PHIL1730 Philosophy Exam Review 1 Aristotle claims that when doing ethics it will be satisfactory if we can indicate the truth roughly and in outline since we argue from and about what holds good usually it will be satisfactory if we can draw conclusions of the same sort Why does he think this Do you agree Two main things to address 1 What he means by indicating truth roughly and in outline Different areas of inquiry have different standards of precision Math very precise careful one mistake can make the entire proof false Similarly rhetoric such as philosophy a mistake can render an argument false Also there is a snowball effect mistakes continue Ethics is not proving something just a persuasive argument o So rhetoric and math standards cannot be used in equivalence o Does not need to be true in every single solution only needs to hold true for general cases 2 Why does he think this holds true for ethics Political science section Goods can vary bravery is not always good can get you killed Virtue is not the only way to reach happiness need external goods generous but also have money to donate Again must be in general because not all virtuous people lead happy lives So should not follow standards precision universality like math Math primarily geometry at the time is within your control External goods are not always in your control 3 Agree disagree Do not need original explanation use what was learned in class Agree King Priam lived virtuous life but had bad things happen to him Should be short use 2 3 sentences and move on 2 Aristotle gives an argument often called the function argument intended to show that eudaimonia is activity of the soul exhibiting virtue Explain this argument in detail and critically evaluate it Write premises in paragraph form and explain how they relate Premises o 1 For anything that has a function the good for that thing depends on the function Ex A knife s function is to cut so its good to be a good specimen is to cut well Using it to hammer may not work well but not bad not meant as a hammer o 2 As a naturally occurring being human beings have a function PHIL1730 o 3 So the good for human beings depends on their function Intermediate conclusion ties 1 and 2 together Since humans have a function its good depends on their function o 4 A thing s function should distinguish it from all other things o 5 What distinguishes humans from everything else is our ability to reason Proves this by saying we share the ability to live grow with plants and perception We are able to reason our conduct what ends we want and making choices to pursue that end o 6 conclusion So a good for human beings is to reason well to guide our conduct A good human being is one that reasons well selects ends and most effective noble means to those ends 3 4 5 needed for 6 Doing it in accordance with reason making decisions Doing it in accordance with virtue doing it well Eudaimonia reaching that end well in accordance with virtue Criticism nothing has functions evolution shaping every organism s characteristics makes his argument unsound External influences act on the organism not naturally function Outdated reasoning 3 What is moral relativism What is the most common argument given in defense of it which we discussed in class What are some problems with the argument Can they be fixed The argument given and the view are two different things Moral relativism is what it is o There are no universal objective cultural independent moral codes No moral codes that apply to all cultures View argument Cultural Differences Argument actual argument for it o 1 only premise Different cultures have different moral codes o 2 conclusion Therefore moral relativism is true Problems o May be invalid CDA even if 1 is true 2 is false 1 Different people have different believes about astronomy One believes Earth is flat other thinks it is round 2 There is no correct answer Obviously wrong just because they disagree does not mean there is not a universal answer someone is just wrong o Maybe the moral codes are not different at all may be some underlying similarity just a manifestation Ex One culture thinks it is wrong to eat meat while another allows eating meat Culture that thinks it is wrong could believe that people reincarnated into that meat Both respect the dead PHIL1730 There are some similarity in basis so 1 is false o If moral relativism is true you can never criticize other cultures E g cannot criticize Nazi Germany because it was just for them Cannot criticize own society no such thing as moral progress Defense o Talking about invalidity is not relevant Abductive inference just the best explanation for why the phenomenon occurs Maybe just no moral law is better explanation than simply we have not gotten there Although science has a convergence philosophy has not no agreement so there is no universal moral law What we can learn Can this be fixed Although false can still learn something from it o Should be tolerant o Understand another culture s practices before criticizing 4 What is Aristotle s doctrine of the mean Give examples of the mean and extremes in regard to several particular virtues What are some criticisms that have been made of the doctrine of the mean Are they right 1 Doctrine of the mean best action in a situation o Virtue is the mean between two vices excessive or deficiency o Mean is not just the middle it is the mean relative to us person in situation and the situation itself Ex Situation running into a burning building to save A fish rash Baby heroic Person Regular person okay if does not want to go in Firefighter cowardly if does not want to go in o How to find the mean what would one do if one were virtuous Think of it as a virtuous observer instructing on what to do 2 Examples see Books III end IV and PowerPoint for vices virtues 3 Criticisms o According to the Doctrine any given emotion feeling can have a vice of deficiency excess Medieval Christian theologians on love Christians claimed there is no excess when it comes to loving God o Should feel appropriately Stoics best life is with little no emotion Pillaged town and murdered family should go after them but do not be angry since it does not help seek vengeance and anger may even cause blind rage PHIL1730 1 Why does Aristotle think that perfect or complete friendship is available only to the virtuous Is he right 1 Since we want friendship and only the virtuous have genuine friendships we should be virtuous 2 Friendship o 1