POST #6: Hume, Kant v. Me
Topic: How do you know something is right versus wrong? Write a short one page essay explaining your reasons behind your moral system. Keep in mind that this section of the post is about how you determine right from wrong. Be honest, autobiographical, detailed. Now address for one page how would Hume critique your views? Offer a one page outline of Hume’s ethical theory. And also how would Kant critique your views? Explain his ethical theory. Make sure that the ideas of Kant and Hume are explained.
Hume, Kant, v. Me
Morality is an important issue of all times. To define morality has also been a heated debate since ancient times. My personal views of morality, which in other words is the knowing of something right versus wrong, are explained as below.
I am a Taiwanese American who was infused with Confucius theories since I was little. Confucius is a famous Chinese philosopher who focused on the teaching of ethics. According to his teachings, one should always ask himself of what his heart desires and dislikes. This way the person can prevent himself from making other people experience things in which they might dislike or simply do not desire, by comparing other people’s mentality to his own.
The whole Confucius idea, in which I believe in, is similar to the American word “empathy”. Therefore, I think as long as people have empathy for others, they are doing the right thing ethically, despite the outcome. By caring for others and actually putting themselves in other people’s shoes, people demonstrate the attempt to do good things for others.
I also believe in the theory of the greater good. I think it is sometimes necessary for people to sacrifice themselves in order to fulfill a greater good. President George Washington is a very good example. He resigned his position as a general when he became President of the United States. Moreover, he refused to stay in presidency after his second term.
President Washington gave up his power twice for the good of the people – to prevent dictatorship and preserve democracy. Such action has set the example for later Presidents and helped make the United States stay a true democratic nation.
Moreover, in my opinion, unethical behaviors are those actions that are done to fulfill selfish purposes. This is another side of both the Confucius and the “greater good” theories – selfishness as well as lacking in empathy results in wrong acts. Examples include slavery and gerrymandering.
In comparisons with philosophers that we have studied in this class, my moral systems are quite similar to Saint Thomas Aquinas’. Saint Aquinas “maintains that what is good or evil about an act is what the agent intends and not the consequences the act produces. Note, however, that intent does include consequences foreseeable by the agent” (Great Traditions, 89).
David Hume is recognized as one of the most influential figures in the history of thought. His philosophical writings focus on the discussion of role morality versus sentiment in ethics. Initially, Hume raises the question of whether the source of morality resides on human’s rational nature or passional nature or both. Later on he elaborates on the discussion using his personal observations.
“According to Hume, however, there can be no compromise about which of the two, reason or sentiment, is the ultimate source of morality” (Great Traditions, 136). In Hume’s arguments, reason is incapable of being the source of morality; however, it plays an essential role in rendering moral decisions.
After recording of his observations and extensive analysis of these recordings, Hume decided that an individual’s morality is based on sentiments that have their origin in concern for others. According to Hume, “such sentiments are universally shared, because they are not affected by the relativism of any personal considerations” (Great Traditions, 141-142).
Interpreting the excerpt, I find the phrase “personal considerations” that Hume addresses to be equivalent to “selfishness” in my mini-essay on moral systems. If my reasoning is correct, Hume thinks people with good morality do things based on interests of other people and not themselves. In short, unselfishness constitutes good morality.
It seems that my moral principles are based on the same grounds as Hume’s moral principles. Hume’s theories combined the concepts of the “greater good” and “empathy” in which I employ in my moral systems. Therefore, I do not expect to receive any harsh criticism if Hume is to criticize my ideas today.
However, my explanation of my ideas is very not very detailed and does not offer observations as well as step-by-step establishment of my ideas. Hume elaborated on how he comes to his conclusion in his writings, which make his statements more plausible. I expect that Hume may doubt the credibility of my theories because they seem to come from nowhere.
Another aspect of ethics and morality that Hume discusses are the two great social virtues, benevolence and justice. “He emphasizes and illustrates that it is manifest not only that virtues are mental qualities characterized as useful or agreeable to the person possessing them, or to others, but also that any mental quality so characterized is a virtue” (Great Traditions, 143).
Benevolence, as Hume observed, is an universally esteemed quality. Therefore both benevolence and justice contribute to social virtues greatly. I did not discuss any of these in my short article. So it is possible that Hume find my ideas narrow and incomprehensive.
Another important philosopher during the 1700’s, who is often compared with David Hume, is philosopher Immanuel Kant. The conclusions that Immanuel Kant has made about morality and ethics are somewhat similar to the conclusions that David Hume made. However, how these two philosophers reach their own conclusion is quite different.
Immanuel Kant is a great philosopher whose philosophies focus on the importance of duty and reason. He lived by routine, never married, and never ventured more than forty miles from the city of his birth and death. Kant has a very regimented attitude toward life. He is a scientific person who establishes his valid moral principle on an a priori foundation.
As mentioned above, Kant values duty and reason and is very critical. He seeks a “pure” moral philosophy instead of just any moral philosophy. As a preliminary to his construction of the pure moral philosophy, “Kant makes a critical analysis of the commonly accepted ‘good’ things, such as health, wealth, and friendship” (Great Traditions, 147).
Kant argues that things can only be good if they are conjoined with a good will, which is something that is unqualifiedly good. “To Kant, good will represents the effort of rational beings to do what they ought to do, rather than to act from inclination or self-interest” (Great Traditions, 147)
In my opinion, Kant’s moral systems and mine are also very similar. Therefore, I do not expect much criticism coming from Kant. However, while I only focus on reasons and moralities, Kant is very serious about the emphasis of human duties. Kant may criticize me for not addressing the issue of duties when these are conditions that are tightly knit with other aspects of ethics.
