The hisÂtoÂry of moral phiÂlosÂoÂphy in the West hinges prinÂciÂpalÂly on a handÂful of quesÂtions: Is there a God of some sort? An afterÂlife? Free will? And, perÂhaps most pressÂingÂly for humanÂists, what exactÂly is the nature of our obligÂaÂtions to othÂers? The latÂter quesÂtion has long occuÂpied philosoÂphers like Immanuel Kant, whose extreme formulation—the “catÂeÂgorÂiÂcal imperative”—flatly rules out makÂing ethÂiÂcal deciÂsions depenÂdent upon parÂticÂuÂlar sitÂuÂaÂtions. Kant’s famous examÂple, one that genÂerÂalÂly gets repeatÂed with a nod to GodÂwin, involves an axe murÂderÂer showÂing up at your door and askÂing for the whereÂabouts of a visÂitÂing friend. In Kant’s estiÂmaÂtion, telling a lie in this case jusÂtiÂfies telling a lie at any time, for any reaÂson. ThereÂfore, it is unethÂiÂcal.
In the video at the top of the post, HarÂry ShearÂer narÂrates a script about Kant’s maxÂim writÂten by philosoÂpher Nigel WarÂburÂton, with whimÂsiÂcal illusÂtraÂtions proÂvidÂed by CogÂniÂtive. Part of the BBC and Open University’s “A HisÂtoÂry of Ideas” series, the video—one of four dealÂing with moral philosophy—also explains how Kant’s approach to ethics difÂfers from those of utilÂiÂtarÂiÂanÂism.
In the video above, ShearÂer describes that most utilÂiÂtarÂiÂan of thought experÂiÂments, the “TrolÂley ProbÂlem.” As described by philosoÂpher PhilipÂpa Foot, this sceÂnario imagÂines havÂing to sacÂriÂfice the life of one for those of many. But there is a twist—the secÂond verÂsion, which involves the added crime of physÂiÂcalÂly murÂderÂing one perÂson, up close and perÂsonÂal, to save sevÂerÂal. An analÂoÂgous but conÂverse theÂoÂry is that of PrinceÂton philosoÂpher Peter Singer (below) who proÂposÂes that our obligÂaÂtions to peoÂple in perÂil right in front of us equal our obligÂaÂtions to those on the othÂer side of the world.
FinalÂly, the last video surÂveys one of the thorniÂest issues in moral philoÂsophÂiÂcal history—the “is/ought” divide, as probÂlemÂatÂic as the ancient EuthyÂphro dilemÂma. How, asked David Hume, are we to deduce moral prinÂciÂples from facts about the world that have no moral dimenÂsion? ParÂticÂuÂlarÂly when those facts are nevÂer conÂcluÂsive, are subÂject to reviÂsion, and when new ones get uncovÂered all the time? The quesÂtion introÂduces a seemÂingÂly unbridgeÂable chasm between facts and valÂues. Moral judgÂments foundÂed on what is or isn’t “natÂurÂal” flounÂder before our terÂror of much of what nature does, and the very parÂtial and falÂliÂble nature of our knowlÂedge of it.
The probÂlem is as starÂtling as Hume’s criÂtique of causalÂiÂty, and in part caused Kant to remark that Hume had awakÂened him from a “dogÂmatÂic slumÂber.” What may strike viewÂers of the series is just how abstract these quesÂtions and examÂples are—how divorced from the messiÂness of real world polÂiÂtics, with the excepÂtion, perÂhaps, of Peter Singer. It may be instrucÂtive that politÂiÂcal phiÂlosÂoÂphy forms a sepÂaÂrate branch in the West. While these probÂlems are cerÂtainÂly difÂfiÂcult enough to trouÂble the sleep of just about any thoughtÂful perÂson, in our day-to-day lives, our deciÂsion makÂing process seems to be much messier, and much more sitÂuÂaÂtionÂal, than we’re probÂaÂbly ever aware of.
RelatÂed ConÂtent:
Free Online PhiÂlosÂoÂphy CoursÂes
What Makes Us Human?: ChomÂsky, Locke & Marx IntroÂduced by New AniÂmatÂed Videos from the BBC
Josh Jones is a writer and musiÂcian based in Durham, NC. FolÂlow him at @jdmagness
Thos aniÂmaÂtions are realÂly nice to make us think a litÂtle about our lives.
Those*
After seeÂing these overÂly simÂplisÂtic examÂples I can’t have much faith in phiÂlosÂoÂphy. PeoÂple are not ratioÂnal and they don’t have free will so all the talk about choice is wastÂed effort.
You give up on an entire purÂsuit of study because you weren’t thorÂoughÂly eduÂcatÂed by a minute and a half overview sumÂmaÂry of a piece of a philoÂsophÂiÂcal debate?
Sounds PERFECTLY ratioÂnal ;-)
Nice videos to start a disÂcusÂsion. As to the first video I would also sugÂgest; don’t coopÂerÂate with evil, espeÂcialÂly if coopÂerÂatÂing will cause anothÂer harm. BetÂter to not say anyÂthing, shut the door and warn your friend, get a gun and defend yourÂself and your friend. Be willÂing to put yourÂself in harm’s way to save a friend. You noticed, I didn’t lie.
