 "So you're saying we should never eat pizza or ice cream again?

"
 Why This Is a Straw Man?
 Person A only said to eat more fruits and vegetables.
 Person B twisted it to sound extreme, making it easier to argue against

 Fallacy of straw man may arise from an honest mistake
 Example, A: “we shouldn’t allow students to talk during the exam.” B: “my bad! I
thought students are not allowed to ask for any clarification.”
 Obscure statements cause fallacy of straw man
 Example, A: “there are no absolute answers for metaphysical questions.” B: “asking
metaphysical questions is useless.”

 Refutation by parallel reasoning

 Refuting an argument by showing that it is just like another argument that is invalid or
unsound.
 Example, A: if I had a higher salary, I could buy more things; so, if everyone had
higher salaries, everyone could buy more things.
 B: that is just like arguing that, if one person stands up at a ball game, he will get a
better view; so, if everyone stands up, everyone will get a better view.
 Example, A: most of the people in this class are college students. Most college
students study hard. Therefore, most of the people in this room study hard.
 B: that just arguing that most whales live in the sea, and most animals that live in the
sea are fish, so most whales are fish.

Kālāma Sūtta by the Buddha: A Skeptical Text

 Kesaputta, identified in Kushinagar in UP or East Ch amparan in Bihar.

 Kālāmas, the inhabitants of Kesaputta.
 Guidance from the Buddha.
 The criterion for rejection: greed, hate, and delusion.
 The criterion for acceptance: absence of greed, hate, and delusion.
 The four exalted dwellings.
 The four solaces.

After Quiz
Part 15 – 27th March
Cārvāka Skepticism

 About the Tradition

 The literal meaning of the word “cārvāka” is “nice word”, or “eat”.
 This is also called Lokāyatamata, the view of common people.
 Carvaka is classical Indian Materialism.
 The founder of this system is said to be sage Cārvāka or Bṛhaspati.
 The original sources of Cārvāka are lost, except one text by Jayarashi Bhatta.
 Cārvāka’s view is found in it’s rival sources as opponent’s view.
 Cārvākas were treated as decadents by all other classical Indian traditions, even
today by the religious people.
 The ill-treatment of Carvaka by others shows the status of ancient Indian intellectual
community.

 Epistemological Skepticism
 Three types of epistemological views in Cārvāka system.
 Negative skepticism, extreme empiricism, mitigated empiricism.
 Inference is not certain.
 No invariable concomitance can be established by perception.
 Scriptural testimony is not a reliable source of knowledge.
 Testimony, that is verifiable by perception is a valid source of knowledge.
 Carvaka rejects all those things which are not verified by experience.

 Metaphysical Skepticism
 The world is made of four elements.
 Reality is only about perceptible objects, for perception and inference that is based
on perception are the only valid source of knowledge.
 There is no eternal soul.
 There is no soul apart from the conscious body.
 Consciousness is rooted in the body.
 There is no God.
 The world is made of elements, so the supposition of a creator is unnecessary.

 Moral skepticism
 No Carvaka ethical source is available today apart from some fragments.
 Based on those fragments and its rival sources, Carvaka’s ethics is reconstructed.
 Carvaka rejects all kinds of religious and spiritual ethics.
 Cārvāka’s ethics is in conformity with its metaphysics.
 Ethics and morality are all about this very life.
 There are different views on the highest goal of human life.
 Cārvāka accepts only two ends of life (puruṣārtha).
 The highest goal in life is to achieve well-being and happiness.
 Lived body cannot be freed from pain.

 Everything related to afterlife becomes irrelevant for Cārvāka.

 Carvaka rejects action and its unseen effect.
 That is good which enhances the well-being of this life.
 That is bad which degrades the standard of life.
 That action is right which maximizes one’s happiness.
 That action is wrong which maximizes pain.
 The whole purpose of Carvaka ethics is to make one’s life happy by reducing
suffering and pain as much as possible.
 Is harm to others acceptable if it maximizes one’s self-interest?

