BOOK REVIEW: CONTEMPORARY MORAL PROBLEMS

BOOK REVIEW: CONTEMPORARY MORAL PROBLEMS

Book Contemporary Moral Problems Chapter 1: James Rachels: Egoism and Moral skepticism 1. To know what Egoism and Moral Skepticism is 2. To understand and differentiate ethical egoism from psychological egoism 3. To identify the usual reactions of an egoist Indeed, a man without any sympathy at all would scarcely be recognizable as a man; and that is what makes ethical egoism such a disturbing doctrine in the first place. This chapter about Egoism and Moral Skepticism is something that I would want others to read as well. This chapter helped me to understand more why people have different reactions toward certain things or situations. It is fun to know that there are really people who act upon what they think is just best for them and people who act based on what they really are. These kinds of topics really interest me because I really like understanding people s behaviour. I think that is why there is no peace in the place we live in. There are people who are selfish enough not to think about the effects of their actions as long as it will be for their benefit. Wherein there are people who will really act based on what will be good for them and for other people as well. It is still a question why there are people like that but according to James Rachels, it something that we must possess and value. Like the story on the first part of the chapter, it is really a mystery why there are people who continuously stay as a moral person wherein according to Glaucon, once a person is given the opportunity to do whatever he wants, a man of virtue will most probably do the exact thing that a rogue will do. He clearly states that what reason is present in a man of virtue to continue being moral when it is not for his or her own advantage. There are 2 types of egoism and that is psychological egoism and ethical egoism. Man acts based on his/her own interests. Being a moral person is something that we must possess and value. 1. What is egoism? Psychological and Ethical? 2. How does an egoistic person acts? 3. What is moral skepticism?

Book Contemporary Moral Problems Chapter 1: John Arthur: Religion, Morality and Conscience 1. To know what morality is all about 2. To identify the effects of religion on mankind 3. To differentiate morality from religion To say that we need religion to act morally is mistaken; indeed, it seems to me that many of us, when it really gets down to it, don t give much of a thought to religion when making moral decisions. Reading this article made me remember everything that I have experienced when I joined YFC and KKB mainly because it is about religion. I like joining church youth ministries because that is where I learn things about God and it helps me become a stronger and more God- fearing person. Based on what I have read, being a moral person doesn t depend on your religion. It actually depends on your conscience. But I think being moral still depends on what you learn in your religion. If you were presented the things that you must not do, then it somehow helps you on deciding what is right and what is wrong which leads you to being a moral person. Although in religion, we focus more on saying prayers and reading God s word, it still influences us and forms us on being a better person and teaches us the right things to do. If we don t know our religion, we will not have a guide on what and how to act about a certain thing and situation. Since like in the Divine Command Theory, God instructs us on what we should and we should not do. But it still doesn t purely depend on religion since there is so much going on in our own religions for being moral to be dependent on religion and there are too many religions in the world which can confuse us which among these religions is true and how we will know that your religion is the right one. Being moral doesn t depend on religion Divine Command Theory- holds that an act is either moral or immoral solely because God either commands us to do it or prohibits us from doing it, respectively Being a moral person is something that we must possess and value. 1. What is Religion? 2. What is Morality? 3. Does religion depends on morality? Does morality depends on religion?

Book Contemporary Moral Problems Chapter 3: Friedrick Nietzsche: Master and Slave Morality 1. To know what master and slave morality is all about 2. To identify its effect in the IT industry 3. To understand and apply the teachings I will get in this article He honours whatever he recognizes in himself: such morality is self- glorification. Friedrick Nietzsche argued that there were two fundamental types of morality: Master morality and slave morality. Master morality weighs actions on a scale of good or bad consequences unlike slave morality which weighs actions on a scale of good or evil intentions. For Nietzsche, a particular morality is inseparable from the formation of a particular culture which means that the languages, rules and other institutions were learned by the struggle between the two types of moral valuation. Nietzsche defined master morality as the morality of the strong-willed. Nietzsche criticizes the view, which he identifies with contemporary British ideology, that good is everything that is helpful; what is bad is what is harmful. He argues that this view has forgotten the origins of the values, and thus it calls what is useful good on the grounds of habitualness - what is useful has always been defined as good, therefore usefulness is goodness as a value (Wikipedia.org/masterslave_morality) while slave morality is literally re-sentiment revaluing that which the master values. This strays from the valuation of actions based on consequences to the valuation of actions based on "intention". Slave morality does not aim at exerting one s will by strength but by careful subversion. It does not seek to transcend the masters, but to make them slaves as well. I ve learned the difference about master morality and slave morality The Will to Power is the will to life which can be achieved through creative activity. 1. What is Master morality? 2. What is Slave Morality? 3. What is the difference between master and slave morality?