SecÂond video; Do the best you can. Take posÂiÂtive action to save as many as posÂsiÂble. Enlist help from othÂers nearÂby. Switch the tracks, save the 5 and warn the one. Throw someÂthing on the tracks to slow the train down but not your friend. That would be murÂder since there is no hope of surÂvival as there would be should you switch the tracks and warn the one. Be willÂing to get in harms way to save anothÂer.
Third video; we as indiÂvidÂuÂals can’t save the whole world but each perÂson can do their part to improve the world one life at a time. There is more benÂeÂfit to perÂsonÂal givÂing than imperÂsonÂal givÂing such as govÂernÂment proÂgrams fundÂed through taxÂes. We should perÂsonÂalÂly seek to be prosÂperÂous so we can give more to relieve pain and sufÂferÂing as well as teach othÂers to become prosÂperÂous. TeachÂing everyÂone a phiÂlosÂoÂphy of prosÂperÂiÂty and givÂing will do more to relieve pain and sufÂferÂing in the world vs. the typÂiÂcal govÂernÂment proÂgram which tends to creÂate anothÂer class of depenÂdent poor who can’t live withÂout a handÂout. Of course, if you are the poor then any help is betÂter than none. I’m just sayÂing, I believe there is a betÂter way.
The “is/ought” video should be simÂple for the atheÂist as well as the God believÂing. From either perÂspecÂtive, if we draw our valÂues from what is or what was, we will fail to propÂerÂly conÂsidÂer what could or should be. By evalÂuÂatÂing our curÂrent state, reviewÂing the pros and cons, we can then form in our minds a betÂter state to become our tarÂget for change. ReachÂing out and conÂnectÂing with othÂers is a creÂative act that will cause us to prosÂper as indiÂvidÂuÂals and/or a race of beings. If you don’t set a tarÂget for a betÂter life or world, you will live an aimÂless life devoid of real meanÂing. You will end up negÂaÂtiveÂly impactÂing progress much like adding 1,000 lbs. of rock to a truck load of grain needÂlessÂly slows the truck down and hurts the marÂkets abilÂiÂty to meet society’s needs. And if you’re not prosÂperÂous enough to save a tribe someÂwhere, try pickÂing a charÂiÂty with a clear purÂpose you can believe in and give $5. In many counÂtries, $5 can save a life. Now wouldn’t that make your day?
It seems as If everyÂbody is conÂcerned about savÂing othÂer peoÂple, but as always they forÂgetÂting a very imporÂtant fact: human specie are the most destrucÂtive beings over the earth, thereÂfore if you save a human life, Are you realÂly makÂing good?
This helps to think more deeply about life and deciÂsions we make
It helps to think more easÂiÂly and deeply about deciÂsions awe make apart from it it helps to make easy deciÂsions
It helps to think more easÂiÂly and deeply about deciÂsions awe make apart from it it helps to make easy deciÂsions there is a lot oh difÂferÂences between ethÂiÂcal and moral deciÂsions ethÂiÂcal deciÂsions are relatÂed to self satÂisÂfacÂtion and moral deciÂsions also includes thinkÂing of othÂer peoÂple
These aniÂmaÂtions are good, betÂter way to learn and underÂstand the topÂic betÂter. these videos quesÂtionÂing our choicÂes and someÂwhere effectÂing the thinkÂing about the deciÂsions that we are going to make in upcomÂing times.
These aniÂmaÂtions are quite helpÂful in order to learn deep about topÂic even it helps to improve the thinkÂing of a perÂson
These aniÂmaÂtions are good enough to think one’s again in topÂic for betÂter underÂstandÂing and make betÂter deciÂsions . Instead of readÂing this is easy way to learn
I think this is the best way to underÂstand the topÂic and to make deciÂsion which would be betÂter for us.
A valuÂable and pracÂtiÂcal resource for develÂopÂing a deepÂer knowlÂedge of ethÂiÂcal prinÂciÂples is the ethics aniÂmaÂtion narÂratÂed by HarÂry ShearÂer. It gives a fun and insightÂful way to invesÂtiÂgate difÂfiÂcult philoÂsophÂiÂcal conÂcepts conÂcernÂing right and wrong. Enjoy the process of learnÂing, and don’t forÂget to incorÂpoÂrate these revÂeÂlaÂtions into your own ethÂiÂcal conÂsidÂerÂaÂtions and deciÂsion-makÂing.
A valuÂable and pracÂtiÂcal resource for develÂopÂing a deepÂer knowlÂedge of ethÂiÂcal prinÂciÂples is the ethics aniÂmaÂtion narÂratÂed by HarÂry ShearÂer. It gives a fun and insightÂful way to invesÂtiÂgate difÂfiÂcult philoÂsophÂiÂcal conÂcepts conÂcernÂing right and wrong. We have to Enjoy the process of learnÂing, and don’t forÂget to incorÂpoÂrate these revÂeÂlaÂtions into your own ethÂiÂcal conÂsidÂerÂaÂtions and deciÂsion-makÂing.
An indiÂvidÂual can learn a lot about the issue and improve their abilÂiÂty to think effecÂtiveÂly by using these aniÂmaÂtions.