 Carvaka’s ethical theory does not necessarily entail violence towards others.
  Do all religious and spiritual people really believe in their doctrines?
 If not, are they actually Carvakas?
 Can there be selfish Carvakas and altruistic Carvakas?
 Can there be modern Carvakas?
 A modern Carvaka should be rational and empathetic.
 What is the general perception on Carvakas?
 Cārvāka’s ethics is generally considered as egoistic hedonism.
 Sensualistic hedonism, egoistic hedonism, universal hedonism.

Part 16 – A Critical Analysis of Caste System

Caste System: A Critical Analysis

 The creator of four castes

 Manu, 1: 31: “Then, so that the worlds and people would prosper and increase, from
his mouth he created the priests, from his arms the ruler, from his thighs the
commoner, and from his feet the servant”.
 Gītā, 4: 13: “Although I have created the four classes (varṇa)-Brahmin, Kshatriya,
Vaishya and Shudra-according to innate properties [guṇa] and actions [karma], know
me the immutable as a non-doer”.
 Innateness of caste
 Gītā, 18: 41: “The duties of Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya, as also of Shudra are
determined by properties [guṇa and karmāṇi] that are born out of their nature
[svabhāva]”.

 Caste Duties
 Manu, 1: 87: “But to protect this whole creation, the lustrous one made separate
innate activities for those born of his mouth, arms, thighs, and feet”.
 Gītā, 3: 34: “Do not be ruled by attachment and aversion, because both of them are
the great enemies that obstruct you on the way to good”.
 Brahmin’s Duty
 Manu, 1: 88: “For priest, he ordained teaching and learning, sacrificing for
themselves and sacrificing for others, giving and receiving”.
 Gītā, 18: 42: “Self-restraint, subduing of the senses, innocence, continence, mercy,
uprightness, piety, true knowledge, and direct perception of divinity are the Brahmins
province-born out of his nature [svabhāvajam]”.

 Kshtriya’s Duty
 Manu, 1: 89: “Protecting his subjects, giving, having sacrifices performed, studying,
and remaining unaddicted to the sensory objects are, in summary, for a ruler”.
 Gītā, 18: 43: “Valour, majesty, dexterity, unwillingness to retreat in battle, charity, and
sovereignty are the natural province of a Kshatriya [svabhāvajam]”.
 Vaishya’s Duty
 Manu, 1: 90: “Protecting his livestock, giving, having sacrifices performed, studying,
trading, lending money, and farming the land are for a commoner”.
 Gītā, 18: 44: “Farming, protection of cows (the senses) and commerce are the
natural province of a Vaishya [svabhāvajam]”.

 Shudra’s Duty
 Manu, 1: 91: “The Lord assigned only one activity to a servant: serving these (other)
classes without resentment”.
 Gītā, 18: 44: “Rendering services is the natural calling of a Shudra [svabhāvajam]”.
 Maintenance of one’s own caste-duty
 Gītā, 2: 31: “In view of your own dharm, too, it is unworthy of you to fear, for there is
nothing more propitious for a Kshatriya than a righteous war”.
 Gītā, 18: 47: “Even though unmeritorious one’s own native calling is superior to the
office of others, for a man carrying out his natural obligation does not bring sin upon
himself”.

 Protection of caste-duty at the cost of life

 Gītā, 3: 35: “Although inferior (in merit), one’s own dharm is the best and even
meeting with death in it brings good, whereas a dharm other than one’s own, though
well observed, generates only fear”.
 Brahmin’s Status
 Manu, 1: 93: “The priest is the Lord of this whole creation, according to the law,
because he was born of the highest part of the body, because he is the eldest, and
because he maintains the Veda”.
 Manu, 10: 3: “The priest is the lord of the (other) classes because he is pre-eminent,
because he is the best by nature, because he maintains the restraints, and because
of the pre-eminence of his transformative rituals”.

