Download Notes on Jamieson, chapter 2

Survey
yes no Was this document useful for you?
   Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Document related concepts

Ethics in religion wikipedia , lookup

Catholic views on God wikipedia , lookup

Thomas Hill Green wikipedia , lookup

Euthyphro dilemma wikipedia , lookup

Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of moral development wikipedia , lookup

Cultural relativism wikipedia , lookup

Moral development wikipedia , lookup

Relativism wikipedia , lookup

The Sovereignty of Good wikipedia , lookup

School of Salamanca wikipedia , lookup

Divine command theory wikipedia , lookup

Moral relativism wikipedia , lookup

Morality throughout the Life Span wikipedia , lookup

Morality and religion wikipedia , lookup

Morality wikipedia , lookup

Secular morality wikipedia , lookup

Transcript
PHILOSOPHY 102 (STOLZE)
Notes on Dale Jamieson, Ethics
and the Environment, chapter 2
Chapter Two: Human Morality
•
•
•
The Nature and Functions of Morality
Three Challenges to Morality
What Can These Challenges Teach Us?
The Nature and Functions of Morality
•
•
•
Jamieson’s definition of morality = “a behavioral system,
with an attendant psychology, that has evolved among
social animals for the purposes of regulating their
interactions” (pp. 26-7).
Hobbesian solution to the problem of a “war of all against
all.”
Morality, then, is a “pattern of behavior” that enables social
cooperation and reciprocation among individuals.
Three Challenges to Morality
•
•
•
Amoralism
Theism
Relativism
Amoralism
•
•
An amoralist = someone who thinks that “there is no such
thing as right or wrong” and so “chooses to opt out of
morality altogether” (p. 31).
Thought experiment: Dirk the Amoralist (pp. 32-3)
Theism
•
•
A theist thinks that “morality comes only from God” and is
not, as Jamieson claims, a “human construction” (p. 33).
Two reasons why someone might worry that “without God,
everything is permitted” (p. 34):
(1) Without god, morality would have no content.
(2) Without God, we would not be motivated to act morally.
Relativism
•
•
•
A relativist = someone who “denies the possibility of moral
claims transcending the moral system of the speaker’s own
society” (p. 39).
Theoretical and practical objections to relativism
Strengths of relativism
What Challenges to Morality Can Teach Us
•
•
•
Morality is ubiquitous and difficult to escape.
Morality does not need the support of God.
Morality is not culture-bound.