Study your flashcards anywhere!

Download the official Cram app for free >

  • Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off

How to study your flashcards.



H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key


Play button


Play button




Click to flip

19 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
Study of good and bad, right and wrong, search for "good life" and defense of principales and rules of morality
Set of principles or rules that guide our actions
-Good life involves getting as much pleasure as you can
+Similar to Epircurian
=avoid pain
=seek moderation
=seek artistic pleasure
=seek pleasure from doing good deeds
-Rigourous self-discipline and abstinence, rejecting as much as possible the comforts, luxuries and pleasures of the world
+similar to monastics
=need for self-discipline
-Thesis that people ought to act to satisfy their own interests (assume a choice)
+need to satisfy yourself first before someone else to be happy
-one ought to act for the sake of another person's interests, but not necessarily against one's own interest (also assumes a choice)
+actions benefit others, but doesn't negate one's own interests
Categorical Imperative
-A moral law that is unqalified and not dependent upon any condition
+if an action is done that you feel ok if everyone did it, then people should do it
+Ex: lying is ok for you then it is ok for everyone to lie
Hypothetical Imperative
-a moral law that only applies in specific situations (has qualifications)
-What society considers right is right for that society
+more Democratic than Absolution as well as dangerous
-There exists one moral "good" that applies to all
+more religous than Relativism
+everything is black or white, no grey
Utility Principal
-Act for the greatest good for the greatest number of people
+Democracy and capitalism
+Put self on hold, act fo the best of others
-Source of evil and unhappiness is social convention and institution. Withdraw from participation in society.
-Accept and succumb to adversity
+Turn the other cheek
+Pacifist who looks within for happiness
-Virtue resides in the will. Only the will is good or bad. Understand that you are part of a divine arrangement (cosmic plan) that you can't possiblely alter
+Plan exists
+Have control over the mind
-Accepted moral code (whatever it is) is objective and completely infallible
+Hilter authoritiran:get rid of Jews
+Negative piece of absoluteism
Kantan Ethics
-We posses moral autonomy (free will), the capability of figuring right and wrong on our own without external authority using only our faculty of reason (God's laws are justified because they are rational-not just because they came from God)
+Can be free to choice, but still influenced by others
-Kant states that it's not our actions that are of moral interest, it's our intentions. The essence of morality, then, is the motive from which the act is done, that is, the intended and expected consquences from which it's done.
+Motive, is of moral interest
+Amoral or moral, no immoral
-An act can be said to be moral only when one suppresses feelings and inclinations and acts from a sense of duty or obligation (otherwise, the act of inclination, amoral)
-Thus there are two types of acts:
+Acts done from inclination (fear of punishment, taste, desire, for reward)
+Acts done by a free agent (without constraint or force) according to a sense of duty or obligations (those acts are considered moral)
-Action is "good" or "bad" in so far as it produces the greatest happiness for the greatest number. This idea was first espoused by Francis Hutcheson. It was developed by Jermey Bentham and John Stuart Mill
-Bentham and Mill see utility principal as a form of hedonism-bringing greatest amount of pleasure to the greatest number of people.
-They were searching for an objective principal of right and wrong. Thus utilitanism stresses the effect of an action. If the action produces more good than bad, it's good.
+It's like a formula with variables that include the intensity and duration of pleasure or pain caused by the action (hedonic calculus)
+Emphasizes the consquences, not the motive of the action
+It seperates the goodness or badness of an action from the goodness or badness of the person doing the action
+Utilitarianism is associated with democracy since it counts each person's pain or pleasure with equal weight
Spinoza's Ethical System
-Nothing is inherently good or bad, but only so in relation to a given person. All things come to pass according to the external order and fixed laws of nature. Sphinoza's ideas are both deterministic and relativistic.
+Relativistic: nothing is intrinsically good or bad. Property is only good if it provides happiness, if it does not, it's not good.
+Deterministic: all actions are determined by past experiences, by the physical and mental constitution of the individual and by the state of the laws of nature at the moment.
-Thus, a person will only be happy when he/she comes to understand that there are limits to human power. Fear, anxiety, and unhappiness arise only when we become slaves to emotions.
+limits free will
Nietzsche's Attack on Morality
-Morality is nothing more than the "herd instinct" in the individual. It's a way of forcing the individual to precieve and value himself as a mere function of the herd. It denies individuals of their power, self-expression and search for meaning.
+Believed that passion and the creative expression of one's life and energy were far more important than reason, pleasure or happiness-the meaning of human life is creativity.
+Morality, as defined in the West, dampens creativity and tries to make us all the same-preventing us from being daring and inventive
+Rejects those who hide behind moral principales as an excuse for doing nothing and making nothing of themselves-to cover their laziness, hypocrisy and cowardice
+Envisioned a society of free, vibrant, creative, and daring people. Morality prevents this.
+He raises the question-How can we justify universal rules or morality without squashing our individual creativity? Why should we be moral at all?
+Won't be afraid of doing something wrong as a consquence wouldn't mean as much