 Status of Outcaste
 Manu, 10: 45: “All of those castes who are excluded from the world of those who
were born from the mouth, arms, thighs, and feet (of the primordial Man) are
traditionally regarded as aliens, whether they speak barbarian languages or Aryan
languages”.
 Treatment of Outcaste
 Manu, 10: 50: “These (castes) should live near mounds, trees, and cremation-
grounds, in mountains and in groves, recognizable and making a living by their own
innate activities”.
 Manu, 10: 52: “Their clothing should be the clothes of the dead, and their food should
be in broken dishes; their ornaments should be made of black iron, and they should
wander constantly”.

 Manu, 10: 53: “A man who carries out his duties should not seek contact with them;
they should do business with one another and marry with those who are like them”.
 Manu, 10: 54: “Their food, dependent upon others, should be given to them in a
broken dish, and they should not walk about in villages and cities at night”.
  Manu, 10: 55: “They may move about by day to do their work, recognizable by
distinctive marks in accordance with the king’s decrees; and they should carry out the
corpses of people who have no relatives; this is a fixed rule”.

B.R. Ambedkar on Caste System

 Any kind of reform is not possible as far as there is caste system.

 Caste system is not a division of labour.
 In caste system, the career of children is decided by the social status of their parents
not by their capacities.
 Caste system is based on heredity not on choice.
 Caste system does not permit readjustment of occupation.
 Individual sentiment and individual preference have no place in caste system.
 Caste system suppresses human’s natural power.

 Caste system does not preserve purity of race and purity of blood because there has
been mixture of all races in all parts of the world.
 Caste system does not demarcate racial division because it is a social division of
people of the same race.
 Caste system prevents common activity and it prevents to form a society with a
unified life.
 Caste is inconsistent with conversion, so it prevents the spread of its religion.
 There is no sympathy for the deserving because virtue has become caste-ridden and
morality has become caste-bound.
 Caste is based on birth not on worth.

 Caste system cannot be maintained without a penal system, so it advocates penal

sanction and penalty of death.
 How can a Shudra depend upon other three classes for his/her education and
defense.
 Caste system has disabled Shudra to rebel against exploitation and it has pushed
him to eternal servitude.
 Chaturvarnya/Caste system cannot be an ideal system of life because there are
records of inter-caste disputes and battles.
 The real remedy of caste system is intermarriage.

 A Buddhist Perspective on Caste System

 The Buddha criticizes caste system many times.
 Sangha community was opened for all castes.
 If there is something called “Brahmin”, it should be based on action not based on
birth.
 By birth everyone is equal, but one becomes praiseworthy and blameworthy by
action.
 If Brahmins were born from Brahma’s mouth, what about Brahmin women?
 If the Brahmin women were also born from Brahma’s mouth, then Brahmin men and
women would be siblings because they were born from the same womb.
  If the Brahmin women were not born from Brahma’s mouth, then they would not
belong to Brahmin Varna, but they are considered to be Brahmins.
 How is marriage acceptable between siblings, it would be against the dharma?
 It would take place the decadence of caste.
 If Brahma is the only creator of his offsprings, then four Varnas would not be possible
because four children of one father would not belong to different castes.
 If the difference is because of different origins of His parts of body, it wouldn’t be
proved logically.
 The feet of Brahma would be impure, for Shudras are considered to be impure.

 The entire body of Brahma wouldn’t be pure.

 The supremacy of Sanskrit language is related to Varna system.
 It is attacked in Buddhist tantra tradition by not following the grammatical rules.
 The primitive tantrism emerged against the Vedic casteism.
 Gradually, Vedic schools incorporated tantrism and modified it accordingly.
 Is casteism acceptable in a civilized and educated society?
 If it is unacceptable, how to remove it?
 If it is acceptable anyway, there won’t be any end of social conflict!

start from here

Part 17 – 7th April
Moral Reasoning

 What is legally permitted and what is morally permitted?

 How to differentiate moral and immoral acts?
 What is legal is decided by official, but what is moral is not decided by any official.
 Moral disagreements
 Why does moral disagreement arise?
 Moral disagreement on factual claims.
 Moral disagreement on moral principles.
 Moral disagreement concerns the range and scope of moral principles.

