WHY that is the case.) 1. (Recap) Respond to at least one of the following questions: o What is a specific question (related to our class) that stands out to you at the moment (from class, the reading, etc.)? Why does it stand out? o What statement , made by another student, stands out to you at the moment? Why does it stand out? o What is one concept on which you gained clarity in our most recent class? What is one concept that is still unclear for you, and how can you go about clarifying it? o What is one philosophical question you have asked someone outside of our class? What did you learn by listening to their response? A specific question that stands out the most to me so far is “Is there anything wrong with being selfish?” . The reason why is selfishness is not always a bad thing. It’s our nature to be selfish to prioritize our needs before other’s needs. Being selfish only becomes bad when you are only looking at your personal benefits and ignoring how your actions might affect other’s physically and mentally. Selfishness is acceptable when you need to do something that necessary for your well-being but barely affect others. Putting yourself prior others can be a good way to take care of your well being, improve your skills, and become a better version of yourself. 2. In your own words, or in words directly from our class book, finish these statements: o “According to ethical subjectivism, morality is determined by individual perspectives .” o “According to an ethical subjectivist, the ONLY thing that determines whether something is morally permissible or not is personal beliefs .” 3. Is the author, Judith Boss, ultimately arguing that you should be an ethical subjectivist OR that you should not be an ethical subjectivist? (Hint: Be careful here2. Sometimes the author’s language confuses people. The answer is: “Should NOT!” – look for it... Also check the short section that comes just before the Ethical Subjectivism chapter in the book.) - Judith Boss is ultimately arguing that you should be an ethical subjectivist. She makes the clear statement that people cannot be mistaken about what is morally right or wrong because there is no universal moral standards. Everyone has their own way of thinking as well as their own opinions. What is right for you might be wrong for another person depending on respective feelings or opinions. No one is right or wrong, it is all matter of individual’s preferences. 4. Once you have identified the author’s conclusion /assessment/evaluation regarding ethical subjectivism (in the above question), write out as many premises (the reasons and analysis she uses to support that conclusion) as you can find throughout the chapter. (By doing this, you are starting to identify the elements of her argument /reasoning.) (Label “descriptive” premises - matters of fact – with a D) (Label “prescriptive” premises – value/ought to claim – with a P). - Descriptive D: + Opinions are not right or wrong. + Tolerance is a universal moral principle. + Ethical does not necessarily entail tolerance. + The statement that a person believes something to be right. + There are no universal moral truths, only individual moral preferences or truths based on each person’s own opinion and feelings. - Descriptive P: + You should do what feels right for you. + People’s ought to tolerate other’s feelings and lifestyle. + People disagree about what is right and what is wrong. + If a person sincerely believes something to be morally correct for him or her, then this causes it to be morally true. + Personal tastes or feelings are the only standard. 5. Reflect: Do you agree with the author’s conclusion/assessment/evaluation regarding ethical subjectivism? Why or why not? Use support from the chapter (as premises) to back up your position. - I do agree with the author’s conclusion regarding ethical subjectivism. I agree because everyone has their own ways of thinking and their own opinions on all different types of topics. Morality is determined by one’s own personal feelings. What is right or wrong depends on their personal taste, such as taste of music or taste of food. Judith uses the analogy of the blind men and the elephant as an example of ethical subjectivism. The blind men come up with different description of the elephant. The “elephant” is whatever someone believe it to be, in other words, it is each person’s imagination. 6. What else did you find interesting / surprising in this chapter? Explain. - In this chapter something I found interesting is that ethical subjectivism is commonly mistaken for the ethics of tolerance and respect for others. It has been commonly used to support a statement such as "People ought to tolerate other people’s feelings and lifestyles." ; however, ethical subjectivism is not appropriate to support a statement that contains a universal moral principle. 7. Generate an inquiry/philosophical question related to the reading and write it out. ©Kimber 2023

