Ethics I PDF

ETHICS I PHI101 INTRODUCTION TO PHILOSOPHY DR SIMON LANGFORD  OUTLINE Plato, Socrates and The Republic 3 Views of Morality The Ring of Gyges Morality and Happiness  INTRODUCTION This topic examines some very ge...

ETHICS I PHI101 INTRODUCTION TO PHILOSOPHY DR SIMON LANGFORD  OUTLINE Plato, Socrates and The Republic 3 Views of Morality The Ring of Gyges Morality and Happiness  INTRODUCTION This topic examines some very general questions about ethics. What is morality? Why do people act morally? Do we ever act for the sake of other people? Or do we always act for our own sakes? We will begin with Plato’s famous discussion in his book, The Republic.  THE REPUBLIC Plato was an ancient Greek philosopher from Athens. 424 BCE – 347 BCE His books were written as dialogues where the main character was usually Socrates. Socrates was Plato’s teacher, but Socrates didn’t write any of his ideas down. Plato’s dialogues combine Socrates’ ideas with Plato’s ideas.  THE REPUBLIC Plato’s best-known book is The Republic, one of the world’s most influential works of philosophy and political theory. In the text, Socrates is in conversation with friends, and the question of justice arises. “Justice” is understood broadly here to mean acting morally or doing what’s right.  MORALITY AS CONVENTION Morality as Convention Cephalus and Polemarchus: acting morally (justly) is following society’s conventions: don’t lie, repay what you owe, be good to your friends but not to your enemies etc. What are conventions?  MORALITY AS CONVENTION Conventions are rules that we make-up. It’s a linguistic convention that “dog” refers to dogs rather than, say, stars. It’s a social convention in some countries that you should bow when you meet somebody. Is being morally good a matter of obeying society’s conventions?  MORALITY AS CONVENTION First, some conventions have nothing to do with acting morally. Second, what if you live in a society that says you should kill all bald people? If morality is just following society’s conventions, then you would be immoral in this society if you didn’t kill bald people. If conventions can be morally wrong, then morality must be something independent (different) from conventions. We can make-up any conventions we like. Can we make-up morality any way we like?  MORALITY: RULES MADE BY THE POWERFUL Morality as What Suits the Powerful Thrasymachus suggests that in each society the most powerful lay down the rules for others to follow—rules which help the powerful to stay in power. According to Thrasymachus, morality is simply rules that the weak people should follow to serve the interests of the powerful.  MORALITY: RULES MADE BY THE POWERFUL Thrasymachus: In each city…[the] ruling group sets down laws for its own advantage... And they declare that what they have set down…is just for the ruled, and the man who departs from it they punish as a breaker of the law and a doer of unjust deeds…[In] every city the same thing is just, the advantage of the established ruling body…so the man who reasons rightly concludes that everywhere justice is the same thing, the advantage of the stronger. Does this view of morality seem right?  MORALITY: RULES MADE BY THE POWERFUL The 19th Century German philosopher, Karl Marx, had a similar view of society. He thought that the ruling class always serves its own interests. Education and the law are designed by the rulers to ensure that they stay in power. Marx wanted to replace capitalism with communism. He thought that in capitalism, the rich exploit the poor, and he wanted to replace it with a system in which everybody is equal.  MORALITY: RULES MADE BY THE POWERFUL Thrasymachus and Marx might be right that society tends to be organised to serve the interests of the powerful. But our questions is: what is morality? For Thrasymachus, being moral is nothing more than obeying the rules laid down by the powerful. But the powerful might lay down rules that are unjust and immoral. If so, morality must be something independent of the rules imposed by the powerful.  MORALITY AS SOCIAL CONTRACT Morality as Social Contract Glaucon offers a third view of morality (not his view but one he’s heard). He distinguishes between things which are: Instrumentally good (e.g., unpleasant medicine) Intrinsically good (e.g., pleasure from eating ice-cream) Instrumentally good and intrinsically good (e.g., friendship) What about money, exercise, love? What about morality?  MORALITY AS SOCIAL CONTRACT Glaucon: Morality is like unpleasant medicine! Being immoral is great, but having immoral acts done to you is terrible. Social contract—people agree to give up the benefits of immorality to avoid the costs. He illustrates this idea with a famous myth: the myth of the ring of Gyges. HTTPS://WWW.YOUTUBE.COM/WATCH?V=TFVMW6SNUX8&T=30S  MORALITY AS SOCIAL CONTRACT What does this story tell us about morality? People obey morality unwillingly Morality is good only because it brings good consequences not because it is good in itself. I.e., it is instrumentally good but not intrinsically good.  