 Almost everyone agrees that death and suffering are bad, but disagree on whose
death and suffering.
 The problem of abortion
 Whether fetuses lie within the range of a standard moral principles against killing.
 How to resolve conflicts between the principles that protect fetuses and other
principles concerning human welfare and a woman’s control over her body.
 How to clarify a moral problem?
 To specify precisely what is being judged.
 In the problem of abortion, the first step is to specify exactly what counts as an
abortion.

 Abortion as the termination of pregnancy.

 Spontaneous abortions or miscarriages raise no moral problems because they are
not the result of human action.
 The moral problem of abortion arises only when the death of the fetus is expected
consequence of terminating the pregnancy.
 Moral issue of “abortion” is intentional termination of a pregnancy with the expected
consequence that the fetus dies as a result.
 Whether abortion is morally wrong or whether abortion should be illegal?
 Abortion is a matter of personal morality not a matter of public morality.
 The question whether abortion is or is not morally wrong is different from whether
abortion is or is not good.

 People who deny that abortion is morally wrong do not hold that abortion is a positive
good. They don’t recommend to get pregnant to have an abortion.
 The pro-life argument
 This argument deals with the moral wrongness of abortion.
 “Pro-life” is considered as conservative view of abortion.
 Opponents of abortion call themselves as “pro-life”.
 Pro-life argument is based on right to life.
 “It is always wrong to kill a human being.”
 Argument: It is always wrong to kill a human being. Abortion involves killing a human
fetus. A human fetus is a human being. Therefore, abortion is always morally wrong.

 Whether a human fetus is a human being is a debatable issue.

 Argument: It is always wrong to kill an innocent human being. Abortion involves
killing a human fetus. A human fetus is an innocent human being. Therefore, abortion
is always morally wrong.
 Argument: It is always wrong to kill an innocent human being except in self-defense.
Abortion involves killing a human fetus. A human fetus is an innocent human being.
Therefore, abortion is always morally wrong except in self-defense.
 Pro-choice argument
 This argument also deals with the moral wrongness of abortion.
 “Pro-choice” is considered as liberal view on abortion.

 Further modifications
 Whether abortion is justified in a critical condition of the mother’s life.
 Whether abortion is justified when the pregnancy results from rape or incest.
 A woman has right to defend not only her life but also her physical and psychological
well-being.
 The status of the fetus
 Pro-choice liberals deny fetus as human being.
 Liberals claim that the real issue is not about biological species.
 The real issue whether a human fetus is covered by the moral principles against
killing, and whether it is protected to the same extent as an adult human.

 Anything that is protected to this extent is said to have a “right to life” and will be
called a “person”. The issue, then, is whether a human fetus is a person.
  If a fetus is not a person, this moral principle can’t show abortion as wrong.
 The problem of personhood arises.
 Conditions of personhood: genetic code, ensoulment, brain activity, sentience,
viability, rationality.
 Pro-life emphasizes genetic code and ensoulment, whereas pro-choice emphasizes
viability and rationality.
 Thus, the personhood of fetus is problematic.
 Gradualism, a claim that fetus slowly develops a right to life.

 Conflicting principles
 It conflicts with pro-life principle on killing.
 Right about the pregnant woman and right about the overall human welfare.
 Defenders of abortion argue that abortion can sometimes be justified in terms of
welfare.
 Argument: An action that best increases overall human welfare is not morally wrong.
Abortion is sometimes the best way of increasing overall human welfare. Therefore,
abortion is sometimes not morally wrong.
 Argument: An action that best increases overall human welfare is not morally wrong,
provided that it is not unfair. Abortion is sometimes an action that best increases
human welfare. Therefore, abortion is sometimes not morally wrong, provided that it
is not unfair.

 Analogical reasoning in ethics

 If the reasons on all sides are fully spelled out and disagreement remains, what is to
be done?
 The point of analogical argument is to reach a conclusion in a controversial case by
comparing it to a similar situation in which it is clearer what is right or wrong.
 A classical analogical argument by Judith Jarvis Thomson.
 Weighing factors
 Disagreements concerning abortion can’t be reduced to yes-no dispute.
 Dealing with irreconcilable differences in a humane ways is fundamental to human
society.

