Reviews for The moral philosophers

The average rating for The moral philosophers based on 2 reviews is 4.5 stars.

Review # 1 was written on 2020-09-17 00:00:00 Gary Barnes Svinbra förklaringar! Här görs det svårbegripliga begripligt bla med hjälp av samtida exempel. 👌🏼

Review # 2 was written on 2017-04-05 00:00:00 Katherine Hogoboom My first book on philosophie and I fall in love, it cant be better :) #Plato: world of forms (world is unreal, only pleasure is intellectual: the pleasure of ideas) We should seek harmony and balance. Rule by reason (is the just life) inhibition feeling (pleasure searching make us slave, working with impulse & obsession #extreme) Moral knowledge is forms #Aristotle: happiness is the highest good, it’s an end, is the purpose. For philosopher living by reason: traditional virtue: observing the mean (have right feeling on right occasion, right reason, right degree, toward right person) No excess No deprivation. For others ordinary people: Moral is built by experience with the world, its duty of a philosopher to set the rules for them to follow: Moral knowledge is empirical study of the facts of human existence. #Hume: Moral knowledge does not exist: approval or denials derive from #sentiment (feeling, emotion) rather than reason. 1: We are affected by the happiness and suffering of others (society): rule utilitarian 2: (contradiction with rule 1 priority to rule 2) guarantees private property: social rule. Justice as equality: People will never agree on about what they deserved and the result would be chaos. The pursuit of equality is at the bottom impracticable, people different on talent and abilities they tend toward inequality => justice is to guarantee what they have already :( private property). #Kant: duty of duty’s sake: No justification for his claims: source divine The ordinary moral consciousness: goodwill: (background: Christian Protestant #God) Moral evaluation focus on people's intention, moral action is worthy only if it’s done for duty’s sake (not selfish end). Treat human being as an end and never only as mean. We should be motivated by other people end as well by our own. Helping them to promote their (end) happiness and prevent their suffering. Respect the other human => search for a mean of ends sum: yours + others (limit yourself to respect others: basic for human right) #Mill: pleasure for pleasure's sake Rule-utilitarianism (higher priority): duties of fidelity/reparation/gratitude/justice/beneficence/self-improvement/non-maleficence Act-utilitarianism: Consequence: Actions are right if it produce more happiness than any alternative The Greatest Happiness Principle #Bentham: do sum of quantitative (x qualitative) happiness of the society (- pain) #Hegel: my station and its duty Social self: people exist as connection (network-mirror) with society, from start you belong to a network: family/profession/state/.. You get all your knowledge from them. And you have a social function toward the networks (example: father/DFT engineer/Tunisian) Identity of an individual is constituted (exist) by his relation to others #projection Each relation carries specific ethic significance: friend / parent / partner / colleague / king Self-realisation #Bradley (it’s not sum of happiness - pain) it has to do with the character of one’s life as a whole #Nietzsche unmasker of religion morals / will to power (need) to make own mark in the world No objective value, there are no moral facts: its illusion: we can only study the historical culture & psychological state. Moral is social phenomena (back to #Hegel) so moral is subject to criticism. Noble morality good (courage/physical-mental strength/pride)/bad (lack, inferior, non-noble, not to blame) (altruism: generosity from a position of strength) Slave morality good/evil placing positive value not on power and success and happiness but on self-denying / self-sacrificing/suffering / poor / meekness / imaginary revenge and hate /self-torture replace the suffering to others to self-suffering (to fill the same pleasure, to satisfy their need for sense of power) #Marx: #economic (need) work & creativity is the objective manifesto (alienation of labour or morals) Social bourgeois/: morality serve as mask for class interests: legitimise existing society and its class structure: obey law / hard work/ preserve private proprietary/ moderate demand => for comment good (good for the dominant class) #Freud: #sexual (need) arousal (can be channelled to cultural/spiritual/intellectual) Super-ego: forbidding / guilty when performing some action: internalisation of external authority. Needed for social and self-control: else our natural aggressive instinct will make social life impossible Internal authority build from childhood by parent educating him against his feeling (frustration, but submit to gain their love) => it’s a necessary illusion (excess or lack of self-control lead to illness) #G.E.Moor: Naturalistic fallacy #intuitionist Good (non-natural) cannot be defined: we know it when encounter it (like property yellow but that is natural) It’s wrong to define Good = willed by god #Kant, sum of pleasure #utilitarian, human need #Marx … One’s good is defined (beautiful) all is self-evident after #intuitionist #B.Russell: So-called values are not an independently existing feature of the world but rather it’s an expression of our own state of mind (moral are not knowledge #emotivism) #Stevenson Language evoke: feelings, emotions, altitude => a social instrument to influence people #manipulation #propaganda (no moral we switched to study the manipulative act embedded in language) #Wittgenstein: the meaning of a word is its use in the language #Hare language is #action-guiding: what we shall do: everybody is #free to form his moral #Nozick: moral right (life/speech/property/body): solve the issue of self-sacrifice #utilitarian for overall happiness of population #Political Philosophy Limit what you can do to others to pursuit your aim: human beings are ends not merely means Only the minimal state, whose role is limited to protecting people's rights, can be justified. Any more extensive state would itself violate people's rights Limited to negative-right, no positive right like: jobs/healthcare/education #R.Dworkin democracy is best way to identify and to implement utilitarian policy + priority to political right and how we build those rights? #J.Rawls #D.Gauthier #contractarian if moral build with “veil of ignorance” people: it will be just & equalitarian (else they will maximize gain for their position in the sociality) Problem we can’t start by pre-moral pre-society also there is no “veil of ignorance” Contract you want to belong or not to a society and there existing morals #B.Williams Agent-Centred Ethics: keeping one's hand clean Commitment: it’s not about happiness or unhappiness: it’s deeper ( not kill / vegetarian … ) #A.MacIntyre Virtue Ethics good human life from within tradition (modern life people they don’t share tradition, so they will never agree on morals) #T.Nagel Moral Pluralism makes rules that combine right/utilitarianism/social/… and solve the conflicts #Realism/anti-Realism: is there a moral believe? (Yes/No) #Mackie is embedded in the language #anti-Realism #Realism #externalist: open question should we follow the morals? D.Brink our believe will be free floating without experience #foundationalism (experience construct foundation from where all derive) Realism #externalist #Coherentism a true is so if it’s coherent with all our believe Realism #externalist McNaughton moral are just believe no need to act but it’s reason to act, additional desire are needed for action Moral are built by experience & seeing (Moral vision) or by telling moral story or fable (lead by story or seeing: like story of King David & Uriah) it build meaning & understanding (through our life/experience): it’s an attempt to make sense of the world (everybody is unique)