Book Contemporary Moral Problems Chapter 4: Mary Midgley: Trying Out One s New Sword 1. To know what moral isolationism is all about 2. To learn the Japanese custom of tsujigiri 3. To understand the principle behind Moral Isolationism Midgley attacks moral isolationism, the view of anthropologists and others that we cannot criticize cultures that we do not understand... Moral isolationism is the belief that no one can ever understand any culture except his or her own. And due to this lack of understanding, no one is ever just in criticizing another culture. (LeBeau, 2006) Advocates for moral isolationism insist that the world is divided into distinctly different cultures, each with its own set of principles and beliefs. They continue that in order to demonstrate respect for all cultures, decisions of moral judgment can only be made within one s own culture. We should understand that every society has their own culture and set of beliefs that sometimes we cannot understand that is why we should not judge other people from different groups because our culture is different from ours and we do not really know their definition of right and wrong is. It is also said in the book that we may well reflect that we simply do not understand it; therefore are not qualified to criticize it at all, because we are not members of that culture. I think what is wrong is we are ignorant or sometimes we misunderstood other people s culture. Moral isolationism stops us in criticizing others customs that might destroy the value of morality, it is wrong because it defies or contrast the moral values we know and believe. Judgement is the ability to judge, make a decision, or form an opinion objectively, authoritatively, and wisely, esp. in matters affecting action; good sense; discretion. (dictionary.reference.com) I ve learned why the article is entitled Trying Out One s New Sword Judging simple means forming an opinion, expressing it if it is called for Moral Isolationism means that we don t know any culture except our own. 1. What is moral isolationism? 2. What are the arguments raised on this issue? 3. What is judgement?

Book Contemporary Moral Problems Chapter 5: John Stewart Mill: Utilitarianism 1. To know what Utilitarianism is 2. To understand the Greatest Hapiness Principle 3. To understand what is a utilitarian standard By happiness is intended pleasure, and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain and the privation of pleasure. According to Wikipedia, Utilitarianism is the ideas that the moral worth of an action is determined solely by its utility in providing happiness or pleasure as summed among all sentient beings. It is thus a form of consequentialism, meaning that the moral worth of an action is determined by its outcome. Utilitarianism is often described by the phrase "the greatest good for the greatest number of sentient beings", and is also known as "the greatest happiness principle". Utility, the good to be maximized, has been defined by various thinkers as happiness or pleasure (versus suffering or pain), although preference utilitarians define it as the satisfaction of preferences. It may be described as a life stance, with happiness or pleasure being of ultimate importance. A utilitarian standard is not the agent s own greatest happiness, but the greatest happiness altogether and we must first think about the effect of our actions to other people before thinking about our own benefit. Whatever might the decision may be, if it may be a bad one or a good one, as longs as there are more people agreeing on a certain situation, the decided task would be chosen. The authority of the decision created from a Utilitarian Morality is something that grows much stronger as it gains more followers or supporters. As it grows much powerful, it becomes something that is very difficult to defeat or overcome. Principle of Utility or the Greatest Happiness Principle, says that the ultimate end, with reference to and for the sake of which all other things are desirable, whether we are considering our own good or that of other people, is an existence exempt as far as possible from pain, and as rich as possible from enjoyments, both in point of quantity and quality. I learned about why Utilitarianism formed a lot of controversies. I have learned that a utilitarian standard means that we should consider first the greatest happiness altogether or the happiness of most people before we consider our happiness. I learned the principle of utility 1. What is Utilitarianism? 2. What is the Principle of Utility? 3. What is The Greatest Happiness Principle?\

Book Contemporary Moral Problems Chapter 6: James Rachels: The Debate over Utilitarianism 1. To know what Hedonism is all about 2. To understand the three propositions of classical utilitarianism 3. To understand what is a utilitarian standard The utilitarian doctrine is that happiness is desirable, and the only thing desirable, as an end, all other things being desirable as means to that end. Principle of Utility or the Greatest Happiness Principle, says that the ultimate end, with reference to and for the sake of which all other things are desirable, whether we are considering our own good or that of other people, is an existence exempt as far as possible from pain, and as rich as possible from enjoyments, both in point of quantity and quality. Hedonism is a perennially popular theory that goes back at least as far as ancient Greeks. Hedonism is the belief of a something that if it is good then it will be called, happiness but it misunderstands the meaning of happiness because happiness is not something that is recognized as good and sought for its means of bringing it about. For every action we do, there will always be consequences after it whether it will be for our betterment or something that will help us learn new things and do things beyond what we thought we are capable of. For every action we do, we always have different interpretations and actions. For some people, it is better for them to think about others first than to think about themselves and for some, they will always choose what they think will make them happy. I learned about why Utilitarianism formed a lot of controversies. I have learned that a utilitarian standard means that we should consider first the greatest happiness altogether or the happiness of most people before we consider our happiness. I learned the principle of utility 1. What is Rule Utilitarianism? 2. What is Act Utilitarianism? 3. What is Hedonism?

