Deck 24: W.D.Ross
Question
Question
Question
Question
Question
Question
Question
Question
Question
Question
Question
Question
Question
Question
Question
Question
Question
Question
Question
Question
Question
Question
Question
Question
Question
Question
Question
Question
Question
Question
Question
Unlock Deck
Sign up to unlock the cards in this deck!
Unlock Deck
Unlock Deck
1/31
Play
Full screen (f)
Deck 24: W.D.Ross
1
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-Explain in detail the notion of a prima facie duty. How does Ross's prima facie duties differ from utilitarianism? Which do you think is better?
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-Explain in detail the notion of a prima facie duty. How does Ross's prima facie duties differ from utilitarianism? Which do you think is better?
No Answer
2
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-How does Ross think we can come to know what our prima facie duties are? How does he think we can come to know what are our duty is in a particular situation?
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-How does Ross think we can come to know what our prima facie duties are? How does he think we can come to know what are our duty is in a particular situation?
No Answer
3
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-Explain Ross's analogy between his theory of prima facie duties and the laws of nature. In what ways are the two similar? In what ways are they different?
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-Explain Ross's analogy between his theory of prima facie duties and the laws of nature. In what ways are the two similar? In what ways are they different?
No Answer
4
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-Ross claims, "There is therefore much truth in the description of the right act as the fortunate act." What does he mean by this, and why does he think it is true? Do you agree with him?
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-Ross claims, "There is therefore much truth in the description of the right act as the fortunate act." What does he mean by this, and why does he think it is true? Do you agree with him?
Unlock Deck
Unlock for access to all 31 flashcards in this deck.
Unlock Deck
k this deck
5
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-What objections does Ross raise to egoism, hedonistic utilitarianism, and Moore's "ideal utilitarianism"? Do you find these objections compelling?
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-What objections does Ross raise to egoism, hedonistic utilitarianism, and Moore's "ideal utilitarianism"? Do you find these objections compelling?
Unlock Deck
Unlock for access to all 31 flashcards in this deck.
Unlock Deck
k this deck
6
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-What is a prima facie duty, and how do prima facie duties differ from actual duties? What advantages does Ross claim for his ethic of prima facie duties? What difficulties do you think such a view faces?
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-What is a prima facie duty, and how do prima facie duties differ from actual duties? What advantages does Ross claim for his ethic of prima facie duties? What difficulties do you think such a view faces?
Unlock Deck
Unlock for access to all 31 flashcards in this deck.
Unlock Deck
k this deck
7
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-How does Ross think we ought to go about constructing and arguing for a moral theory? Do you find his method plausible? Why or why not?
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-How does Ross think we ought to go about constructing and arguing for a moral theory? Do you find his method plausible? Why or why not?
Unlock Deck
Unlock for access to all 31 flashcards in this deck.
Unlock Deck
k this deck
8
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-According to Ross, the main issue between utilitarianism and its opponents is whether:
A) the principle of utility can be proven.
B) there is any single characteristic which makes acts right.
C) pleasure is good in itself.
D) utilitarianism is compatible with justice.
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-According to Ross, the main issue between utilitarianism and its opponents is whether:
A) the principle of utility can be proven.
B) there is any single characteristic which makes acts right.
C) pleasure is good in itself.
D) utilitarianism is compatible with justice.
Unlock Deck
Unlock for access to all 31 flashcards in this deck.
Unlock Deck
k this deck
9
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-According to Moore's "ideal utilitarianism," the right action is the one that brings about the greatest amount of:
A) pleasure.
B) happiness.
C) good.
D) virtue.
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-According to Moore's "ideal utilitarianism," the right action is the one that brings about the greatest amount of:
A) pleasure.
B) happiness.
C) good.
D) virtue.
Unlock Deck
Unlock for access to all 31 flashcards in this deck.
Unlock Deck
k this deck
10
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-According to Ross, hedonistic utilitarianism is committed to:
A) what produces the maximum good is right
B) pleasure is the only thing good in itself.
C) both a and b.
D) neither a nor b.
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-According to Ross, hedonistic utilitarianism is committed to:
A) what produces the maximum good is right
B) pleasure is the only thing good in itself.
C) both a and b.
D) neither a nor b.
Unlock Deck
Unlock for access to all 31 flashcards in this deck.
Unlock Deck
k this deck
11
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-Which of the following is one of Ross's prima facie duties?
A) Courageousness
B) Temperance
C) Wisdom
D) Gratitude
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-Which of the following is one of Ross's prima facie duties?