Part 18 – 12th April

 Virtue Ethical Reasoning

 Aristotle (384 BC—322 BC) was an ancient Greek philosopher.

 He is considered to be the systematic propounder of Virtue Ethics.
 Aristotle’s famous book on Virtue Ethics is Nicomachean Ethics.
 Aristotle’s broad question is “how should I live” rather than “how should I act”.
 He emphasizes on “what kind of person” we should become rather than “what kind of
action” should be done.
 He gives focus on what character traits we should try to develop.
 Aristotle is concerned about character which consists thought, action, emotion,
responsiveness.

 Ethics for Aristotle is not only about thinking but it is also about feeling and acting.
 Three types of life: life of pleasure, life of politics and life of contemplation.
 What is good?
 Everything aims at something and good is that at which everything aims.
 Good is end in itself.
 Eudaimonia/Happiness/Flourishing is the highest good.
 Eudaimonia, happiness, human flourishing, fulfillment, activities in accordance with
virtue.
 Happiness is chosen for itself. The ultimate goal of other ends is happiness or human
flourishing.

 What is happiness, is it identical to pleasure, or is it some kind of activity?

 Happiness is living well and acting well.
 Happiness is a virtue.
 Happiness is the first principle, for the sake of which everything is done.
 Happiness is honorable and complete in itself.
 Happiness is a certain kind of activity of the soul in accordance with complete virtue.
 Who is happy person?

 The happy person is one who, adequately furnished with external goods, engages in
activities in accordance with complete virtue, not for just any period of time but over a
complete life.
 Does happiness depend on chance, for the favorable things like family background
are by chance?
 Though social background matters, life can be flourished because humans are
rational animals.
 What is virtue?
 Virtue is that which produces flourishing.
 Virtue is valuable character traits.

 Virtue is necessary condition of flourishing/happiness.

 Virtue is not only doing the right thing but being the right sort of person.
 What are the types of virtue?
 Intellectual virtue and virtue of character.
 Contemplation, reflection, practical wisdom, courage, kindness etc.
 How is virtue acquired?
 Is it acquired by learning, habituation, training, some divine order or by chance?
 Virtue is not natural, we need to cultivate it through practice.

 Morality can be heard from books, but learned by practice.

 Aristotle advocates golden mean between excess and deficiency.
 Excess and deficiency are two forms of vice or the opposite of virtue.
  Does golden mean give clear guidance to solve problems?
 Can any character trait become moral if it comes under the golden mean?
 Can Aristotle’s ethics be measured, for it doesn’t give a moral law?
 Is Aristotle’s ethics useful in real life, for it neglects the consequence of action?
 If the primary concern of morality is character rather than action, how can action be
judged because one’s action affects others?

 In moral relations, what kind of action matters rather than what kind of agent, why
character becomes more fundamental to morality than action?
 If what kind of person is important than what kind of action, would it morally fine if a
good person acts immoral actions?
 A virtuous person’s action may be wrong in a circumstance, then how can it be moral
standard to justify the moral status of the action?
 Ancient Greek society and today’s society are completely different, then how is
Aristotle’s ethics relevant today?
 Who can become moral according to Aristotle?
 What kind of moral reasoning is used in Aristotle’s ethics?

 An action is right if it is what a virtuous person would do in the circumstance.

 This is moral because a virtuous person does it or would do it.
 Lying is immoral because a virtuous person doesn’t lie.
 Whatever a virtuous person does or would do is moral. Abortion wouldn’t be done by
a virtuous person. Therefore, abortion is not moral.
 Whatever a virtuous person does or would do is moral. A virtuous person would do
abortion in a critical situation. Therefore, abortion is morally acceptable in a critical
situation.
 Cheating is immoral because a virtuous person doesn’t do it.
 Telling truth is moral because a virtuous person tells truth.

