PHIL 240 INTRODUCTION TO ETHICAL THEORY Week 3

PHIL 240, INTRODUCTION TO ETHICAL THEORY Week 3, Lecture 1 Benjamin Visscher Hole IV

AGENDA 1. Assess where we are in the course 2. Clicker Quiz 3. Introduction to Utilitarian Value Theory – Overview – Begin Nozick – Tomorrow: continue Nozick, begin Bentham

REVIEW The Immoralist Challenge Possible Solutions • Why should you be moral in situations where you’re incentivized to be immoral? – Gyges’s Ring – Prisoner’s Dilemma – State of Nature – Tragedy of the Commons • Glaucon and Hobbes – Social Contract Theory • Hardin – Utilitarianism

READING SCHEDULE DATES REQUIRED READINGS RECOMMENDED READINGS Week One: June 24 -28 Why be moral? Moral Theory Primer Syllabus Plato, 65 -78 Timmons (electronic) Shafer-Landau, 1 -17 Shafer-Landau, 289 -305 Concepción (electronic) Week Two: July 1 -5 Social Contract Theory and Collective Action Problems Hobbes, 236 -247 Hardin (electronic) Vaughn, “How to Read an Argument” (electronic) Shafer-Landau, 201 -213 Week Three: July 8 -12 Utilitarianism Week Four: July 15 -19 Utilitarianism Week Five: July 22 -26 Kantian Ethics Nozick (electronic) Bentham, 353 -361 Singer, 873 -880 Mill, 362 -383 Kant, 313 -352 Shafer-Landau, 117 -132 Shafer-Landau, 21 -58 Shafer-Landau, 117 -132 Shafer-Landau, 133 -153 O’Neil (electronic) Velleman (electronic) Shafer-Landau, 168 -186 Week Six: July 29 - August 2 Assessing Utilitarianism & Kantian Ethics Anscombe, 527 -539 Williams, 657 -673 Wolf, 790 -802 Stocker (electronic) Baker (electronic) Week Seven: August 5 -8 Virtue Ethics Week Eight: August 12 -16 Virtue Ethics & Assessing Ethical Theory Week Nine: August 19 -23 Contemporary Moral Issues: Abortion Aristotle, 124 -140; 146 -147 Nussbaum, 755 -774 Wolf, 790 -802 Thomson, 817 -827 Hursthouse, 849 -862 Shafer-Landau, 252 -271 Aristotle, 152 -157 Shafer-Landau, 252 -271 Note: Final Paper due August 12 Review for the final Note: Final Exam August 23

Please set your Turning Technology Clicker to channel 41 Press “Ch”, then “ 41”, then “Ch”

MY LEARNING PROCESS WOULD BE SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVED IF THE WEEKLY WRITING ASSIGNMENTS WERE DUE TUESDAY AT 10 AM INSTEAD OF MONDAY AT 10 AM. A. Strongly Agree B. Agree C. Somewhat Agree D. Neutral E. Somewhat Disagree F. Disagree G. Strongly Disagree

CLICKER QUIZ

1. WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING IS A KIND OF CONSEQUENTIALIST THEORY THAT EXPLAINS RIGHT ACTION IN TERMS OF THE NET BALANCE OF PLEASURE (OR LACK OF PAIN) PRODUCED BY THAT ACTION? A. hedonistic utilitarianism B. perfectionist consequentialism C. rule consequentialism D. desire satisfaction consequentialism E. all of the above F. None of the above

2. IF PLEASURE ALWAYS MAKES US BETTER OFF (OR “IF PLEASURE IS ALWAYS VALUABLE”), THEN HEDONISM. . . A. must be true. B. must be false. C. might be true but only if other things make us better off as well. D. might still be false if other things make us better off as well.

3. WHAT QUESTION IS NOZICK TRYING TO RAISE WITH HIS EXPERIENCE MACHINE THOUGHT EXPERIMENT? a. b. c. d. e. What sorts of new technology are possible in the future? What else can matter to us, other than how our lives feel from the inside? Are we letting machines do too many things for us? Which kinds of experiences are most valuable? None of the above

ETHICAL PRINCIPLES & MORAL PARTICULARS Practical Syllogism 1. Universal Ethical Principle 2. Moral Particulars (Context) 3. Right Action Hobbes Right action is determined by one’s social contract. Hardin Right action is determined by the principle of utility.

UTILITARIANISM “An act is right if and only if (and because) it would (if performed) likely produce at least as high a utility (net overall balance of welfare) as would any other alternative action one might perform instead” (Timmons, 8).

UTILITARIANISM DETERMINING THE RIGHT ACTION How to apply consequentialist reasoning: 1) Identify what is intrinsically good. 2) Identify what is intrinsically bad. 3) Determine all of your options. 4) For each option, determine the value of its results. 5) Perform the action that produces more good to bad results. E. g. , maximization; optimization

UTILITARIANISM: “AN ACT IS RIGHT IF AND ONLY IF (AND BECAUSE) IT WOULD (IF PERFORMED) LIKELY PRODUCE AT LEAST AS HIGH A UTILITY (NET OVERALL BALANCE OF WELFARE) AS WOULD ANY OTHER ALTERNATIVE ACTION ONE MIGHT PERFORM INSTEAD” (TIMMONS, 8). A. Strongly Agree B. Agree C. Somewhat Agree D. Neutral E. Somewhat Disagree F. Disagree G. Strongly Disagree

THEORIES OF WELL-BEING Theories of well-being attempt to state what it is for a life to go well, and what kind of things make a life go better. They seek to specify what is intrinsically good for us. Utilitarians ethical theory is value-based on a “The of the Good” about well-being. Theories of Well-Being 1. Hedonism 2. Desire Satisfaction Theory 3. Objective List / Perfectionist

INTRINSIC VS. INSTRUMENTAL VALUE Something is instrumentally valuable if it is valuable because of the goods it brings about. Something is intrinsically valuable if it is valuable for its own sake.