A) Courageousness
B) Temperance
C) Wisdom
D) Gratitude
Unlock Deck
Unlock for access to all 31 flashcards in this deck.
Unlock Deck
k this deck
12
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-According to Ross, it is more important that a theory:
A) be true than produce good results.
B) produce good results than be true.
C) fit the facts than be simple.
D) be simple than fit the facts.
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-According to Ross, it is more important that a theory:
A) be true than produce good results.
B) produce good results than be true.
C) fit the facts than be simple.
D) be simple than fit the facts.
Unlock Deck
Unlock for access to all 31 flashcards in this deck.
Unlock Deck
k this deck
13
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-According to Ross, we should construct a moral theory by:
A) constructing logical proofs for moral principles.
B) consulting social conventions.
C) reflecting on what we really think.
D) consulting scripture.
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-According to Ross, we should construct a moral theory by:
A) constructing logical proofs for moral principles.
B) consulting social conventions.
C) reflecting on what we really think.
D) consulting scripture.
Unlock Deck
Unlock for access to all 31 flashcards in this deck.
Unlock Deck
k this deck
14
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-Which of the following does Ross claim is intrinsically good?
A) Virtue
B) Knowledge
C) Pleasure
D) all of the above.
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-Which of the following does Ross claim is intrinsically good?
A) Virtue
B) Knowledge
C) Pleasure
D) all of the above.
Unlock Deck
Unlock for access to all 31 flashcards in this deck.
Unlock Deck
k this deck
15
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-According to Ross, our prima facie duties:
A) can be proven.
B) are self-evident.
C) cannot be known.
D) are not objective.
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-According to Ross, our prima facie duties:
A) can be proven.
B) are self-evident.
C) cannot be known.
D) are not objective.
Unlock Deck
Unlock for access to all 31 flashcards in this deck.
Unlock Deck
k this deck
16
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-According to Ross, our actual duties:
A) can be proven.
B) are self-evident.
C) cannot be known.
D) are not objective.
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-According to Ross, our actual duties:
A) can be proven.
B) are self-evident.
C) cannot be known.
D) are not objective.
Unlock Deck
Unlock for access to all 31 flashcards in this deck.
Unlock Deck
k this deck
17
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-To explain the notion of a prima facie duty, Ross draws an analogy with:
A) natural laws.
B) the laws of a nation.
C) the commands of a dictator.
D) our emotions.
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-To explain the notion of a prima facie duty, Ross draws an analogy with:
A) natural laws.
B) the laws of a nation.
C) the commands of a dictator.
D) our emotions.
Unlock Deck
Unlock for access to all 31 flashcards in this deck.
Unlock Deck
k this deck
18
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-According to Ross, the character of duty is:
A) social.
B) impersonal.
C) personal
D) none of the above.
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-According to Ross, the character of duty is:
A) social.
B) impersonal.
C) personal
D) none of the above.
Unlock Deck
Unlock for access to all 31 flashcards in this deck.
Unlock Deck
k this deck
19
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-Ross claims that we learn of our prima facie duties:
A) by seeing the prima facie rightness of particular acts, and then apprehending general principles.
B) by apprehending general principles, and then inferring the prima facie rightness of particular acts.
C) by proving them philosophically.
D) from the explicit moral instruction we receive as children.
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-Ross claims that we learn of our prima facie duties:
A) by seeing the prima facie rightness of particular acts, and then apprehending general principles.
B) by apprehending general principles, and then inferring the prima facie rightness of particular acts.
C) by proving them philosophically.
D) from the explicit moral instruction we receive as children.
Unlock Deck
Unlock for access to all 31 flashcards in this deck.
Unlock Deck
k this deck
20
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-Ross objects to utilitarianism on the grounds that:
A) happiness is not the only thing that is intrinsically valuable.
B) it does not do justice to the highly personal character of duty.
C) it claims that there is only one duty.
D) all of the above.
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-Ross objects to utilitarianism on the grounds that:
A) happiness is not the only thing that is intrinsically valuable.
B) it does not do justice to the highly personal character of duty.
C) it claims that there is only one duty.
D) all of the above.
Unlock Deck
Unlock for access to all 31 flashcards in this deck.
Unlock Deck
k this deck
21
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-According to Ross, justice is:
A) when all laws are followed.
B) when contracts and promises are adhered to.
C) when the distribution of happiness is in accordance with merit.
D) when the guilty are punished for their crimes.
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-According to Ross, justice is:
A) when all laws are followed.
B) when contracts and promises are adhered to.