- Will there ever be a time when everyone has the same beliefs as with each other on many topics? HW Chapter 8: Utilitarianism ETHICS HW on Utilitarianism (Note: Utilitarianism is a STRONG type of justification for moral claims. Use this HW to explore WHY that is the case.) 1) In your own words, or in words directly from our class book, finish these statements: a. “According to utilitarianism, morality is determined by its consequences .” b. “According to a utilitarian, the most moral choice is the one that generates/produces/yields the greatest good .” 2) Create a chart where you identify PLEASURES & pains you experience this week. Give each pleasure and pain a number to indicate its pleasure value or pain value. (For example: I am eating a delicious piece of pizza, and that’s a +20 out of a possible +100 units of pleasure; I got bit by a mosquito and now it is itchy, and that’s -15 units of pleasure out of a possible -100 units of pleasure.) (If you use negative pleasure units to indicate pain as I did in this example, you can put all your data on one chart or one line.) Pleasure Pain Go to the beach to watch sunset (+80) Traffic jam (-50) Go shopping (+70) Lose my wallet (-60) Eat my favorite food (+50) Get my hand burnt while cooking (-80) 3) Do non-human animals deserve ethical treatment – or only humans? What does it mean to treat animals ethically? Can you think of any examples? How is this like or different from the ethical treatment of humans? - Yes, non-human animals deserve ethical treatment. Treating animals ethically means you treat them with the same and respect and care you would a human. Treating animals ethically involves in ensuring their well-being such as providing them food and shelter. For instance, it is morally wrong when animals are used for any experiment purposes. The difference from the ethical treatment of humans is that animals are not given the same right as humans. Human ethics has complex morals like justice, equality, freedom, which animals do not have. a. Explain how you can use utilitarianism to enhance your response to this question. - In utilitarian ethics, treating animals ethically means considering the consequences of human’s actions on animals. Ethical treatment of animals based on utilitarianism is minimizing unnecessary suffering and maximizing well-being. 4) Does it make sense to talk about treating the earth ethically? What would it be like to treat the earth ethically? Are humans treating the earth ethically right now? Have they ever done so? Are you? Explain – and use examples. - Yes, I believe it totally make sense to treat the earth ethically. Treating the Earth ethically involes actions that minimize harm to the environment like no littering, conserve water, recycle, etc. Nowadays, humans are not treating the earth ethically right since environmental issues caused by humans are still existing. For example, climate change is getting worse due to human activities have released large amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere every day. I have been protecting the environment by doing little things such as recycling bottles and trying to conserve water. a. Explain how you can use utilitarianism to enhance your response to this question. - Utilitarianism applied to the treatment of the Earth by considering the outcomes. From utilitarian perspective, treating the Earth ethically means avoiding actions that cause harm to the environment and encourage positive actions to protect the environment. 5) In the prompts below, you will see some important Critical Thinking (CT) Outcomes/Objectives written in bold. The questions are structured to help you see how you can use them to analyze and evaluate big questions, so pay extra attention to them as you answer. a. (CT) Explain the question , problem, or issue: “Is it morally acceptable to euthanize people who have terminal illnesses and who want to end their lives? Why or why not?” - I believe it morally right to euthanize people who have terminal illnesses and who want to end their lives. This is because they are suffering from pain every day and their survival chance is extremely low. The longer they are still alive, the more they must go through hard times in pain. Thus, they have every right to decide whether to stay fighting with their illnesses with no hope or put an end to their lives. b. NOW : Clarify your initial response by explaining exactly what makes this issue a moral dilemma . That is, explain which universal moral principles are at stake in this dilemma. Underline the universal moral principles in your reply. - The thing that makes this issue a moral dilemma because it is the situation in which people need to make difficult choice. Universal moral principles are at stake in this dilemma including autonomy, freedom, and respect . Autonomy supports a person's right to make decisions ©Kimber 2023

