Hw 10
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Mesa Community College *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
PHIL 112
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Dec 6, 2023
Type
docx
Pages
2
Uploaded by rootisaacj
Parfit, From
Reasons and Persons
(in packet, p.132-159 internal)
Williams,
A Critique of Utilitarianism
(in packet, p. 611- 621)
.
2. Suppose that Grace really loves her daughter Samantha. Now suppose further
that Samantha is not doing too well in English and Grace wants to use some of
her extra income to hire a tutor. Finally, imagine that this money could also be
sent to some very worthy charity which would save the actual lives of some
children much poorer than Grace and Sammy. Suppose that Grace gives the
money to Samantha’s tutor, explain why according to Parfit this act is 1) wrong
but 2) blameless. [Hint: Parfit says that actions are blamelessly wrong under very
specific circumstances. What are these?]
In order for an action to be defined as a blameless wrongdoing: A) the action must be
wrong B) The person committing the act is acting in good faith of their principles/morals
C) it would be wrong for the person to change their principles/morals. When Grace
made the decision to support her child over multiple strangers, this action was wrong.
Grace committed this act in good faith of her love for her child. It would be wrong to
change her love for her child. Therefore, this example meets the requirements of an
action that is wrong but blameless.
4. According to Parfit, if we can show that Consequentialism is indirectly self-
defeating does that mean that Consequentialism is false? Explain why or why
not?
Parfit states that it does not matter if the claim was indirectly or directly self defeating, it
matters if circumstances are unclear and have moral implications. Given that Parfit
pointed out several major self-defeating arguments to consequentialism that have moral
implications, Consequentialism is false.
7. Now explain why Williams thinks that in both of the examples from #6
Utilitarianism conflicts with common sense. [NOTE: the answer is NOT that
Utilitarianism says that George should take the job whereas commonsense says
that he should not and that Utilitarianism says that Jim should take Pedro’s offer
whereas common sense says that he should not. Read the paragraph starting
(613) “To these dilemmas...” Utilitarianism and common sense disagree not
necessarily about what to do (at the end of the article he says that Utilitarianism
and common sense actually agree about Jim and Pedro), but they disagree about
something else. What is it?]
Williams states that Utilitarianism makes integrity as a value more or less intelligible.
Meaning there becomes less or more responsibility for one's actions which is overall
bad for society. This fundamentally contradicts Utilitarianism.
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