Thomas E. Hill, Jr. Dr. Clea F. Rees ReesC17@cardiff.ac.uk Centre for Lifelong Learning Cardiff University Spring 2012
Outline Connexions & Questions Paper structure Part I: What is servility? Part II: Is servility morally wrong? Three possible reasons to think so and why they fail Part III: Exploring the wrongness: what is the moral defect? Part IV: Why are these characteristics morally objectionable? Part V: Are there duties to oneself? Concluding remarks The value or otherwise of exercising one s autonomy autonomy Dangerous Ideas Thinking for Oneself Definition
Connexions & Questions Connexions & Questions Do we need moral rules action guidance (what should I do?) or virtues (what kind of person should I be, and how can I develop the appropriate character traits?) or both? Under stress, which are more important? How important is moral education? What kind of moral education is needed/appropriate/...?
Connexions & Questions Connexions & Questions Recall nature of autonomy: Definition (Autonomy) one is autonomous if one has the capacity to make one s own decisions. Definition (Respect for autonomy) one respects a person (and her autonomy) if one does not interfere with her making her own decisions.
Paper structure Paper structure Three issues/questions/aims: 1. Is servility a vice i.e. morally bad? 2. Does one have duties to oneself? In particular, does one have the duty to oneself not to be servile? 3. Kant s remarks about respect for persons and the moral law: an argument for a self-respect incompatible with servility? Conclusions Given a common moral view, each person should respect herself independent of the consequences. One should avoid servility as far as possible. This is not just a right, but a duty. It is not just a duty to others, but to oneself.
Part I: What is servility? What is servility? Uncle Tom, the Self-Deprecator & the Deferential Wife Examples 1. Uncle Tom: a person who thinks she is entitled to less and is less important because of her race.
Part I: What is servility? What is servility? Uncle Tom, the Self-Deprecator & the Deferential Wife Examples 1. Uncle Tom: a person who thinks she is entitled to less and is less important because of her race. 2. Self-Deprecator: a person who thinks she is entitled to less and is less important because of (unrelated but real) individual failings.
Part I: What is servility? What is servility? Uncle Tom, the Self-Deprecator & the Deferential Wife Examples 1. Uncle Tom: a person who thinks she is entitled to less and is less important because of her race. 2. Self-Deprecator: a person who thinks she is entitled to less and is less important because of (unrelated but real) individual failings. 3. Deferential Wife: she believes the proper role of a womon is to serve her family; she is proud to serve her husband and subordinate her interests to his.
Part I: What is servility? What is servility? Uncle Tom, the Self-Deprecator & the Deferential Wife These three characters all have mistaken attitudes. Each thinks that she is entitled to less moral consideration than persons of another race/sex or with more intelligence / skill at pottery etc. etc., and that her interests deserve less moral consideration than theirs.
Part I: What is servility? What is servility? The nature of servility Servility Servility involves a certain attitude about one s rightful place in the moral community. Rather than merely thinking, for example, that one is not as rich / as intelligent / as strong etc. as others, one also thinks one is worth less as a human being and does not deserve equal moral consideration.
Part I: What is servility? What is servility? All persons are created equal... Presumably, this is the idea behind all persons are created equal". This does not claim what is patently false: namely, that everyone is born w/ the same talents, abilities etc. Rather, no matter what your talents, abilities etc., you are entitled to the same moral consideration as everyone else and your needs and interests are equally important. (You don t get an extra vote for winning an Olympic medal or inventing a cure for AIDS.)
Part I: What is servility? What is servility? Connexion between autonomy & servility If one is servile, one fails to recognise that one s own thinking, decision making and beliefs are important; one accepts the decisions, values and beliefs of one s betters" without question; one fails to respect one s own autonomy i.e. one does not respect oneself as a person.
Part II: Is servility morally wrong? Three possible reasons to think so and why they fail Is servility morally wrong? Three reasons not to think so Consequentialist objections may or may not show servility is wrong; in any case, it seems to count the wrong things Hill thinks that the potential benefit to exploiters should be discounted; so should happiness the servile individual gains from a morally objectionable attitude.
Part II: Is servility morally wrong? Three possible reasons to think so and why they fail Is servility morally wrong? Three reasons not to think so Merit / desert considerations the servile person deserves better; but, this fails for the self-deprecator; the point is that moral worth does not depend on merit or what is earned or deserved.
Part II: Is servility morally wrong? Three possible reasons to think so and why they fail Is servility morally wrong? Three reasons not to think so Human potential may not ever be reached; servile person may have very limited capacities; this objection seems to rest on shaky ground.