about their life, including the choice to end it to avoid suffering. The decision to put life into an end to give freedom for people who suffering from terminal illness. Another moral principle is respect, people have the right to do anything with their own body and we must respect their decision. c. (CT) Analyze and interpret relevant information : Identify or write out the facts and variables that will need to be considered to effectively evaluate this case with utilitarianism. You can fill in variables by making them up. For example: Life expectancy of the patient is 8 months. AND…. AND…. - Someone got into a car accident, and he got hit in his head which caused him to have traumatic brain injury. The doctor claims that this is going to affect his ability to function for the rest of his life, and his life expectancy is less than a year. He must deal with a terrible headache and is semi-conscious of his surroundings. d. (CT) Evaluate the information to determine possible conclusions : In this case, use utilitarianism as your evaluative “lens” to help you identify possible conclusions. - If the patient is suffering a lot of pain, the best choice for them is to put an end to their lives. there is nothing better than hell if you are alive but still feel like going through hell every day for the rest of your life. e. Challenge: Include an explanation of how the conclusions would be different if you evaluated the same information through the “lens” of ethical subjectivism. - According to ethical subjectivism, morality is a matter of personal judgment or cultural values. Euthanasia decisions would solely depend on individual beliefs. Euthanasia may be supported by some as a matter of personal liberty and compassion, while it may be opposed by others due to their own moral or religious beliefs. f. Challenge: Include an explanation of how the conclusion could be different if you changed some of the variables. - Some of the variables could be changed to make a different conclusion is extended life expectancy and improve medical treatment for the patient. A person will never be pushed to the point where they have to end their life, they will have the motivation to continue fighting the illness. Moreover, there can be a possibility of a better medical treatment to extend the patient’s life. g. (CT) Generate a well-reasoned conclusion : Explain which conclusion makes the most sense after completing your analysis and evaluation. - The most appropriate conclusion is to ensure to maximize happiness while respecting the patient’s autonomy. 6) (Synthesis - purpose) What, do you think, was the purpose of reading and evaluating ethical subjectivism and utilitarianism at the same time? - I think the purpose of reading and evaluating ethical subjectivism and utilitarianism at the same time to help us gain deeper understand the connection between those two ethical theories. Allowing individuals to compare their fundamental principles, ideas, and each theory’s own values. 7) (Synthesis) Now that you’ve read about ethical subjectivism (moral relativism) and utilitarianism (a universal moral theory), consider this: Should political leaders make decisions based on ethical subjectivism, or utilitarianism? Use an example and explain your reasoning. - Political leaders should primarily base their decisions on utilitarianism rather than ethical subjectivism. Utilitarianism offers a more rigorous and objective approach to decision-making, coinciding with the aim of political leaders to promote the greatest good for their constituency and society as a whole. While ethical subjectivism recognizes the significance of personal beliefs and opinions. 8) Rawls’ Veil of Ignorance (I call it the Veil of Impartiality because it’s less confusing for folks) --- Gain an initial understanding of the Veil of Ignorance/Impartiality (look it up in the glossary or index if you don’t know what it is and then go to the pages in the book that discuss it). a. In your own words, or the words of Judith Boss, describe the Veil of Ignorance/Impartiality : - The thought experiment known as the Veil of Ignorance, or the Veil of Impartiality in this context, was developed by philosopher John Rawls. It asks people to picture themselves in an imagined scenario where they are completely ignorant of any of their own unique features, including their gender, social status, money, or skills. Individuals are blind to their own advantages or disadvantages in society because of this "veil." They are entrusted with creating the rules for a just and equitable society from this vantage point without understanding how these rules would affect them directly. b. Would a person who is using/applying – that is, under - the Veil of Ignorance/Impartiality be more likely to apply ethical subjectivism or utilitarianism when making a moral decision? Explain. ©Kimber 2023

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

- A person using the Veil of Ignorance/Impartiality is more likely to choose utilitarianism when deciding on a moral course of action. The Veil of Ignorance encourages people to adopt an unbiased stance and consider the interests and well-being of every member of society equally, which is why this is the case. With its emphasis on the greatest benefit for the largest number, utilitarianism, a consequentialist ethical theory, is consistent with this strategy. It necessitates that people make choices that increase general pleasure and reduce suffering, which is congruent with the notion of building a just and fair society while hiding behind the Veil of Ignorance, where one is unaware of their own position or privileges in society. ©Kimber 2023

HW2 Chpt 4 & 8 Eth Subjectivism & Utilitarianism

Related Documents