Part 19 – 17th April

Immanuel Kant’s Deontological Reasoning

 Immanuel Kant (1724—1804 AD) was a German philosopher.

 Kant’s ethics is known as deontological ethics.
 The literal meaning of “deontology” is study of duty.
 According to Kant, morality cannot be based on God’s command, golden rule,
character trait, social contract and sentiment.
 Human beings are rational, self-governing and free agents according to Kant.
 Kant defines morality as the duty of rational beings.
 Morality is moral law governed and it is end in itself.

 Morality cannot be based on desire, sympathy, or inclination because they are not
unconditionally good.
 Morality is not based on facts about humans, for it has to be valid for all rational
creatures, whether human or not.
 Kant centers his analysis on the concept of the “good will”.
 Good will is a will that is motivated by the idea of duty or moral law.
 Good will serves ground for morality according to Kant.
 Good will is end in itself and it is good without limitation.
 Good will is good even in ordinary life.
 If the will is not good, virtues like courage, understanding, wealth, health, self-control
could be extremely evil and harmful.

 A self-controlled criminal might well be more evil than one who loses control easily.
 Good will is not good because of what it accomplishes, but purely in itself.
 Good will is an intrinsic value not an extrinsic value.
 Moral law is duty of rational beings and it is categorical imperative, opposite of
hypothetical imperative.
 Categorical imperative: Moral maxims and laws which are unconditional and
unchangeable.
 Hypothetical imperative: Moral rules which can be changed and modified.
 “Do not tell lie” is a categorical imperative.
 “If you don’t want to get into trouble, don’t tell lie” is a hypothetical imperative.

 Categorical imperatives or moral maxims:

 1) “Act as if the maxim of your action were to become by your will a universal law of
nature.”
 Any human action which can be universal is moral action.
 If the action is not universal, then it cannot be moral according to Kant.
 The universality of action can be checked like this, What if everyone did that?
 2) “So act that you use humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any
other, always at the same time as an end, never merely as a means.”
 According to Kant, human being cannot be means at all.
 Any human cannot be used as a means.

 Any form of human exploitation and discrimination cannot be morally justified.

 Human being is end in himself/herself.
 What about animals? According to Kant, animals don’t have moral standing because
they don’t have good will, but he is against the cruelty towards animals.
 Even God is not beyond morality, He must follow moral duty.
 3) “A systematic union of rational beings through common objective laws, that is, a
kingdom, which can be called a kingdom of ends.”
 Every rational being is a member of the kingdom of ends who gives universal laws in
it but is also himself subject to these laws.
 This is a kind of moral community of rational beings who follow moral duty.

 A community where categorical imperatives are followed.

 These three moral maxims are categorical imperatives which are formula of the
universal law, formula of humanity, and formula of the kingdom of ends.
  Duty: duty is to be practical unconditional necessity of action and it must therefore
hold for all rational beings and only because of this be also a law for all human wills.
 Ground of practical law lies in that which is end in itself.
 Good is motivated by the sense of duty guided by reason.
 Actions have moral value if they are acted from a sense of duty guided by reason.
 Now how to put Kant’s ethics into practice?

 That action is moral which is universal and treats humans as end not means.
 Only those actions are moral which are done out of a sense of duty guided by
reason.
 Lying is immoral because it is not universal and doesn’t treat human/s as end.
 Lying is immoral because the action of lying treats the other person as a means.
 Telling truth is moral because it is universal.
 Truth will remain as truth even if everyone tells truth.
 What are the criticisms of Kant’s ethics?
 Kant’s critics argue that feelings and emotions have moral roles, but Kant excludes
them from the moral domain.

Part 20 – 21th April

Utilitarian Reasoning

 The chief exponents of this theory are Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill.
 Jeremy Bentham (1748—1832) was an English philosopher.
 John Stuart Mill (1806—1873) was also an English philosopher.
 Bentham has propounded Utilitarianism in his An Introduction to the Principles of
Morals and Legislation.
 Utilitarianism is known as the greatest happiness principle.
 Utilitarianism is a kind of consequentialism according to which consequence is the
most fundamental moral value than the moral agent and moral action.

