Internalist Argument Analysis

In order to grasp the philosophy of luck in our existence we must analyze the philosophy of Thomas Nagle’s article, “Moral Luck”. Nagle dispute the Kantianism ideology in which states that we must submit our actions to certain universal moral laws, such as "do not kill". At the same time is important to analyze the concept that they are other factors to take in consideration. This philosophy can be applied in a specific case such as the judicial system or as an opportunity to analyze our behaviors. At the end it can be concluded that the major issue with the analysis of Moral Luck is the ethical aspect.

A useful definition of egocentric is in the Merriam-Webster dictionary, which defines it as “concerned with the individual rather than society.” In the context of this argument, an egocentric view of morality would align with Mavrodes’ idea that it would be irrational for a person to have a moral obligation that would cause him a net loss of Russellian benefits. Next, the concept of morality in this argument has already been addressed by Mavrodes: once all things have been considered, “morality ‘includes [...] judgements of the form ‘N ought to do (or to avoid doing) ________’” (216). Finally, Merriam-Webster’s law dictionary’s definition of rationality defines being rational as “relating to, based on, or guided by reason, principle, fairness, logic... or a consideration of fact.” In other words, a person acting rationally is doing so based on reason, logic, and

Unlike utilitarianism, deontology requires that you set certain boundaries to one 's actions. Fried describes that the deontological perception involves taking into account how to achieve its goals because the act has a moral significance. Unethical acts like lying, slavery, denying, and harmless innocence can not be justified, although it could lead to a lot of good in some cases. For example, a follower of deontology would not argue that a person is happy if this happiness was caused by the suffering of an innocent person. Utilitarism, on the other hand, believes it is permissible to inflict an innocent person harm if this causes more happiness as a consequence of the action.

Hume takes the belief of what would be considered moral sense theorists where we gain awareness of moral evil and good by experiencing the uneasiness of disapproval and the pleasure of approval when we think of a character trait or action from an unbiased point of view. Hume goes against what would be considered a rationalists point of view in regard to that although reason is the foundation to discover anything that is a concrete situation, or general social impact, reason alone is insufficient in its ability to yield a judgment that would be considered

There are various forms of moral realism that maintain different things, all agreeing and disagreeing upon different things. However, one generally agreed feature is that moral claims assert facts, if these facts are true, then the moral claim is also true, in other words there are mind-independent facts about right and wrong. In light of brevity, this is the feature I will be referring to when speaking of moral realism. Throughout my essay I shall explain the negative implications of Streets argument on Moral realist theory and shall outline why it may be the case that realists are not necessarily committed to accepting the critiques. I aim to reach the conclusion that Streets criticism of moral realism does not stand and so despite the proposed Darwinian Dilemma Moral realism is still plausible, but one would be required to explore various other criticisms to reach a definite conclusion regarding the plausibility of Moral Realism.

How do I Make Moral choices, in a World of Moral Ambiguity? A desire for meaning would also include obtaining some kind of “identity,” or individualism. Yet, society or someone will try to force their “ideal” moral system onto everyone else. “Thinking may be “good for nothing” in the world, but in the mind it is good for guidance—not legislation, but guidance” (Bruehl 193).

Consequentialism is based on two principles: ¥ Whether an act is right or wrong depends only on the results of that act ¥ The more good consequences an act produces, the better or more right that act It gives us this guidance when faced with a moral dilemma: ¥ A person should choose the action that maximizes good consequences And it gives this general guidance on how to live: People should live so as to maximize good consequences ¥ for example, according to rule consequentialism we consider lying to be wrong because we know that in general lying produces bad consequences.

In criticizing the utilitarian behaviorist framework, Murdoch says that moral philosophy should provide not only an ideal of what it means to be good, but also advice on how to move oneself towards that ideal. One way that the ideal of humility can help a person be good is by providing a test for actions. Instead of asking himself the rather difficult question “Is this a good action?” an agent can ask himself “Would a humble person do this?”, and if the answer is “no”, then the action is probably bad. The same test can be applied to persistent behaviors or attitudes.

Deontologist believe, for the most part, “that our moral obligations- whatever they are- are in some sense or to some degree independent of consequences” (LaFollette 9). Basically, if one’s moral obligations were not to cheat, though the best outcome will be achieved, he or she shouldn’t cheat even though they may fail without doing so. The Overall outcome may result in getting caught and being disqualified. In other words, Mr. Armstrong’s decision to cheat broke Kant’s ethical guideline, regardless of his contributions or success thereafter. Morally, cheating is wrong, it’s a deception of one’s self and

As a result, this leads to the conclusion that the standards of good and bad, as well as what is moral or not are not definite, which renders the concept of morality baseless. According to Nietzsche, it is likely that the competition for dominance and power is the best basis for explaining morality, noting that these definitions are changed through human interactions. In his second essay, Nietzsche contrasted what he called "master morality" and "slave morality." Master morality was developed by the strong, healthy, and free, who saw their own happiness as good and named it

153). This passage explains Quinn’s focus on narrowing the Doctrine of Doing & Allowing to incorporate morality, as does Thomson. Both individuals are drawn to the idea of a more detailed or revised version of the traditional Doctrine of Doing & Allowing, yet there does not seem to be a distinct difference between their thoughts. Quinn is mainly concerned with this idea of a “Harmful positive agency,” which is “an agent’s most direct contribution to the harm…an action,” and a “Harmful negative agency,” which is “the most direction contribution in an inaction, a failure to prevent the harm.” (Quinn, pg. 163).

Results: Are Walzer’s Arguments Effective? Whether or not Walzer’s arguments are effective is obviously a subjective question; realists would argue no, but Walzer would say yes. I feel they are effective, because they expose the unusual and faulty logic of the realists as a base and shameful way of justifying the wrongs they choose to engage in.

When it comes to Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, I believe that he has found a common thread in humanity in the fact that humans strive for the moderate in living virtuously. However, I would argue that the thread is varied enough to have no true worth in discerning the aspects of humanity. People have too different moralities and goals. Because Aristotle allows for these “local variations”, as Martha Nussbaum later terms in her defense of Aristotle, he is acknowledging that there cannot be an overarching analysis of humanity.

Dr. Bennet Omalu said, “I wish I never met Mike Webster. CTE has driven me into the politics of science, the politics of the NFL. You can’t go against the NFL. They will squash you.” Dr. Bennet is saying the NFL is to powerful and they’re not helping protect their players.