Term
| Identify two different ways in which prostitution might be incompatible with the essential ends of humanity if the essential ends of humanity is understood a bit differently. |
|
Definition
Assuming the essential ends of humanity includes protecting all mental capacities, that would include the capacity to form meaningful relationships. Since prostitution damages the capacity to form meaningful relationships, it is incompatible with the essential ends of humanity.
Also, according to the essential ends of humanity, we should treat everything with respect and by selling yourself or buying someone you are not repecting yourself or humanity. |
|
|
Term
| What, in general, is existentialism, according to Sartre? |
|
Definition
| Existentialism is the view that existence precedes essence. |
|
|
Term
| Why, offhand, does existentialism in this interpretation seem incoherent given the standard metaphysical meaning of essence? |
|
Definition
| The standard metaphysical meaning of essence consists of the properties we cannot exist without, which means that we cannot exist without our essence. Existentialism seems incoherent because it claims essence comes before existence, but if essence is needed to exist, then it is impossible for anything to exist. |
|
|
Term
| On what interpretation of human essence does existentialism make sense? |
|
Definition
| If essence is interpreted as a function or purpose, then existentialism makes sense because for human essence, it makes sense that our existence comes before our funtion or purpose. |
|
|
Term
Why does Sartre think that Atheism entails existentialism?
Does it on the standard interpretation of essence? Why/not?
Does it on the alternative interpretation? Why/not? |
|
Definition
If atheism is true, then no one created us with a purpose in mind and any function or purpose we have, we must create, which entails existentialism.
On the standard interpretation of essence, Atheism does not entail existentialism because God's existence is irrelevant to whether or not we have an essence. Existentialism is impossible in the standard sense because without we cannot exist before our own essence.
On the alternative interpretation, Atheism does imply existentialism, because if God does not exist, it makes no sense to say that something has a purpose before it was created. In order to have a purpose, we have to exist first and then create our own purpose, which means existentialism is true.
|
|
|
Term
| Sartre seems to infer from the premise that essence does not precede existence, that existence precedes essence. What, if anything, is wrong with this inference? |
|
Definition
| It falsely assumes that if essence does not precede existence, then existence precedes essence. They may come into existence at the same time. |
|
|
Term
| What, according to Sartre, is the first principle of existentialism? |
|
Definition
| Man is nothing else but that which he makes of himself. |
|
|
Term
| According to existentialism, value is subjective in one sense but not the other. Explain. |
|
Definition
According to existentialism, all value is rooted in human choice. If humans did not exist, then nothing would have value. Value is subjective in the sense that something has value only if they still believe it is right.
There are two different views of subjective value. 1) Something is right only if and only if someone believes it is right.
2)something is valuable, good or right ONLY if someone believes it or chooses it. |
|
|
Term
| What does Sartre mean in saying that in choosing for oneself, one chooses for all mankind? What is his argument for this position? |
|
Definition
| Whenever we make a choice, we commit ourselves to say that that choice is good for everyone similarly situated. To say that a decision is good for me is to say that it is good for everyone similarly situated. In this sense, when we choose for ourselves, we choose for all mankind. However, not all of mankind is similarly situated. |
|
|
Term
| How does Sartre’s view about choosing for all mankind help defend existentialism against the charge that it is subjective in a bad way? |
|
Definition
| It allows existentialism to say that other people make wrong decisions. It is possible for someone to believe they are making the best decision when it is really the wrong one. |
|
|
Term
| Does the conclusion that in choosing for oneself, one chooses for all mankind follow from the premise 1) that ones chooses to do something only if one believes it to be the best choice and the premise 2) that one believes that something is best choice for one person only if it is right for everyone similarly situated? Why/not? |
|
Definition
| It follows for everyone similarly situated. Not all mankind is similarly situated in respect to every choice, therefore the conclusion does not follow. |
|
|
Term
| According to Sartre, atheism implies that value is subjective in one important sense. Why does he think this? Is he right? Why/not? |
|
Definition
| Atheism is subjective in the second sense, that something has value only if someone believes that it has value. If Atheism is true, things can be valuable without anyone choosing them. He is wrong because Atheism does not necessarily entail subjectivism and some value is still objective (valuable whether or not anyone chooses it). If God does not exist, then the source of value must be our own choices, and we must create value ourselves. |
|
|
Term
| How would Socrates disagree with Sartre on the nature of value? |
|
Definition
| He would disagree because Socrates believes things have value on their own and that Gods choose things because they are already valuable. However, Sartre believes we give things value ourselves, regardless of if God exists or not. |
|
|
Term
How does Nietzsche distinguish the moral systems of good/bad and good/evil?
What names does he give these moral systems?
Which came first, and how did the others arise?
|
|
Definition
Good/evil is Christianity and Good/bad is the views of the ancient Greek.
Good/bad system is "master of morality" and Christianity is "slave of morality"
Master of morality came first, and slave of morality came from the slaves, being seen as "bad" according to the old system, wanting to make the slave/land owners look evil |
|
|
Term
| Is “slave morality” good for humanity according to Nietzsche? Why/not? |
|
Definition
No, because slave morality is stifling. If people decide that what is good is to be humble, meek, ugly and poor, then that makes people want to stifle their greatness.