 According to Bentham, pain and pleasure are natural to humans.

 Pain, unhappiness, suffering, misery are synonyms.
 Similarly, pleasure, happiness, well-being are synonyms.
 Pain and pleasure serve the foundation of “what we ought to do”.
 Humans are subject to pain and pleasure, so morality is directly related to them.
 Happiness or pleasure is the only thing that is good.
 Pain or displeasure is the only thing that is bad.
 Bentham advocates the principle of utility.

 By utility is meant that property in any object, whereby it tends to produce pleasure or
to prevent the happening of pain.
 Utility is understood first in terms of happiness and then as the balance of pleasure
over pain.
 Utilitarianism is to maximize pleasure at the individual level or at the group level and
to minimize pain at all levels.
 Bentham’s Utilitarianism is called Act Utilitarianism.
 That action is right which maximizes the balance of pleasure over pain.
 That action is wrong which does not maximize the balance of pleasure over pain.

 The greatest amount of pleasure or happiness of the greatest number of people.

 If many people are involved, then the greatest happiness for the greatest number is
followed.
 If only one person is involved, then this theory approves of whatever maximizes the
balance of pleasure over pain for that individual.
 How to measure pleasure and pain?
 According to Bentham, individual pleasures and pain can be measured:
 (1) intensity (how strong), (2) duration (how long), (3) certainty or uncertainty (how
likely to occur), (4) proximity (how soon), (5) fecundity (more pleasure), (6) purity
(pain).

 Bentham’s utilitarianism is an attack on religious morality which is against earthly

pleasure according to him.
 According to Bentham, asceticism is utilitarian view because its aim is heaven
through painful practices.
 Bentham doesn’t talk about the quality of happiness, but J.S. Mill does.
 Morality needs everyone to be treated as an equal.
 How is equal treatment possible if morality is greatest happiness principle?
 How to align individual action with the general greatest happiness principle?
 Rule Utilitarianism is built upon Act Utilitarianism.

 Certain rules are made in order to achieve the balance of pleasure over pain, and
following those rules is moral practice.
 What are the objections to utilitarianism?
 The narrowness objection: the utilitarian theory of good is too narrow because
happiness is only one type of good.
 The agency objection: that what matters is not just subjective feelings of pleasure
and pain we have, but also how we act.
 The evil pleasures objection: that not all pleasures are good.
 The quality objection: in addition to the quantity of pleasure, quality matters too.

 The irrelevance objection: happiness is not a good at all. It is a possible objection.

 In utilitarianism, each and every life is not valued, but only majority’s concerns are
addressed at the cost of minority.
 Utilitarianism is consequentialist, can consequences be predicted?
 Do we have any control on consequence once its cause is already committed?
 On the other hand, should we ignore the consequence while doing action?
 Does utilitarianism advocate to take pleasure in the misfortune of others?
  If everyone pursues his/her own happiness, there would be chaos because wills are
likely to conflict.

 Utilitarianism is strongly against social discrimination.

 Happiness of one section of society and individual liberty advance the collective
happiness.
 Animals are equally worthy of moral consideration because they feel pain and
pleasure.
 Utilitarian reasoning:
 An action is right if it produces the greatest happiness for the greatest number.
 Saving a life is right because it produces the greatest happiness for the greatest
number.
 Whatever produces the greatest happiness for the greatest number is morally right.
Saving a life produces the greatest happiness for the greatest number. Therefore,
saving a life is morally right.

Part 21–25th April

Immanuel Kant: An Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment?

 The essay was written in 1784.

