Question #1 Question #2 Question #3 Question #4 Question #5

Question #1. Briefly explain the major differences among three major types of ethical theories: Deontological, Consequentialist, and Virtue Ethics. Briefly explain the respect in which each type of theory highlights a separate feature of our common notion of ethics or morality.

Hadley Worcester

Deontological ethical theory emphasizes the notion of duty and principle. It is wrong to lie, kill, etc., are examples. Certain types of actions are intrinsically wrong simply because of the kind of actions they are. Although consequences matter, good consequences may not be used to justify bad actions.

Consequentialist ethical theory stresses the contribution of the overall behavior to the society or community it effects. Certain types of actions tend to lead toward certain good consequences. Those actions are good which are in the best interest of society. Behavior should be evaluated primarily on the basis of effect on society.

Virtue ethics emphasizes the development of character; not "What should I do?" but "How should I be?" in situations. Parents often emphasize good character in their children's upbringing as life situations are often so unique, principles and social good may be too abstract to be helpful.

Khalil S. Khan

Deontological, consequentialist, and virtue ethics each, to some extent, contribute to our common notion of ethics. Deontological ethics is a duty-based ethics, in which certain rules are perpetually adhered to without deviation. An example of such ethics is Kant's categorical imperative to refrain from lying, that is, to be honest. As we understand ethics to be about doing the "right thing", following a rule, always, without regard for consequences, deontology satisfies this notion. Consequentialist ethics, as its name implies, value the consequence of actions. Utilitarianism is a type of consequentialist ethics and involves seeking the greatest good for the greatest number. Insofar as we conceive of ethical behavior being behavior in pursuit of certain ends, namely good, pleasing ones, consequentialist ethics comports with our basic notions. Virtue ethics involves the cultivation of good character. In Aristotle's formulation this involves the habituation of a person to behaving rationally, which really means with moderation, in practical situations. A good character means that one is more likely to behave correctly, "virtuously" when confronted with different situations. A good character seems intrinsic to our ethical ideals, as we recognize the propensity to good or bad based on habit.

Question #2. Explain Aristotle's idea of telos. Briefly explain the role of this idea in Aristotle's idea of the best way for a human to live.

Robin Miranda

Aristotle's notion of telos is closely linked to his metaphysical understanding of the four causes of any entity. Specifically, each existent can be understood as having a material cause, an efficient cause. I can't remember the third [formal] one, but the fourth, and most critical, is the final cause. The final cause of any item can be related to its function--for example, the final cause of a hammer is its ability to pound nails, so a good hammer can be judged according to how well it lives up to its function of pounding a nail into the wall. A good human being, then, also has a final cause. Artistotle determines this to be related to the essence of humans, which is, for Artistotle, rationality. The exercise of true human excellence then, is the degree to which we persue and cultivate our pre-established telos--the use of reason. Not all human subjects can achieve intellectual virtue, however. Slaves and women were less developed in their natures and thus could not achieve a high level of intellectual virtue. However, everyone could cultivate moral virtues, which was the result of social cultivation.

Question #3. Briefly explain Epicurus' Idea of the best possible life, as well as the best way to live in order to achieve this life. Be sure to distinguish Epicurus' ideas from the idea commonly associated with the term "Epicure."

Pablo Garcia

For Epicurus the Idea of the best possible life was one of moderation and balance and harmony accomplished through simplicity, honesty to oneself, frugality and control of the senses. Pleasure was the highest good, but in a moderate way; not promoting execesses either in your mind and in your body. A temporate attitude towards life in your body as well as in your mind was the best possible life for Epicurus, which was dedicated to enjoying the pleasure of life moderately and also a philosophical or contemplative way of thinking. The best way to live was separated from the demands of society; living a frugal life, with not many desires or wants, except for what is necessary to have pleasure. The idea commonly associated with "Epicure" is an wrong misunderstanding of Epicurus real meaning at saying you should enjoy your life, through having pleasures and avoiding pain, but in a moderate way, not in a excessive or without control attitude towards pleasure. People often have misunderstood the real message of Epicurus, which in essence is very monastic.

Khalil S. Khan

"Epicaure" usually refers to someone with especially refined tastes with regard to food and drink. In actuality, though Epicurus identified the good with pleasure, his conception of pleasure involved a simplicity in no way like the conventional idea to surrounds him. Epicurus believed positive pleasures merely satisfied desires that were in themselves painful. He argued that only desires whose lack of satisfaction cause pain ought to be dealt with, i.e., life, health, intellect. Friendship, for Epicurus is a definite good, and companionship without worry or envy is an ideal to be sought. Freedom meant that one has free will, was not subject to either the good or an awful "necessity." Able to choose, we should not take on unecessary desires but satify those we must and find pleasure in those simple things whose duration is longest and sweetest.

Question #4. Explain the difference between what is in our power, and what is not in our power, according to Epictetus, giving examples. Explain why our happiness depends upon what is in our power, illustrating with a specific example.

Jessica Thompson

According to Epictetus our happiness depends on recognizing that which is in our power and that which is not, and making adjustments to the former while being indifferent towards the latter. The realm of what is in our power includes our attitudes and feelings, while that which is outside of our power includes events, how other people judge us, nature, and other such external occurrences. By constantly appraising our inner selves and making adaptations to our attitudes and feelings concerning the outer world, we can maintain a more constant state of happiness and avoid inner turmoils. For example, if one finds himself caught in a horrible traffic jam and late for work, Epictetus would say that one should adjust his attitude to accommodate this event which is out of his control, rather than allow himself to be angered and distressed over it.

Judith Miller

Epictetus explains that happiness can be determined by self control. Mastering our desires. If we understand those things that are in our control and those things that are not; we can achieve happiness. We can control our inner life: our expectations, attitude, how we look at the world. If we put ourselves in the correct state of mind, we will be able to appreciate everything life throws our way. For example, if I loose my keys, I can either accept that "well, I lost my keys lets move on" or I can get a double wammy by thinking "Bummer, I lost my keys and I am so irrate about it!" well--I've lost two times. I let it get the best of me by getting so upset about it. Instead I could just say "well, that's life" and move on! Accept what I cannot control and put myself in the right state of mind for those things I can!

Question #5. Explain Aquinas' distinction between eternal law and natural law. Mention some apparent ethical directives which might seem to follow from the idea of natural law, explaining why these directives would seem to follow. Explain difficulties with the idea that these actually are directives following from the natural law.

Nancy Davis

Eternal law is the law of God that we can know only imperfectly. Natural law can be learned from observing the natural inclinations of man and animals in the world around us. Some ethical difficulties which might seem to follow from the idea of natural law would include the aggressive nature found in many males. Does this mean that it is ethical to aggress? Or again in the animal kingdom and in fact, also in the human realm at certain historical times the most powerful male mates with the most and has the most offspring. Would this then be a foundation for an ethical directive since it seems to flow from natural law?