C) when the distribution of happiness is in accordance with merit.
D) when the guilty are punished for their crimes.
Unlock Deck
Unlock for access to all 31 flashcards in this deck.
Unlock Deck
k this deck
22
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-According to Ross, all right actions share a single character that is the foundation of their rightness.
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-According to Ross, all right actions share a single character that is the foundation of their rightness.
Unlock Deck
Unlock for access to all 31 flashcards in this deck.
Unlock Deck
k this deck
23
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-In Ross's view, there is only one duty: that of producing as much good as possible.
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-In Ross's view, there is only one duty: that of producing as much good as possible.
Unlock Deck
Unlock for access to all 31 flashcards in this deck.
Unlock Deck
k this deck
24
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-Ross claims that according to ideal utilitarianism, the only morally significant relationship between people is that of being possible beneficiaries of one another's actions.
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-Ross claims that according to ideal utilitarianism, the only morally significant relationship between people is that of being possible beneficiaries of one another's actions.
Unlock Deck
Unlock for access to all 31 flashcards in this deck.
Unlock Deck
k this deck
25
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-As Ross defines the term, a "prima facie duty" is not in fact a duty, but rather something related in a special way to duty.
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-As Ross defines the term, a "prima facie duty" is not in fact a duty, but rather something related in a special way to duty.
Unlock Deck
Unlock for access to all 31 flashcards in this deck.
Unlock Deck
k this deck
26
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-According to Ross, we all have a prima facie duty to improve ourselves.
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-According to Ross, we all have a prima facie duty to improve ourselves.
Unlock Deck
Unlock for access to all 31 flashcards in this deck.
Unlock Deck
k this deck
27
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-Ross claims that calling a duty prima facie indicates that the duty may turn out to be illusory.
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-Ross claims that calling a duty prima facie indicates that the duty may turn out to be illusory.
Unlock Deck
Unlock for access to all 31 flashcards in this deck.
Unlock Deck
k this deck
28
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-In Ross's view, if a proposition is self-evident, it will be evident from the beginning of our lives.
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-In Ross's view, if a proposition is self-evident, it will be evident from the beginning of our lives.
Unlock Deck
Unlock for access to all 31 flashcards in this deck.
Unlock Deck
k this deck
29
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-Ross claims that implied in the act of entering into conversation is the implicit promise not to lie.
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-Ross claims that implied in the act of entering into conversation is the implicit promise not to lie.
Unlock Deck
Unlock for access to all 31 flashcards in this deck.
Unlock Deck
k this deck
30
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-According to Ross, we can never be certain of what we ought to do when duties conflict.
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-According to Ross, we can never be certain of what we ought to do when duties conflict.
Unlock Deck
Unlock for access to all 31 flashcards in this deck.
Unlock Deck
k this deck
31
W. D. Ross: The Right and the Good
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-Ross claims that our judgments about what we actually ought to do in particular circumstances are self-evident.
Ross starts by considering two influential ethical theories: egoism and hedonistic utilitarianism. Against egoism-the view that the right action is whatever will bring about the greatest benefit to oneself-Ross asserts that a large part of morality consists of respecting the rights and interests of others. Against utilitarianism-the theory that an action is right if and only if it creates more net happiness than any alternative action-Ross claims that there are many things besides happiness that are good in themselves. Because G. E. Moore's theory avoids these problems by holding that the right action is the one that produces the greatest amount of good, Ross considers it an improvement over the previous two views. Nonetheless, Ross criticizes Moore's view on the grounds that it claims that there is ultimately only one duty: that of maximizing goodness.
Against this, Ross develops his own moral theory, according to which there are a number of irreducible prima facie duties. A prima facie duty is a characteristic of an act that tends to make the act right in the absence of other considerations. That an act would fulfill a prima facie duty (e.g., the act would fulfill a promise) always counts in favor of performing that action, but this can be outweighed if the act would violate other prima facie duties (e.g., the act would cause great harm). According to Ross, there is no formula for deciding which prima facie duties take precedence over others in any particular situation; we must simply consider the circumstances in which we are acting and come to a considered opinion regarding which prima facie duty takes precedence. Because of this, we can never truly know what our obligations are in any particular situation. On the other hand, Ross claims our prima facie duties are self-evident-we can know them simply by reflecting on their content, much as we are able to recognize that certain mathematical axioms are true.
-Ross claims that our judgments about what we actually ought to do in particular circumstances are self-evident.
Unlock Deck
Unlock for access to all 31 flashcards in this deck.
Unlock Deck
k this deck