Master of morality celebrates human greatness, so if people embraced that instead then it would benefit humanity and encourage people to develop their full potential. |
|
|
Term
| What, according to Nietzsche, should humanity ultimately aim for in its actions? |
|
Definition
| Reject slave morality and christianity, which will free us from self-doubt and shame. This will help us achieve human excellence and devote our energy into achieving our full potential, free from guilt. We have to let excellence flourish without trying to control them with the wrong ideas of good and evil. |
|
|
Term
| What, according to Nietzsche, are the necessary social conditions for human flourishing and excellence? |
|
Definition
| We must reject slave morality and put master morality in its place. |
|
|
Term
| How does Socrates’ view of the value to a person of acting justly differ fundamentally from that of Nietzsche? |
|
Definition
| Socrates believes that by acting justly, you benefit yourself because justice is intrinsically good for us. Nietzsche disagrees because he thinks that if people are constantly concerned with justice they will not fully develop their higher capacities. He thinks justice only has instrumental value because people need peace and stability to develop their higher capacities. |
|
|
Term
| What are Arjuna’s doubts in the face of battle and what considerations justify these doubts in his mind? |
|
Definition
| He is questioning if he should lead his troops into battle, because if he does it will have horrible consequences, like most of his troops dying. |
|
|
Term
| How does Krishna respond to Arjuna's doubts and why does this response seem harsh? |
|
Definition
| Krishna tells Arjuna to stop being a coward. This seems harsh because Arjuna is having reasonable doubts and it does not mean he is a coward; it is showing that he is sane and not a sociopath. It is natural for him to care about the fate of his soldiers. |
|
|
Term
| What interpretation of renunciation and nonattachment leads Arjuna to think that he should not fight? |
|
Definition
| If he renounces power, glory and wealth then there is no reason for him to fight. By non-attachment, it would mean to detach the consequences of his actions (by not fighting). If he does these, it means he should not fight. |
|
|
Term
| What interpretation of renunciation and nonattachment leads Krishna to think that Arjuna should fight? |
|
Definition
| He should not renounce the motive of duty. He has a role as a general that should make his main duty to lead his troops into battle. If Arjuna renounces glory, wealth and power, he still has a duty to fight and duty is a legitimate reason to fight. If he detaches himself from the consequences of battle, then he should not be afraid of the consequences. |
|
|
Term
| After distinguishing “the named” and “the nameless” Lao Tzu writes: “Hence always rid yourself of desires in order to observe its secrets.” What does he mean? By it’s secrets? By hence? |
|
Definition
By secrets, he is referring to secrets of reality. We have to rid ourselves of desire to observe its secrets because our desires focus our attention on name, so we have to rid ourselves of desires to focus on the nameless.
By hence, he means follow that |
|
|
Term
“The sage keeps to the deed that consists in taking no action and practices the teaching that uses no words.”
What does he mean and why does he say this?
“The way never acts and yet nothing is left undone.” Why does “the way” never act?
Why is nothing left undone? |
|
Definition
| He means that we shouldn't try to change things because they are the way they are supposed to be, that is why nothing is left undone and that's why the sage is passive and consists to the deed of taking no action. |
|
|
Term
| Why does it make sense to think that everything is as it should be if everything that happens happens necessarily and “ought” implies “can”? |
|
Definition
Everything that happens, happens necessarily means that there is no other way the world could be and this is the only possible world.
It makes no sense to say that ought implies can because things that should be done can sometimes not be done.
Something ought to be only if it can be.
It is not true things should be different because they can't be different.
|
|
|
Term
| “The man of the highest virtues does not keep to virtue and that is why he has virtue.” Explain |
|
Definition
| The man of the highest virtue has virtue naturally because he just does the right thing, he does not even try to be virtuous. |
|
|
Term
Lao Tzu distinguishes a number of character types: benevolence, rectitude, virtue, and attachment to rites. Explain what each is.
What is the best way to be once “the way” is lost? What is the next-best, the worst, and next to worst? |
|
Definition
Before the way is lost, we act naturally, not concious of anything, as the way of nature.
After this, the next best state is VIRTUE= doing the right thing for the right reasons.
Then BENEVOLENCE, desire to be good for its own sake
then RECTITUDE, person becomes concerned with rights and what is legally right/wrong.
Last is concern with RITES, what is customary and expected |
|
|
Term
| What are “rites” and why are they such an important part of living well, according to Confucius (inner/outer harmony) |
|
Definition
| It is necessary to get into the habit of doing what is customary and expected in order to develop good character (virtue) and to act in ways to make other people feel treated with respect (outer harmony) and gain confidence in social situations (inner harmony) |
|
|
Term
How do Lao Tzu and Confucius differ on the importance of rites?
What difference in empirical assumptions about human psychology might explain their difference here? |
|
Definition
Lao Tzu thinks it is possible to just be virtuous naturally and develop character. Confucius disagrees because he said humans learn to be virtuous by practicing and getting in the habit of acting in a certain way.
Confucius thinks it is not possible to be virtuous without developing these habits.
Rite thinking follows rite action. |
|
|
Term
| List and describe the four noble truths of suffering. |
|
Definition
1) all life is suffering, everything is suffering.
2) we suffer because we have unsatisfied desires
3) when we cease to have desires, we cease to suffer
4) by using the eightfold path, we can rid ourselves of desire and suffering |
|
|
Term
| Is it possible to attain enlightenment solely through meditation? Why/not? |
|
Definition
| No because according to Buddhism, it is not possible purely through meditation. You have to first go through the process of becoming a perfect person morally and give up your desires, which takes many years. |
|
|
