Friday, 29 May 2015

Intutionism Q and A- It just IS

INTUITIONISM- IT JUST IS

Main thinkers?
G.E Moore
Prichard
W.D Ross

What is it?
A cognitivist approach to meta-ethics which attempts to avoid the naturalistic fallacy (is to ought) and explain what good and bad is.

Why?
People reach different moral conclusions but usually reach them in a similar way. This suggests that there is an inner driving force of moral decision making.

What is good?
It is always recognisable and universal but we can’t define it. It’s like the colour yellow- it’s an adjective but we can’t describe it itself.

So we actually don’t know what good is…?
Well it’s beyond human knowledge. It’s irreducible- we need no further explanation. Good is something we can point to to make a point. It’s not pleasure or happiness but these are good.

Right…so how do we make moral judgements?
Based on our intuition of good things! We make moral decisions based on what outcome will create the most good things

Kind of like utilitarianism then… okay. Who is G.E Moore?
G.E Moore was born in 1903. He criticised naturalism for the obvious reason- we cannot use a non-moral premise to make a moral judgement. He believed that moral judgements are not proved empirically but “we recognise good things intuitively”. In fact, he had a kind of pseudo-utilitarian view- evaluating consequences in terms of basic principles.

So are there any moral truths?
There are some but they are known not provable. You can’t infinitely break down to more basic beliefs- like the colour yellow.

Who is our second person?
Pritchard. 1871-1947

Key word to kick start our memory?
Obligations

What does this mean?
If goodness is recognised by example, so are our obligations. We will intuitively know when we OUGHT to do something.

Can we define obligations?
They’re as indefinable as ‘good’, actually.

Right… what’s the role of intuition in decision making then?
It decides what to do in a situation. People get it wrong because some people’s intuition is more developed than others.

You identified two types of thinking, what are they and what do they do?
1.       Reasoning- collects data
2.       Intuition- decides what to do with the data

Obviously there are some problems with this. Give three.
Conflicting obligations, some people don’t care about obligations, which option is more enlightened?- people have different conclusions.

Who is our third person?
W.D Ross

Key word to kickstart memory?
Prima Facie duties

What did he say?
In any situation, moral duties and obligations are apparent and intuition again depends on a person’s maturity. Our choice of action is down to judgement

Are there any ethical dilemmas?
Nooooooo. One duty would always outweigh others.

That’s a bit harsh. What about the mother and her unborn child in a life or death situation!
Well in that situation we’d have to take into account prima facie duties which are universally known at face value.

Well, what are they?
Promise keeping, reparation from harm, gratitude, justice, benefice, self-improvement, non-maleficence

Is that it? What about lying to save someone’s life?
Granted they’re not complete, but your hypothetical situation would weigh up promise keeping perhaps with non-maleficence, justice, benefice, and gratitude. In this situation, you’d obviously use your judgement and lie.

What if you self-improve yourself in order to beat someone you’re jealous of?
Well something can be a right action but be done for wrong reasons. You have a personal duty.

What did Nietzsche say about intuitionism?
That it was choosing to be “ethically colour-blind” and that the disagreements were about what actions not good things in themselves.

What did MacIntyre say about intuitionism?
It’s always a “signal that something has gone badly wrong”

Are there any ethical discussions?
Not really. You can’t justify your shady intuitions so you can just continue to share them… Your own moral principles aren’t self evident

Where else can intuitions come from? Is this a strength or weakness?
God, cultural conditioning, evolution, World of the Forms. Can be compatible with the idea of a conscience.

Another two weaknesses?
People’s intuitions differ and it’s frustratingly irreducible.

There are only three strengths. What are they?
1.       Instant answer
2.       Appeals to human nature
3.       Avoids complex debate

Moore’s sassy quote:
“Good is good and that is the end of the matter”- fair
“We cannot actually define yellow”- fair
“Neither science nor religion can establish the basic principles of morality”- hmmm. They’ve done a better job than you!

Prichard’s decent quote:
“Not only goodness that is indefinable but all types of obligation”

Rating overall:
2/10

Avoids point, load of bull, vague

No comments:

Post a Comment