Introduction to Joseph Butler Sermons, published in 1726. Had profound effect on moral philosophy in Britain, well into 20th century.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Psychological Egoism By Joel Feinberg
Advertisements

Utilitarianism Maximize good.
Hedonism & Utilitarianism
Aristotle and Virtue Ethics. Everything aims at some endhas some purpose Ethics requires that we discover what the purpose or end of human life is.
EVIL IS STILL A PROBLEM!!!.
Objectivism 101 Diana Mertz Hsieh Lecture Three: Life and Happiness Tuesday, July 2, th Annual Summer Seminar of The Objectivist Center.
The Moral Argument for the Existence of God.
Egoism Psychological & Ethical Egoism Ought implies can: In order for you to have a moral obligation to do something, it has to be possible for you to.
Utilitarianism: Bentham and Mill
 Humans are metaphysically free  Our choices define us and as a result our intuitions about the human condition are satisfied.  Dualism  Kant  Existentialism.
Happiness and Wellbeing From a Philosophical Point of View Dan Weijers.
ARISTOTLE: Background
From Last time Cognitivism vs. non-cognitivism Subjective descriptivism Cultural relativism Divine Command theory.
Hume on Taste Hume's account of judgments of taste parallels his discussion of judgments or moral right and wrong.  Both accounts use the internal/external.
An Introduction to Ethics Week Four – Criticisms of Kant.
Introduction to Ethics Lecture 9 Psychological Egoism
Aristotle Virtue Ethics
Chapter 1 A Comprehensive History of Western Ethics
Socrates of Athens BCE “The unexamined life is not worth living” Philosophy of Nature Moral Philosophy.
Notice there is no “s” at the end of his name; he is not a cereal.
Basic Critical Thinking Skills Essentials of Clear Thinking: Claims and Issues.
How Actions Can Be Morally Evaluated l Teleological Ethics: morality is the means to achieve what is identified as good or valuable l Deontological Ethics:
Freedom and Virtues Introduction to Virtues. Questions… What are Virtues? What are Virtues? What is the significance of each? What is the significance.
© Paul T. P. Wong. What makes life worth living?  The happiness hypothesis  The virtue-ethic hypothesis  The positive-engagement hypothesis  The.
Is there such a thing as conscious will?. What is “conscious will”?! Having “free will” or “conscious will” basically means being in control of one’s.
Natural Law/Virtue Ethics. Morality and Human Nature  Natural Law Theory  Based upon assumption that the good is consistent with fundamental design.
Now back to my favorite subject: ME!
Lawrence M. Hinman, Ph.D. Director, The Values Institute University of San Diego 8/24/2015(c) Lawrence M. Hinman1 “Look out for #1— and there is no #2”
Unit 4: Morality.
Aristotle How Should We Live?. Summary of What Will Come  The selection (Nicomachean Ethics, Bks. I and II) begins with Aristotle describing ethics as.
Why Philosophy?. Philosophy: A study of the processes governing thought and conduct. A system of principles for the conduct of life. A study of human.
Philosophy and Ethics Is lying always wrong? Is conscience a reliable guide? Are all values relative?
Lawrence M. Hinman, Ph.D. Director, The Values Institute University of San Diego 9/24/20151(c) Lawrence M. Hinman Psychological Egoism.
LO: to know about Mill’s approach to Utilitarianism HMK: Can you come up with an ethical situation and outline where Bentham and Mill would disagree on.
