Portico PRTO1000 23 28 Michael J Smith Final Review Short Answer Questions 1 One of the major themes that we explored in the second half of Portico was the tension between living for oneself and living for others Explain how the short stories Harrison Bergeron and The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas explore this theme Harrison Bergeron is a story about living for others in two ways One is a bad way sacrificing ourselves for others The society is one in which individuality is completely denied Showing us that if you live for others with the exclusion of the self it can be unhealthy We cannot live in a world where we live solely to make others feel better about themselves In Harrison Bergeron every American is fully equal meaning that no one is stupider uglier weaker or slower than anyone else The central idea within The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas is the presence of a scapegoat The people of Omelas face an ethical dilemma when they learn about the existence of the child They must choose between the welfare of the city and themselves and the welfare of one single child This story explores the tension between living for oneself and living for others by illustrating the decision between living for what benefits you the most or living for others The child represents this tension as well the child is not living for himself but living for the city For the people of Omelas their happiness the beauty of the city the health of their children and much more depends wholly on the child s misery 2 What does Michael Sandel mean by a market society What is moral relativism What is it about moral relativism that makes it comfortably fit in a market society A market society is marked by the encroachment of market values on other areas of lives where they don t belong The reach of markets and market oriented thinking into aspects of life traditionally governed by non market norms Market society letting the market decide on what can be bought or sold ex voluntary cannibalism Being a market society means that the market economy has become the highest value Moral Relativism the view that all moral or ethical claims beliefs are relative to individual or cultural preference The claim that ethical beliefs are purely subjective not objective at all Moral relativism is the idea that there are no definite ethical truths and is seen as a way to avoid ethical questions Moral relativism fits comfortably in a market society because part of the appeal of markets is that they don t pass judgement on the preferences they satisfy This nonjudgmental stance toward values lies at the heart of market reasoning and explains much of its appeal It also reflects our reluctance to engage in moral and spiritual argument 3 Michael Sandel is worried about the movement towards becoming a market society for two main reasons What are these reasons and why is Sandel concerned about them 1 Inequality In a society where everything is for sale life is harder for those of modest means The more money can buy the more affluence or the lack of it matters As money can now buy more and more political influence good medical care a home in a safe neighborhood access to elite schools rather than failing ones the distribution of income and wealth looms larger and larger Not only has the gap between rich and poor widened the commodification of everything making money matter more has sharpened the sting of inequality by 2 Corruption and the corrosive tendencies of markets Markets don t only allocate goods they also express and promote certain attitudes toward the goods being exchanged Markets are not inert they leave their mark on the goods they exchange and sometimes market values crowd out nonmarket values worth caring about 4 Explain three criticisms that Ayn Rand levels against the ethics of altruism How does Rand understand love and friendship in light of this criticism Lack of self esteem sacrificing something you value more for something you value less lack of respect for others constantly viewing mankind as victims begging for help and a nightmare view of existence believing that men are trapped in a malevolent universe where disasters are the constant and primary concern of their lives Rand understands that love and friendship factor into your hierarchy of values If you do not love yourself you cannot love other people If you do not come from a position of self love you cannot benefit others All love of others is rooting in self love but on that basis you can love and care for other people 5 Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of utilitarianism as articulated by Jeremy Bentham and Peter Singer Be sure to explain what utility is different ways in which it can be measured and the specific aspects of an ethical decision that the principle of utility concerns Jeremy Bentham utility actions either give us pleasure or give us pain which is relative Strengths seeks the greatest good for the greatest number amount of people Utilitarianism is simple since it is quantifiable the net effect or net utility is based on individuals and summed up for the entire community Peter Singer The solution to world poverty is giving everything away that isn t necessary Unrealistic Specific aspect is of people affected 6 What does Kant claim to be the only good without qualification What does this mean Why does Kant think that virtue is not good without qualification How might Aristotle respond Human good will We know this because human good will is an end in itself Virtues are only good with qualification because you can use it for good or bad An example of this is bravery it can be used for good or for bad A good without qualification does not need any further explanation or further questioning about how it is being used Kant wants to say all things are like that except for good will Human good will is good without reference to anything else It is internally good and intrinsically good However virtues are only good when they are in reference to something else Aristotle would say that if someone is using a virtue negatively they are not being virtuous at all For example a person that uses their bravery to pull off a daring Ponzi scheme they are not being virtuous From Aristotle s perspective Kant is assuming that a virtue could be put to a bad purpose but Aristotle says that by definition it cannot be put to a bad use 7 Explain Kant s distinction between acting in accordance with duty and acting from duty Give an example Acting from duty is doing a