David Hume and Immanuel Kant, two of the greatest philosophers of the 1700’s, provided valuable information on their findings of moral principles in both of their writings. Their methods for finding true meaning of morality are quite different; however, they reached similar conclusions on certain aspects. I am very happy that without reading their works beforehand, my moral systems seem to concord with these two great thinkers’.
Hume, Kant, v. Me
Morality is an important issue of all times. To define morality has also been a heated debate since ancient times. My personal views of morality, which in other words is the knowing of something right versus wrong, are explained as below.
I am a Taiwanese American who was infused with Confucius theories since I was little. Confucius is a famous Chinese philosopher who focused on the teaching of ethics. According to his teachings, one should always ask himself of what his heart desires and dislikes. This way the person can prevent himself from making other people experience things in which they might dislike or simply do not desire, by comparing other people’s mentality to his own.
The whole Confucius idea, in which I believe in, is similar to the American word “empathy”. Therefore, I think as long as people have empathy for others, they are doing the right thing ethically, despite the outcome. By caring for others and actually putting themselves in other people’s shoes, people demonstrate the attempt to do good things for others.
I also believe in the theory of the greater good. I think it is sometimes necessary for people to sacrifice themselves in order to fulfill a greater good. President George Washington is a very good example. He resigned his position as a general when he became President of the United States. Moreover, he refused to stay in presidency after his second term.
President Washington gave up his power twice for the good of the people – to prevent dictatorship and preserve democracy. Such action has set the example for later Presidents and helped make the United States stay a true democratic nation.
Moreover, in my opinion, unethical behaviors are those actions that are done to fulfill selfish purposes. This is another side of both the Confucius and the “greater good” theories – selfishness as well as lacking in empathy results in wrong acts. Examples include slavery and gerrymandering.
In comparisons with philosophers that we have studied in this class, my moral systems are quite similar to Saint Thomas Aquinas’. Saint Aquinas “maintains that what is good or evil about an act is what the agent intends and not the consequences the act produces. Note, however, that intent does include consequences foreseeable by the agent” (Great Traditions, 89).
David Hume is recognized as one of the most influential figures in the history of thought. His philosophical writings focus on the discussion of role morality versus sentiment in ethics. Initially, Hume raises the question of whether the source of morality resides on human’s rational nature or passional nature or both. Later on he elaborates on the discussion using his personal observations.
“According to Hume, however, there can be no compromise about which of the two, reason or sentiment, is the ultimate source of morality” (Great Traditions, 136). In Hume’s arguments, reason is incapable of being the source of morality; however, it plays an essential role in rendering moral decisions.
After recording of his observations and extensive analysis of these recordings, Hume decided that an individual’s morality is based on sentiments that have their origin in concern for others. According to Hume, “such sentiments are universally shared, because they are not affected by the relativism of any personal considerations” (Great Traditions, 141-142).
Interpreting the excerpt, I find the phrase “personal considerations” that Hume addresses to be equivalent to “selfishness” in my mini-essay on moral systems. If my reasoning is correct, Hume thinks people with good morality do things based on interests of other people and not themselves. In short, unselfishness constitutes good morality.
It seems that my moral principles are based on the same grounds as Hume’s moral principles. Hume’s theories combined the concepts of the “greater good” and “empathy” in which I employ in my moral systems. Therefore, I do not expect to receive any harsh criticism if Hume is to criticize my ideas today.
However, my explanation of my ideas is very not very detailed and does not offer observations as well as step-by-step establishment of my ideas. Hume elaborated on how he comes to his conclusion in his writings, which make his statements more plausible. I expect that Hume may doubt the credibility of my theories because they seem to come from nowhere.
Another aspect of ethics and morality that Hume discusses are the two great social virtues, benevolence and justice. “He emphasizes and illustrates that it is manifest not only that virtues are mental qualities characterized as useful or agreeable to the person possessing them, or to others, but also that any mental quality so characterized is a virtue” (Great Traditions, 143).
Benevolence, as Hume observed, is an universally esteemed quality. Therefore both benevolence and justice contribute to social virtues greatly. I did not discuss any of these in my short article. So it is possible that Hume find my ideas narrow and incomprehensive.
Another important philosopher during the 1700’s, who is often compared with David Hume, is philosopher Immanuel Kant. The conclusions that Immanuel Kant has made about morality and ethics are somewhat similar to the conclusions that David Hume made. However, how these two philosophers reach their own conclusion is quite different.
Immanuel Kant is a great philosopher whose philosophies focus on the importance of duty and reason. He lived by routine, never married, and never ventured more than forty miles from the city of his birth and death. Kant has a very regimented attitude toward life. He is a scientific person who establishes his valid moral principle on an a priori foundation.
As mentioned above, Kant values duty and reason and is very critical. He seeks a “pure” moral philosophy instead of just any moral philosophy. As a preliminary to his construction of the pure moral philosophy, “Kant makes a critical analysis of the commonly accepted ‘good’ things, such as health, wealth, and friendship” (Great Traditions, 147).
Kant argues that things can only be good if they are conjoined with a good will, which is something that is unqualifiedly good. “To Kant, good will represents the effort of rational beings to do what they ought to do, rather than to act from inclination or self-interest” (Great Traditions, 147)
In my opinion, Kant’s moral systems and mine are also very similar. Therefore, I do not expect much criticism coming from Kant. However, while I only focus on reasons and moralities, Kant is very serious about the emphasis of human duties. Kant may criticize me for not addressing the issue of duties when these are conditions that are tightly knit with other aspects of ethics.
David Hume and Immanuel Kant, two of the greatest philosophers of the 1700’s, provided valuable information on their findings of moral principles in both of their writings. Their methods for finding true meaning of morality are quite different; however, they reached similar conclusions on certain aspects. I am very happy that without reading their works beforehand, my moral systems seem to concord with these two great thinkers’.
posted by Mavis Chao at 11:46 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home