 “Enlightenment is mankind’s exit from its self-incurred immaturity.”
 “Immaturity is the inability to make use of one’s own understanding without the
guidance of another.”
 “Self-incurred is this inability if its cause lies not in the lack of understanding but
rather in the lack of the resolution and the courage to use it without the guidance of
another.”
 “Have the courage to use your own understanding! is thus the motto of
enlightenment.”

o “Laziness and cowardice are the reasons why such a great part
of mankind, long after nature has set them free from the guidance of
others, still gladly remain immature for life and why it is so easy for others
to set themselves up as guardians.”
o “It is so easy to be immature.”
o “If I have a book that has understanding for me, a pastor who has a
conscience for me, a doctor who judges my diet for me, and so forth,
surely I do not need to trouble myself.”
o “I have no need to think, if only I can pay; others will take over the tedious
business for me.”
o “After they [guardians] have first made their domestic animals stupid and
carefully prevented these placid creatures from daring to take even one
step out of the leading strings of the cart to which they are tethered, they
show them the danger that threatens them if they attempt to proceed on
their own.”
o “Now this danger is not so great, for by falling a few times they would
indeed finally learn to walk; but an example of this sort makes them timid
and usually frightens them away from all further attempts.”
o “It is thus difficult for any individual man to work himself out of an
immaturity that has become almost natural to him.”
o “He has become fond of it and, for the present, is truly incapable of
making use of his own reason, because he has never been permitted to
make the attempt.”
o “Hence there are only a few who have managed to free themselves from
immaturity through the exercise of their own minds, and yet proceed
confidently.”
o “For there will always be found some who think for themselves, even
among the established guardians of the masses, and who, after they
themselves have thrown off the yoke of immaturity, will spread among the
herd the spirit of rational assessment of individual worth and the vocation
of each man to think for himself.”
o “Therefore a public can achieve enlightenment only gradually.”
o “A revolution may perhaps bring about the fall of an autocratic despotism
and of an avaricious or overbearing oppression, but it can never bring
about the true reform of a way of thinking.”
o “For this enlightenment, however, nothing more is required
than freedom and indeed the most harmless form of all the things that
may be called freedom: namely, the freedom to make a public use of
one’s reason in all matters.”
o “But I hear from all sides the cry: don’t argue! The officer says: “Don’t
argue, but rather march!” The tax collector says: “Don’t argue, but rather
pay!” The clergyman says: “Don’t argue, but rather believe!”
o “Only one ruler in the world says: “Argue, as much as you want and
about whatever you want, but obey! Here freedom is restricted
everywhere.”
o “The public use of reason must at all times be free, and it alone can bring
about enlightenment among men; the private use of reason, however,
may often be very narrowly restricted without the progress of
enlightenment being particularly hindered.”
o “I understand, however, under the public use of his own reason, that use
which anyone makes of it as a scholar before the entire public of
the reading world.”
o “The private use I designate as that use which one makes of his reason
in a certain civil post or office which is entrusted to him.”
o “Here one is certainly not allowed to argue; rather, one must obey.”
o “So it would be very destructive, if an officer on duty should argue aloud
about the suitability or the utility of a command given to him by his
superior; he must obey.”
o “But he cannot fairly be forbidden as a scholar to make remarks on
failings in the military service and to lay them before the public for
judgment.”
o “The citizen cannot refuse to pay the taxes imposed on him; even an
impudent complaint against such levies, when they should be paid by
him, is punished as an outrage.”
o “If it is asked “Do we now live in an enlightened age?” the answer is “No,
but we do live in an age of enlightenment.”
o “As matters now stand, much is still lacking for men to be completely
able—or even to be placed in a situation where they would be able—to
use their own reason confidently and properly in religious matters without
the guidance of another.”
o “Yet we have clear indications that the field is now being opened for them
to work freely toward this, and the obstacles to general enlightenment or
to the exit out of their self-incurred immaturity become ever fewer.”
o “I have placed the main point of enlightenment—mankind’s exit from its
self-imposed immaturity—primarily on religious matters since our rulers
have no interest in playing the role of guardian to their subjects with
regard to the arts and sciences and because this type of immaturity is the
most harmful as well as the most dishonorable.”
o “Argue, as much as you want and about whatever you want, only obey!”
o A Reflection on Enlightenment or Modernism
o Rationality
o Universality
o Homogeneity
o Given truth