Book Contemporary Moral Problems Chapter 7: Immanuel Kant: The Categorical Imperative 1. To know what Categorical Imperative is all about 2. To understand what Immanuel Kant is trying to prove 3. To be aware of the impact of Categorical Imperative to people Our moral duty can be formulated in one supreme rule, the categorical imperative, from which all our duties can be derived. Categorical Imperative may be defined as the standard of rationality from which all moral requirements derive. (Wikipedia.com) According to Kant, human beings occupy a special place in creation, and morality can be summed up in one ultimate commandment of reason, or imperative, from which all duties and obligations derive. He defined an imperative as any proposition that declares a certain action or inaction to be necessary. A hypothetical imperative compels action in a given circumstance: if I wish to quench my thirst, I must drink something. A categorical imperative, on the other hand, denotes an absolute, unconditional requirement that asserts its authority in all circumstances, both required and justified as an end in itself. It is best known in its first formulation of the saying "Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law." Kant thinks that Good will is not good of what its effects or accomplishes are because of its fitness for attaining some proposed end. Categorical Imperative also let the person practicing it to think of the situation first before arriving in a decision. People who undergo this morality would first think of the possibilities and would then be firm to their decision. It is also a decision where others are thought of first. This is somehow not a selfish act to perform because the decision would be based on the welfare of others. And I think this is what all of us should do to really weigh in all the possible outcomes of the decisions we will be making to avoid disappointments or regrets. If duty is done in a wrong way it is not considered to be good. I learned that categorical imperative consists of the two concepts 1. What is Categorical Imperative? 2. How does Categorical Imperative affect the way people live? 3. What is the concept of good will?

Book Contemporary Moral Problems Chapter 8: Aristotle: Happiness and Virtue 1. To know Aristotle s view on Happiness and Virtue 2. To differentiate his view from what I know 3. To learn new philosophies about Happiness and Virtue Aristotle argues that all human beings seek happiness, and that happiness is not pleasure, honor, or wealth, but an activity of the soul in accordance with virtue. Happiness from what I know is a state of mind or feeling characterized by contentment, love, satisfaction, pleasure, or joy and virtue is a character trait or quality valued as being always good in and of itself. For Aristotle happiness is a virtuously activity of the soul. It is something that you can gain through contemplating. Happiness is said to be related with virtue because according to Aristotle, virtue is a state of character that concerned with the intermediate, mean or what we commonly known as middle maybe because having too much or even too less of something is not good. Aristotle also said that Moral virtue is what makes the mean. Moral virtue is something that a product of training and habits, it is also the mean between the vices of excess and deficiency. According to him, moral virtue wasn t arises by nature because you can t change natural things, like the way you can t train the rain to pour from your feet upwards. Happiness always goes with virtue and virtue must always go with happiness. Whenever we do something good, we have this happiness inside us because of that action and every time we are happy we always tend to do something of virtue. I hope doing something of virtue doesn t only happen when people are happy but because they know what is right and what is wrong and they follow the teachings that they learned from school, church, guardians and society. We are the one who creates our own happiness. Happiness and virtue always go together. Being happy doesn t just benefit yourself but it also benefit others through the concept of virtue. 1. What is Happiness? 2. What is Virtue? 3. How does happiness and virtue affect the way people live?

Book Contemporary Moral Problems Chapter 9: Joel Feinberg: The Nature and Value of Rights 1. To know the importance of rights 2. To determine the nature and value of rights 3. To learn new things about our rights Feinberg wants to demonstrate that rights are morally important. To do this, he imagines Nowheresville, a world like our own except that people do not have rights. As a result, people in this world cannot make moral claims when they are treated unjustly. They cannot demand or claim just treatment, and so they are deprived of self respect and human dignity. We know that having right as a person is important. A world like that of Nowheresville will hinder us from learning how to be responsible from our own actions and it stops us from expressing the goodness we have to other people. If a kid accidentally broke something or did something bad, he must be taught to say sorry or do something in exchange for what he has done. But since the people in Nowheresville has no rights, that kid doesn t possess the right to be taught or to be of good manner most especially if there is no one who is guarding him to teach him to be virtuous. According to Feinberg, deserving something good is not the same as having a right to it. The doctrine of the logical correlativity of rights and duties says that all duties entail other people s right and all rights entail other s people duty. The first part, all duties entail other people s right, Feinberg says that this doctrine is somewhat right and somewhat wrong. He said that duty, from the root word due, is like a task. According to Feinberg, to have a right is to have a claim against someone whose recognition as valid is called for by some set of governing rules or moral principles. To have a claim is to have a case meriting consideration for status as a right, subject to evaluation in context. It is this process of claiming that Feinberg argues is essential to furthering moral progress and human dignity and what distinguishes our world from his constructed one. We are the one who creates our own happiness. Happiness and virtue always go together. Rights are always in a society to have discipline and respect from each other. 1. What is Happiness? 2. What are the disadvantages of a world without rights? 3. What is Nowheresville?

