PHIL 1273 1st Edition Lecture 9 Outline of Last Lecture I. Transition from Utilitarianism to Deontological EthicsA. Three Types of Moral TheoryII. Focus on Intention (Motive)A. Tom and Sally CaseB. Lessons of the CaseIII. Focus on FreedomA. Pat and Sandy CaseOutline of Current Lecture I. Focus on FreedomA. Pat and Sandy Case RevisitedB. Defining FreedomC. What It Means to Be a PersonD. Freedom and MoralityE. What about Desires?II. ConclusionCurrent LectureI. Focus on FreedomA. Pat and Sandy Case Revisited1. Who acts more freely? What would Kant say?2. Different answers point to different ways of understandinga. What it means to be freeb. What it means to be a personc. Related to differences between utilitarianism and Kantian viewB. Defining Freedom1. Absence of obstacles that may prevent someone from attaining wants2. Utilitarian Idea: absence of obstacles means humans attain more of their desires3. Might not be right to get more, if others subsequently get less (the idea of consequential balance among all people)4. Observing only at understanding of what being human meansC. What it means to be a person1. Utilitarianisma. A vessel for utilityThese notes represent a detailed interpretation of the professor’s lecture. GradeBuddy is best used as a supplement to your own notes, not as a substitute.b. Passive view: persons are “enjoyers” or “sufferers”i. Associated with “sentience”: the ability to feel pleasure and pain2. Kantian Viewa. Active view: persons are choosers, through having choice, and thus become cosmically significanti. Freedom associated with choiceii. Human dignity related to human status as free choosersb. Utilitarians and Choicei. Utility as a preference of satisfactionii. Free choice among desires (pick the strongest desire to fulfill)c. Kant: not choice among desires, but choice between acting from desire or from moralityi. Choice of basis of choiceii. Humans are special because they can choose to choose from beyond natural desiresD. Freedom and Morality1. Kant: moral action is freely chosen actiona. Chain Reaction Casei. A pushes B into Cii. B did no wrongb. Muscle Spasm Casei. A unintentionally hits Bii. A did not wrongc. Morality has nothing to do with physics or biology – it is found in intentions (motives)d. Heteronomyi. “mixed law”ii. Source of action from outside of williii. Human status of natural (material bodied) beings and exposed to natural laws (physical processes)E. What about desires?1. Desires and physical causesa. Associated with the bodyb. Natural to act on desire2. Kant: no different than above examplesa. Desires come from outside of willb. Acting on desire is “heteronomous”c. Morality has no relation to acting on desire, which includes sympathy, or other psychological impulses3. Kant: morality has nothing to do with naturea. Morality is above natureb. Kant holds people to a higher standard than naturec. The fact that people can act morally (to that higher standard) is the basis of human dignity – this is why humans have rights, o the capacity to choose and act freelyd. What is involved in moral behavior?4. What makes action free?a. No heteronomyi. Motive cannot come from outside the willii. Thus, no psychological impulses, kind or unkindiii. How does a motive come from inside the will?b. Freedom as self-restrainti. The will can bind itself by making a commitmentii. Appointment case (not less free but instead a higher level of freedom through self-commitment)iii. Autonomy- “self-law”- Source of action (accepting restraint) is inside the will- Human status as free beings – not determined by nature- Nature may influence the physical body, but will can exceed naturec. Human status as rational beingsi. Rationality- Thinking with a logically consistent set of principles- Constraining? No- If A>B and B>C, can an individual freely think that A<C?d. Kant: moral rules have this rational structurei. Particular rules called dutiesii. “Deontology”: morality of dutyiii. What makes the right thing right is the motive to obey duty- Not due to psychological influences outside the will (heteronomy)- But accepting constraints of rationality (autonomy)II. ConclusionA. How do people know if they are actually acting from duty?B. “Categorical Imperative” (CI)1. Basically a big mystery2. CI is a test to explain morality of an actiona. View motive that causes actionb. Is the action done to act as a rational being