MORALITY AS SOCIAL CONTRACT Glaucon says that on this view of morality, the immoral person is happier than the moral person. Imagine the most immoral person who is thought by everybody to be the most moral. Imagine the most moral person who is thought by everybody to be the most immoral. Happiness doesn’t come from being moral but from seeming to be moral. The immoral person is happier than the moral person.  MORALITY AS SOCIAL CONTRACT Next in The Republic, Socrates takes up the task of showing that morality is intrinsically good as well as being instrumentally good. And he tries to show that the just person is happier than the unjust person…  SUMMARY Plato and Socrates Plato’s book The Republic Morality as Convention (Cephalus and Polemarchus) Morality as Rules of the Powerful (Thrasymachus) Karl Marx: the ruling class makes rules for society to keep power Morality as Social Contract (Glaucon) Intrinsic good and instrumental good The Ring of Gyges Immoral people are happier  QUESTIONS Explain what Cephalus and Polemarchus think morality is. Are they right in your view? Explain what Thrasymarchus thinks about morality. Is he right, in your view? How does morality arise, according to Glaucon? Why is morality like an unpleasant medicine, according to Glaucon? Describe the myth of the Ring of Gyges. What point is it supposed to show about morality? What point is being made by the example of the immoral man whom people think is moral and the moral man whom people think is immoral?  PLATO’S RESPONSE Plato’s Response Plato attempts to show that being moral is intrinsically good and instrumentally good. He attempts to show that the moral person is always happier than the immoral person. The Tripartite Soul The human soul is made up of three parts: Reason Spirit Appetite  PLATO’S RESPONSE The moral person’s soul is in harmony: reason governs; spirit wills what reason chooses; reason and spirit keep the appetite in order. Having a harmonious soul is happiness. You can control your desires and not be ruled by them. You can use reason to desire the right things. You can use reason and a well-functioning spirit to fulfil those desires. You can use reason to avoid regret and frustration. The pleasures of the harmonious soul are the greatest pleasures.  PLATO’S RESPONSE When the soul is not in harmony, an immoral character results. Plato describes 4 kinds of disordered souls. Timocratic character (ruled by spirit—seeks glory and honor above all) Oligarchic character (ruled by necessary appetites—seeks wealth above all) Democratic character (ruled by unnecessary appetites—seeks freedom above all) Tyrannic character (ruled by lawless appetites—seeks pleasure above all) These depart further and further from the harmonious soul.  PLATO’S RESPONSE The tyrannic character is a slave to his desires and dominates those around him. He has lost touch with reality and lost control of himself. His desires cannot be satisfied. He regrets time spent chasing desires that don’t satisfy and fears a hollow future without fulfilment.  PLATO’S RESPONSE The pleasures of the harmonious soul are greater than those of the disordered soul. Each type of character may believe that his own pleasures are superior. But the harmonious soul knows better than the others. He has experienced the pleasures of appetite, spirit and reason. Through his greater command of reason, he has a keener ability to compare them.  PLATO’S RESPONSE What do you think of Plato’s view of morality—as having a well-ordered soul? How well does Plato answer the challenge given in the myth of the ring of Gyges? How well does Plato answer the challenge that the immoral person is happier than the moral person?  SUMMARY Plato and Socrates Plato’s book The Republic Morality as Convention (Cephalus and Polemarchus) Morality as Rules of the Powerful (Thrasymachus) Morality as Social Contract (Glaucon) Intrinsic good and instrumental good The Ring of Gyges Immoral people are happier  SUMMARY Plato’s Tripartite Soul Reason, Spirit, Appetite The moral person has a harmonious soul 4 kinds of disordered souls (Timocratic, Oligarchic, Democratic, Tyrannic) The pleasures of the harmonious soul are greater  QUESTIONS Explain what Cephalus and Polemarchus think morality is from following the conventions Explain what Thrasymarchus thinks about morality conventions that powerful people put How does morality arise, according to Glaucon? Why is morality like an unpleasant medicine, according to Glaucon? It not nice at the first Describe the myth of the Ring of Gyges. What point is it supposed to illustrate about morality? That if we can avoid the conseqeunces we will be immoral What point is being made by the example of the immoral man whom people think is moral and the moral man whom people think is immoral? That Explain Plato’s tripartite view of the soul. Why does Plato think the moral person is happier than the immoral person?