HEDONISM Hedonism states: Pleasure is the only thing that is intrinsically good for people. Pain is the only thing that is intrinsically bad for people. Hedonism: X is valuable if and only if (and because) X is pleasurable.

DESIRE SATISFACTION THEORY Desire Satisfaction Theory States If something is good for us, then it fulfills our desires. If something fulfills our desires, then it is good for us. DST: X is valuable if and only if (and because) X satisfies a desire

OBJECTIVE LIST / PERFECTIONIST THEORY Objective List / Perfectionist Theory States If something is good for us, then it is an item on an objective list of values, which may include items such as knowledge and achievement. If something is on an objective list of values, then it is good for us. OL/PT: X is valuable if and only if (and because) X satisfies is on an objective list of values.

MY PREFERRED THEORY OF WELL-BEING IS: A. Hedonism B. Desire Satisfaction Theory C. Objective List / Perfectionist Theory D. None of the above are good theories of wellbeing E. I object to theories of wellbeing as the basis for ethical theory

THOUGHT EXPERIMENTS “are employed … by philosophers … to examine the implications of theories and to explore the boundaries of certain concepts” (Honderich, T. , The Oxford Companion to Philosophy, 2 nd eds, OUP 2005, pg. 919)

DESIRE SATISFACTION THEORY Desire Satisfaction Theory States If something is good for us, then it fulfills our desires. If something fulfills our desires, then it is good for us. DST: X is valuable if and only if (and because) X satisfies a desire

DISAPPOINTMENT Imagine getting everything you want. . . . and then being completely miserable. In cases of disappointment, desire satisfaction doesn't always make us better off. DST: X is valuable if and only if (and because) X satisfies a desire

IGNORANCE OF DESIRE SATISFACTION A desire is satisfied. . . . but you never learn of this. The satisfaction of desires doesn't make us better off unless we know about it. DST: X is valuable if and only if (and because) X satisfies a desire

IMPOVERISHED DESIRES Desires are heavily shaped by environment and upbringing. Some people lower their expectations and desire little for themselves. DST: X is valuable if and only if (and because) X satisfies a desire

IMPOVERISHED DESIRES Desires are heavily shaped by environment and upbringing. Some people lower their expectations and desire little for themselves. DST: X is valuable if and only if (and because) X satisfies a desire

IMPOVERISHED DESIRES Desires are heavily shaped by environment and upbringing. Some people lower their expectations and desire little for themselves. DST: X is valuable if and only if (and because) X satisfies a desire

IMPOVERISHED DESIRES Desires are heavily shaped by environment and upbringing. Some people lower their expectations and desire little for themselves. DST: X is valuable if and only if (and because) X satisfies a desire

DESIRE SATISFACTION THEORY: X IS VALUABLE IF AND ONLY IF (AND BECAUSE) X SATISFIES A DESIRE A. Strongly Agree B. Agree C. Somewhat Agree D. Neutral E. Somewhat Disagree F. Disagree G. Strongly Disagree

HEDONISM: X IS VALUABLE IF AND ONLY IF (AND BECAUSE) X IS PLEASURABLE. A. Strongly Agree B. Agree C. Somewhat Agree D. Neutral E. Somewhat Disagree F. Disagree G. Strongly Disagree

THE DELUDED SADIST THOUGHT EXPERIMENT “Imagine a universe consisting on one sentient being only, who falsely believes that there are other sentient beings and that they are undergoing exquisite torment. So far from being distressed by the thought, he takes a great delight in these imagined sufferings. Is this better or worse than a universe containing no sentient being at all? Is it worse, again, than a universe containing only one sentient being with the same beliefs as before but who sorrows at the imagined tortures of his fellow creatures? I suggest, as against Moore, that the universe containing the deluded sadist is the preferable one. ” (J. J. C. Smart)

A UNIVERSE CONTAINING ONLY A DELUDED IS BETTER THAN A UNIVERSE CONTAINING NO SENTIENT BEINGS AT ALL A. Strongly Agree B. Agree C. Somewhat Agree D. Neutral E. Somewhat Disagree F. Disagree G. Strongly Disagree

A UNIVERSE CONTAINING ONLY A DELUDED IS BETTER THAN A UNIVERSE CONTAINING ONE SENTIENT BEING WITH THE SAME BELIEFS AS THE DELUDED SADIST BUT WHO SORROWS AT THE IMAGINED TORTURES OF HIS FELLOW CREATURES A. Strongly Agree B. Agree C. Somewhat Agree D. Neutral E. Somewhat Disagree F. Disagree G. Strongly Disagree