Book Contemporary Moral Problems Chapter 10: Ronal Dworkin: Taking Rights Seriously 1. To know the importance of rights 2. To know the reason behind the rights given to us 3. To learn new things about our rights The institution of Rights is therefore crucial, because it represents the majority s promise to the minorities that their dignity and equality will be respected. We know that having right as a person is important. I agree on what Dworkin says that any Government harsh treatment of civil disobedience or campaign against vocal protest may therefore be thought against its sincerity. Government and laws do subsist because it protects its citizen s right. It helps its citizen to be protected against circumstances that can harm her. And if the government does such thing, we can really conclude that they don t have full sincerity on their duty to their inhabitant. I also agree that the government view is necessarily the correct views; anyone who thinks it does must believe that men and women have only such moral rights as government chooses to grant which means that they have no moral rights at all. Like what I said earlier, government are there because it protect us, but it doesn t mean that it cover everything. We have rights that can t be cover by what Government laws states, these rights are our edge on our Government. All in all, if people would take seriously the rights that they have, they are also taking seriously the laws that are implemented in the area they are living in. These two are connected and intertwined with each other making it very important and vital for a society to have. People who doesn t take other people s right seriously simply means that the particular person doesn t take the law seriously. Rights are always important in a society to have discipline and respect from each other. 1. Who is Ronald Dworkin? 2. Distinguish between legal and moral right 3. What two important ideas are behind the institution or rights?

Book Contemporary Moral Problems Chapter 11: John Rawls: A Theory of Justice 1. To know what Theory of Justice is all about 2. To learn new things about theory of justice 3. To find out new things that I can apply to my life Justice as Fairness is not a complete contract theory. For it is clear that the contract idea can be extended to a choice of more or less an entire ethical system, that is, to a system including principles for all the virtues and not only for justice. John Rawls is a professor of philosophy at Harvard University. He authored several significant books about the Law and Justice. Rawls s theory states that there are two principles of justice: The first principle involves equal basic liberties, and the second principle concerns the arrangement of social and economic inequalities. According to Rawls theory, these are the principles that free and rational persons would accept in a hypothetical original position where there is a veil of ignorance hiding from the contractors all the particular facts about themselves. Basically what John Rawls is proposing is to give everyone equal access to the basic judicial services of the government and treat everyone as equals. I think that by doing this people have more rights because they are granted basic services by the government. The first principle states that equal basic liberties are involves meaning to say that justice should regulate all subsequent criticism and reform of institutions then having chosen a conception of justice, we can suppose that they are to choose a constitution and a legislature to enact law, and so on, all in accordance with the principles of justice initially agreed upon. The second principle states that it was concerned on the arrangement of social and economic inequalities meaning to say that our social situation is just if it is such that by this sequence of hypothetical agreements we would have contracted into the general system of rules which defines it. I learned who is the author of the book I learned that Justice has two principles 1. Who is John Rawls? 2. What is the theory of justice? 3. What are the two principles of justice?

Book Contemporary Moral Problems Chapter 12: Annette Baier : The Need for More Than Justice 1. To know why the article is entitled The Need for More Than Justice 2. To what justice perspective is 3. To find out what justice perspective is all about and how it affects lives The differences are as much emphasis as in substance, or we can say that they are differences in tone of voice. Annette Baier is a teacher of philosophy at the University of Pittsburgh. She authored several significant books about morality and ethics. She distinguishes between the justice perspective of philosophers such as Kant and Rawls and the care perspective Gilligan found in her studies of the moral development of women. Baier argues that the justice perspective by itself in inadequate as a moral theory. It overlooks inequalities between people, it has an unrealistic view of freedom of choice, and it ignores the importance of moral emotions such as love. The best moral theory, she claims, is one that harmonizes justice and care. Annette said that one cannot regard any version of morality that does not ensure that caring for children gets well done as an adequate "minimal morality," anymore than we could so regard one that left any concern for more distant future generations an optional extra. A moral theory, it can plausibly be claimed, cannot regard concern for new and future persons as an optional charity left for those with a taste for it. If the morality the theory endorses is to sustain itself, it must provide for its own continuers, not just take out a loan on a carefully encouraged maternal instinct or on the enthusiasm of a self-selected group of environmentalists who make it their business or hobby to be concerned with what we are doing to mother earth. I have learned more about Annette Baier I learned is that justice and care should be hand in hand. 1. Who is Annette Baier? 2. What is justice perspective? 3. What is care perspective?