Part III: Exploring the wrongness: what is the moral defect? What is the moral defect? Two types of servility Two types of servility In both cases, one lacks a certain kind of self-respect. 1. Misunderstanding one s moral rights Suggestion: the moral defect is a failure to understand and acknowledge one s own moral rights. The servile person may not always be to blame for her servility; it can still be morally objectionable. 2. Placing too low a value on one s moral rights
Part III: Exploring the wrongness: what is the moral defect? What is the moral defect? Enlightened servility Now, suppose the servile person is enlightened, has the knowledge and continues to act as before. Is this objectionable? Hill thinks it depends: not servile if done for an important reason e.g. saving oneself or one s children, keeping one s only means of survival or to get time / stories for the revolution; But, if done for some less important reason e.g. minor advantage, laziness or timidity then it does not count one s moral status as worth enough; this is a kind of servility which does not depend on moral ignorance: it is a willingness to publicly and systematically deny one s moral status for no good reason.
Part IV: Why are these characteristics morally objectionable? Why are these characteristics moral defects? A Kantian idea Hill (inspired by Kant): One type of respect for persons consists in respect for their moral rights. So, if one respects morality, then one must respect one s own moral rights i.e. one must have a sort of self-respect which is incompatible w/ servility.
Part IV: Why are these characteristics morally objectionable? Why are these characteristics moral defects? A Kantian idea 1. All human beings have equal basic moral rights. 2. A servile person disavows (denies or gives up) her moral rights because of ignorance or b/c she does not value them sufficiently. 3. One ought, as far as one can, to value and respect morality and ethical principles as well as simply obeying them. 4. One ought to be reluctant to give up one s moral rights. (Specific instance of 3.) 5. The servile person does something she ought not to do. (From 1, 2 and 4.) Fraternity club analogy.
Part IV: Why are these characteristics morally objectionable? Why are these characteristics moral defects? A further idea One might think something further: in the case of some rights, one has a duty to preserve them e.g. life or liberty or minimal respect as a person, perhaps. (So one cannot give these rights up even if doing so is not servile.)
Part V: Are there duties to oneself? Are there duties to oneself? Note that this section of Hill s paper is not among the excerpts included in the anthology. What does it mean to say that one has duties to oneself? How does the analogy w/ duties to others work? There are differences, but also similarities: 1. Sometimes, a duty to another is a duty towards or regarding that person. Clearly, the duty to not be servile is towards oneself. 2. Generally, that something is a duty to somebody tells us who is best entitled to complain. So, the person herself is most entitled to complain if she is servile; self-recrimination is more appropriate than the censure of others. 3. Often, that something is a duty to somebody can indicate the source of the duty. This suggests that a duty of non-servility is not entirely to do w/ others, but, perhaps, b/c one ought to respect one s own rights as a person.
Part V: Are there duties to oneself? Are there duties to oneself? Common objections Hill considers the following objections: 1. no duties if alone on desert island: irrelevant b/c servility requires others; 2. idea suggests one can make promises to oneself / owe oneself debts of gratitude: this arg. doesn t depend on these; 3. no duty to promote own happiness: arg not based on this; promoting rights is not equal to promoting welfare; 4. must be violating own rights: too complex to deal w/ here; but arg. doesn t rely on idea of violating own rights; 5. it s really a duty to morality: in this sense, all duties are.
Part V: Are there duties to oneself? Are there duties to oneself? Common objections Plus: not respecting one s own rights may lead one to violate those of others either b/c one is ignorant of their rights or b/c one does not sufficiently value the principles of morality.
Part V: Are there duties to oneself? Are there duties to oneself? Questions Are Hill s responses adequate? Are there other stronger objections?
Concluding remarks Concluding remarks So, the idea is that there is something wrong with servility b/c servility involves a morally objectionable lack of self-respect. If one is servile, one fails to respect oneself as autonomous.
The value or otherwise of exercising one s autonomy The value or otherwise of exercising one s autonomy Discussion of prompt 8:
autonomy Dangerous Ideas Autonomy Dangerous Ideas Inappropriate, unquestioning acceptance of another s view as authoritative can be particularly dangerous in ethics. It seems important to many that people form their own ethical beliefs and do not simply follow others. Doing so seems to contribute to some atrocities e.g. the murder of Jews, homosexuals, Romanies, socialists etc. in Nazi Germany. It can also lead to the perpetuation of discrimination if children believe their parents and teachers unconditionally and those adults have racist / sexist / homophobic attitudes.
autonomy Thinking for Oneself Autonomy Thinking for Oneself Suggestion: it is important to decide moral questions etc. for oneself and not to accept uncritically the ethical claims and beliefs of one s community/society/religious faith/older brothers/parents etc. i.e. not to accept these without question.
autonomy Definition Autonomy Definition Definition ( Autonomy) One is ethically autonomous if one has the capacity to make one s own ethical judgements/decisions, to think through moral issues/questions for oneself etc.