Welcome to your life! Now What?
The Question: How should I live?
Free at Last! You re adults! Cool, huh? You no longer have to do what others tell you to do. What Now? Your parents Your teachers Your religion --What should you do?
What to do? How should you live? How should you choose? What do you want to do? What do you get to do? What makes you happy? Is being happy all that matters? What is the good life? What is justice?
Moral Philosophy How should I live? How should we live? And why? Is there such a thing a moral obligation? Are there things that, morally speaking, you should do, even if you don t want to? Is there some general principle that makes things morally right or morally wrong?
Moral Philosophy What is morality? Why should we act morally? Is there an objective moral code? What is justice? Is it morally OK to do whatever I want to do? How do I decide what I want to do?
What makes things moral? Is morality subjective? Is it simply a matter of personal preference or personal taste? Is morality culturally relative? Does what s right or wrong depend upon society? Is morality God s will? Is something right because God allows it and wrong because God forbids it? Is morality absolute? Are there objective moral truths?
Well? What do YOU think? If you have no opinion, then I guess that means it would be alright for me to assign your grades at random, right?
A Thought Experiment
What would you do If you knew If you could be INVISIBLE? You d never get caught?
Plato and Socrates
Plato: 428-327 BC uborn in Athens, to upper-class family ugave up a life in politics to study with another Athenian, named Socrates uwas present when Socrates died in 399 BC ufounded the Academy, the first university in the western world.
Socrates: 469-399 BC upursued basic questions about life, love, friendship, justice. ua gadfly who questioned prominent people, exposing how little they knew. uwas sentenced to death for corrupting the youth. Ø Because he taught them to ask questions!
Plato s Republic Written as a dialogue, with Socrates as the main character. Concerned with how society should be structured if human being are to flourish. In Bk. I, Thrasymachus argues that justice is what is in the interest of the strong That might makes right. In Bk. II (where we start), Glaucon argues that no one acts justly for its own sake.
A Distinction
Ways we value/desire things Intrinsically: Things desired for their own sake, not because of what they bring about: Example: Listening to music, viewing works of art Instrumentally: Things desired for what they bring about, not for their own sake. Example: Going to the dentist Both intrinsically and instrumentally: Example: Eating
How do we value acting justly? Socrates thinks we value justice both for what it brings about (others treat us justly in return), and in itself (simply because it is right). Both instrumentally and intrinsically. Glaucon thinks we value justice only for what it brings about, not in itself. Merely instrumentally, but not intrinsically. Glaucon s evidence: what we would do if we had Gyges Ring if we could be invisible.
Gyges Ring In Greek mythology, this ring makes you invisible. Plato uses this as a thought experiment to get us to think about why we act certain ways. Are we concerned with acting morally only because we re afraid that, if we don t, we ll get in trouble?
Gyges Ring This thought experiment helps us focus on what people would do if we weren t worried about the beneficial effects of appearing to act justly. Do we value justice in itself (because we believe it s right), or merely because of what it brings about (how others will treat us)?
Glaucon s Point Glaucon thinks most people would act unjustly if they knew they could get away with it if they could become invisible. So, he concludes, people value acting justly only for what it brings them (i.e., merely instrumentally). He thinks they do not value it in and of itself (or intrinsically). If they valued justice intrinsically, they would act justly when no one was looking.
If you could steal And no one would know You wouldn t get caught No one would think of you as a thief People would still trust you But you get to keep what you stole You d have the benefits both of being a thief (the money you stole) and of seeming to be honest Wouldn t you be a chump to be honest?
Why be moral? If you do what s right only because you are afraid of punishment ( hell ) or because you seek reward ( heaven ), is that really morality? Isn t that just being selfish in a smart way? On the other hand, if doing the right thing involves sacrifice of your own best interests, isn t that simply being irrational?
The Question to You: (and me!) Do you should you act morally simply because doing so is in your interest (in order to get rewarded or to avoid being punished)? Or do you should you act morally because it is the right thing to do, even if acting this way causes you pain or suffering?
Moving On
Justice Is racism/segregation unjust? Is it immoral? or is it just distasteful? Was it OK back then (in the past), but not OK now? How should we judge those (in the past, or in the present) who practiced discrimination? Is racism still an issue today, or is this all just ancient history?