Ethics (Fundamentals of Philosophy)

Ethics (Fundamentals of Philosophy)

Piers Benn

Language: English

Pages: 224

ISBN: 0773517014

Format: PDF / Kindle (mobi) / ePub


Benn stimulates a concern for moral discourse through an initial discussion of moral objectivity and relativism, a central problem for ethical theory as well as one of the most immediate and practical concerns in our contemporary world. He suggests that most of the arguments offered in support of relativism are really arguments for tolerance and elucidates the crucial distinction and its implications. His emphasis on showing the reader how to think critically about the issues is brought to bear on key moral concepts throughout the book. Free will and determinism, pleasure and happiness, reasons and causes, authority, and rationality are examined with insight and clarity. Benn's elegant and perceptive treatment makes Ethics an ideal text for undergraduate courses. The guides to further reading provided in each chapter help the reader pursue interesting topics and facilitate using the book in conjunction with primary sources.

The Nicomachean Ethics (Oxford World's Classics)

The Monk and the Philosopher: A Father and Son Discuss the Meaning of Life

The Monk and the Philosopher: A Father and Son Discuss the Meaning of Life

Gene Wars: The Politics of Biotechnology (2nd Edition) (Open Media Series)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Arid about a purely negative appraisal. Some relativists may be on the side of the angels, even if – as if often true of such people – their arguments are confused. It would be good to concentrate on the idea of tolerance, to start with, as this is often thought to be inextricably bound up with moral relativism. Many people rightly regard tolerance as a virtue. A tolerant person is usually not abrasive in the delivery of his judgements, is prepared to give 19 AUTHORITY AND RELATIVISM others.

Happiness, pleasure, or tendency to confer an evolutionary benefit. (In fact, although Moore called the mistake the naturalistic fallacy, his argument is really directed against any attempt to define goodness, whether in naturalistic terms or not. For this reason, some writers prefer to speak of the definist fallacy). The argument that this is indeed a fallacy is called the open question argument. Take anything which is allegedly identical with 35 THE OBJECTIVITY OF MORALITY goodness, says.

Individual desire only his or her own pleasure (and avoidance of pain), or are we motivated simply to avoid all pain and promote any pleasure, whoever experiences them? The theory that claims that all we ever desire for its own sake is pleasure and the avoidance of pain is known as psychological hedonism. This theory generally assumes, moreover, that each person ultimately desires his or her own pleasure. This may involve the pleasure of others too, but only because it gives him or her pleasure.

Determinism seems certainly false. For anything that implies a falsehood is itself false. 140 THE CASE FOR DETERMINISM The case for determinism In his defence, the determinist is likely to claim that causal determinism is an assumption we actually do make with respect to most things in nature, and that there is no particular reason to exempt human actions from the causal nexus. We know perfectly well that water always boils at 100 degrees centigrade at sea level under normal conditions, that.

Closer to the modern managerial virtue of assertiveness, much extolled today. It is also important to note that Aristotle’s system takes hierarchy, including slavery, for granted. The highest virtue could be possessed only by males of a high social standing, and signs of such virtue apparently included a measured pace and a bass voice. But these outrages against the spirit of modernity should not prevent fruitful discussion of the content and structure of Aristotle’s theories. 166 PLEASURE AND.

Download sample

Download