Basic Critical Thinking Skills Essentials of Clear Thinking: Claims and Issues.
10/21/2015 Modern Philosophy PHIL320 1 Spinoza – Ethics Four Charles Manekin.
Egoism Plato: “The Myth of Gyges” from The Republic.
Theories of Morality Kant Bentham Aristotle. Morality  Morality: Action for the sake of principle  Guides our beliefs about right and wrong  Sets limits.
A balance between theory and practice
Theories of Morality Kant Bentham Aristotle. Morality  Morality: Action for the sake of principle  Guides our beliefs about right and wrong  Sets limits.
Introduction to Philosophy Jason M. Chang
Lecture 7: The Existence of God Major Arguments for God’s Existence Based upon Natural Theology.
Ethics Jeannette Sandoval. Description of ethics Ethics usually refers to terms that set a standard for an individual’s actions such as: righteousness,
From Last Time The good will is the only good thing in an ‘unqualified way” Acting from duty vs. acting in accord with duty Categorical vs. hypothetical.
Meta-ethics Meta-ethical Questions: What does it mean to be good/bad? What constitutes the nature of being good or bad?
Morality and Self- Interest Vice and Virtue in Everyday Life Chapter 3.
Conscience in the Teaching of the Church From the Pastoral Constitution of the Church in the Modern World -Gaudium et Spes.
Aristotle’s Ethics. Aristotle’s Approach to Ethics Practical: How can I live a fulfilling life? Thesis: virtue (arete) = key to a good life Continues.
1 Psychological Egoism Soazig Le Bihan -- University of Montana.
Virtue and Natural Law. Natural law theory (Aquinas) Eternal law: law of nature governing universe Natural law: governs what things should do or be A.
Chapter 7: Ethics Egoism and Altruism
Hobbes’s Vision of the Human
Phil/RS 335 God’s Existence Pt. 2: The Moral Argument.
Ethics Chapter 12. Ethics  The moral principles governing or influencing conduct  The branch of knowledge concerned with moral principles  Ethics.
Hume on Ethics and the Passions The influencing motives of the will and of moral judgment Paola Chapa, Oct
Aristotle on three virtues Michael Lacewing
Immanuel Kant (1724 – 1804) Influenced Secular Moral Thought. Raised in a Protestant Household. No formal Church Structure. Morality ground in reason,
A moral sense of right and wrong, especially as felt by a person and affecting behaviour or an inner feeling as to the goodness or otherwise of one’s behaviour.
AS Ethics Utilitarianism Title: - Preference Utilitarianism To begin… What is meant by preference? L/O: To understand Preference Utilitarianism.
By Alisha MacIsaac. Passion  Hume is one of the main philosophers who focuses on the contradiction between passion and reason  Hume believes “The Will”
The evidential problem of evil
Introduction to Virtue Ethical Theory & Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics
John Stuart Mill ( ) An Introduction to Mill’s form of Utilitarianism in comparison to Bentham’s.
The Stoics were a school of Greek philosophy that started just after the time of Aristotle, and remained popular for about 400 years. human nature as part.
Aristotle and Virtue Ethics
Introduction to Philosophy Lecture 15 Ethics #1: Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism 2.0.
Happiness.
Intro to Philosophy Ethical Systems.
Hedonism good = pleasant Bad = painful Claims:
Presentation transcript:

