Abram John A. Limpin
Book: Contemporary Moral Problems
Library Reference: N/A
Amazon Reference: http://www.amazon.com/Contemporary-Moral-Problems-James-White/dp/0534584306/
Quote: “The legend of Gyges is about a shepherd who was said to have found a magic ring in a fissure opened by an earthquake. The ring would make its wearer invisible and thus would enable him to go anywhere and do anything undetected. Gyges use the power of the ring to gain entry to the Royal Palace where he seduced the Queen, murdered the King, and subsequently seized the throne.”
Learning Expectations:
- to understand want egoism and moral sceptism is all about
- to be aware of philosophical terms
- to understand how important it is to view morality in different ways
- to determine how should morality inclined with ethics
- to learn new ideas about philosophers
Review:
This chapter talks about ideas coming from an American philosopher named James Rachels, who happen to be well-known in the field of ethics. At the first few paragraphs of the chapter, Rachels discussed something about egoism and moral sceptism. He was able to distinguish and determine the commonalities of the two - both of them are quite insignificant. There were some parts of her discussions that he tried to object, making her responses from psychological egoist's claiming that people never act in unselfish manner - they react on things they think what they are doing is something that the 'majority' would usually does.
Rachels also explained and argued that it is the object of an action that creates meaning or determines whether a certain action is selfish or not. She argued that if people want to prosper on the way they think and on the way they live, they should do certain action, based on their desires, without turning the situation in a selfish act.
In this chapter, it was also discussed how egoists react on Rachels' stand. It would still be a question why would people will become so 'big-hearted' in the first place, well in fact, there's no reason at all in the first place. However, what Rachels standpoint makes everything clear. She talked about the welfare - the human welfare that we need - which is something we must possessed and we must value. There should be reasons why would a person do something or perform something, thinking if he would allow himself others or not.
According to Rachels, the best argument against ethical egoism is its unacceptable arbitrariness. The egoist finds his interests come before those of others but in fact, no person matters that much more than others - a selfish act. Just as well as explained, egoism is like racism. Racism assumes that the interests of one race count more than the interests of others, for no good reason.
Self interest is something that should be highlighted in this chapter. No matter how 'good' or 'bad' we execute our tasks or actions, at the end of the day, we shouldn't feel guilty about it. What is done is done. If egoists would reject with what Rachels wanted to point out, probably, that person never cares at all. That kind of person won't be bothered whether his actions brought something that could affect other people in different ways.
What I’ve learned:
- Egoism is a selfish act, based on what I've understood.
- Whether it is ethical or not, egoism is still egoism
- There are two kinds of egoism: psychological and ethical egoism
- Egoism creates a kind of 'leveling' for two paties/individuals.
Integrative Questions:
- What is egoism?
- What is moral sceptism?
- What are the differences between egoism and moral sceptism?
- How should people respond in ethical egoism?
- How morality should be balanced in a way that everyone use it 'fairly'?
Review Questions:
- Explain the legend of Gyges. What questions about morality are raised by the story?
- The Legend of Gyges talks about a shepherd who happended to found a magic, yet mystical ring, which makes a person wearing it invisible. Gyges happened to be 'selfish' in a way that he used his 'ability' to get his own interests - he seduced the queen, kill the husband, and made himself the king.
- What a man of virtue and a bad guy would do with the magic ring? “What reason is there for him to continue being “moral” when it is clearly not to his own advantage to do so?”
- Distinguish between psychological and ethical egoism.
- Quoting White and Rachels, “psychological egoism hold that all human actions are self-interested.”
- “Ethical egoism says that all actions ought to be self-interested.”
- Rachels discusses two arguments for psychological egoism. What are these arguments, and how does he reply to them?
- “It is the object of a want that determines whether it is selfish or not."
- "If we have a positive attitude toward the attainment of some goal, then we may derive satisfaction from attaining that goal.”
- What are the three commonplace confusions does Rachels detect in the thesis of psychological egoism?
- self-interest being a selfish act.
- actions done either of self-interest or other motives.
- care for one’s self is different from caring for others
- State the argument for saying that ethical egoism is inconsistent. Why doesn’t Rachels accept this argument?
- “To say that any action or policy of action is right (or that it ought to be adopted) entails that it is right for anyone in the same sort of circumstances.”
- "What he advocates and what he does are both calculated as means to an end (the same end, we might note)."... “He cannot be refuted by the claim that he contradicts himself.”
- According to Rachels, why shouldn’t we hurt others, and why should we help others? How can the egoist reply?
- Simply this - human welfare for everyone.
Discussion Questions:
- Has Rachels answered the question raised by Glaucon, namely, “Why be moral?” If so, what exactly is his answer?
- No. He got a different answer, quoting, “the majority of mankind is grossly deceived about what is, or ought to be, the case, where morals are concerned.”
- Are genuine egoists rare, as Rachels claims? Is it a fact that most people care about others, even people they don’t know?
- Egoists are those people who are left out, 'foresaken' in a way, lonely people. People needs people. What they are doing are 'far' from what reality is. They should be called as 'outsiders'.
- Suppose we define ethical altruism as the view that one should always act for the benefit of others and never in one’s own self-interest. Is such a view immoral or not?
- It depends on the situation especially if it involves morality.
Comments (0)
You don't have permission to comment on this page.