Introduction to Joseph Butler Sermons, published in Had profound effect on moral philosophy in Britain, well into 20th century.

2 major themes: 1. Nature is the standard of good/bad, right/wrong. 2. The problem of the relation between self-love and love for others.

Butler on Human Nature Human Nature comprises a constitutional system of drives, desires, instincts. Distinction between power and authority. Following nature is not a matter of following our strongest inclinations, but our highest (the inclinations with the greatest authority).

Human Nature as a Constitution Mental principles, impulses form a harmonious system or constitution. The parts are mutually adjusted to each other, for the sake of a final end. (see footnote 1, p. 42)

Power vs. Authority Distinction between the power of an impulse and its authority The conscience (the power of rational reflection & of moral judgment) has supreme authority in our mental constitution. It does not always have its way: it can be usurped by more powerful rebels.

Like a diseased tree or a machine out of order: the malfunctioning does not mean that the constitution is dissolved. Example: rash action. Acting on an impulse not in one’s best interest. The rash impulse usurps the authority of the superior impulse: self-love.

Why are we obliged to follow our conscience? It is the law of our own nature (p. 43). Notice: Butler does not appeal to God’s commands and his power to enforce them. God’s will is incorporated into our nature, so that virtue is its own reward.

Wouldn't we be better off without our conscience? Doesn't it interfere with our pursuit of happiness, and add unnecessary pain, in the form of guilt and shame? Compare: losing your sense of pain. This would be a terrible loss, resulting in a shortened life span and much suffering.

Coincidence of Conscience and Self-Love Butler argues that for the most part and in the long run, virtue and self-interest coincide in this life. Taking into account the afterlife, they coincide perfectly.

The Possibility of the Love of Others Butler could be taken as arguing against two kinds of positions: –1.The eudaemonistic theory of Aristotle and Aquinas must be false, because it entails that everyone is selfish (an obvious falsehood). –2. Everyone really is selfish (universal psychological egoism).

Eudaemonism vs. Egoism Butler insists (as did Aristotle), that from the fact that everyone pursues his/her happiness as the sole ultimate end, it does not follow that everyone is selfish, incapable of genuine love of others.

The Hedonistic argument for Universal Egoism 1. Everyone always acts (ultimately) for the sake of obtaining the greatest pleasure (and avoiding the most pain), and for no other reason. 2. Pleasure and pain are internal states of the self. 3. If one is concerned (ultimately) only about one's own internal states, then one is selfish.

Hedonist argument, cont. 4. Therefore, everyone is always selfish.

Butler rejects premise 1. He insists that we often seek the external objects of our desires and affections, not just the pleasure or satisfaction of fulfilling them. –Hunger is a desire for food, not for the sensation of eating. –Loneliness is the desire for companionship, and not just for the good feelings that result from companionship.

Satisfaction vs. Satiation Suppose we had a form of chewing gum that gave us all the sensations of eating a wonderful meal, including the cessation of hunger, but provided no nutrition. Would the gum satisfy our hunger, or only mask its unsatisfaction? Consider again the Experience Box. Would this satisfy all our longings and desires, or only fool us into thinking they were satisfied?

A Non-Hedonistic Argument for Universal Egoism 1. Everyone always acts (ultimately) for the sake of obtaining his/her own (objective) happiness, and for no other reason. 2. If one is concerned (ultimately) only about one's own happiness, then one is selfish. 3. Therefore, everyone is always selfish.

Premise 1 is ambiguous, in a very subtle way. Happiness (here we are talking about happiness in this life, Aquinas's "imperfect happiness") is a large and complex thing, made up of many parts: –exercising wisdom in intellectual activities –exercising virtue in civic activities –engaging in artistic and athletic pursuits –partaking of the bonds of true friendship

To say that the desire for one's own happiness is one's only ultimate end could be to mean one of two things: 1. Every action is taken with the single ultimate goal in mind of achieving one's own happiness (considered as a whole). 2. Every action is taken with some ultimate goal in mind that is included as one of the parts of one's happiness

Meaning 1 In the first case, one would have only own passion or affection -- the passion for one's own happiness. Every action would be calculated with this end in mind. Mr. Spock from Star Trek? He clearly had a passion, or he wouldn't have been so zealous in his duties. But he appeared (most of the time) to lack any particular affections.

Meaning 2 One has many particular affections, each passion being a passion either for the whole of happiness (the passion of "self-love") or for one of its parts. We humans cannot function without many particular passions.

Butler’s paradox Butler argues that if the passion for happiness as a whole (self-love) becomes too strong, it becomes counter-productive. We can be made miserable by an excessive desire for happiness!

Love for others Love for other human beings is one of our particular affections. This love really is a desire for the good of that other person as an ultimate end. Our happiness includes the happiness of our loved ones. Their happiness is not merely a means to ours.

Butler rejects premise 2 of the second argument “2. If one is concerned (ultimately) only about one's own happiness, then one is selfish.” This is false, if one’s own happiness includes the good of others, and if one is sometimes moved by the particular affection of love for those others.