Thomas Paine’s influential essays, titled The Rights of Man and Common Sense, argue that humans are born with natural rights. Paine views human natures as essentially good, but capable of evil. In order to contain this evil there needs to exist an over-arching institution that would provide stability and peace. Paine argued that the government would play this role. However, he viewed the government as a necessary evil.
Thrasymachus believes justice is the good of another-- doing what is of advantage to the more powerful. This is a revisionary definition because this is a perversion of the word justice as it is typically associated with morality by his peers. Justice is not defined by laws the more powerful have written, but is defined by what is advantageous to the more powerful as in the example of the eulogy therefore excluding obedience as Socrates assumes he means. He offers an implicit conception of where everyone must work towards the good of the most powerful. By defining this as justice there is no need for exercising self advancing interests in order to act just.
Introduction In this essay, I will be comparing Deontology to Utilitarianism. I will attempt to substantiate why I am justified in arguing that Deontology is a superior moral theory than Utilitarianism. A Discussion of the Main Elements of Utilitarianism Utilitarianism is a moral theory developed by English philosopher Jeremy Bentham (1947 – 1832) and refined by fellow countryman John Stuart Mill (1806 – 1873).
When discussing human nature, there is a never ending debate over whether man is born with sin or if he develops it over time through interacting with the environment. William Golding, author of Lord of the Flies, was quoted saying, “Man is a fallen being. He is gripped by original sin. His nature is sinful, his state perilous…” (Golding).
11 UTILITARISM TO DEONTOLOGY Sketch the main points in Smart 's version of utilitarianism. Compare with a deontological view of ethics and discuss deontological objections to utilitarianism. Number of words with footnotes: 3169 Utilitarism and deontology are two opposing ethical theories. On the one hand, J. J. C. Smart represents the utilitarian view of ethics, while on the other hand Charles Fried represents the deontological. Both point to fundamental features of their interpretations as well as some criticism of the other party.
The power of good and evil fills humans. How we come about using which is argued upon by past ideologies. On one hand the Puritans, who had lived in the early settlement of the colonies around the 1600s, believed that the human use of good is out of fear of the consequence of their sins and the wrath of God (Lawson “Puritan Background”). The other known as humanism believes the nature of good comes from the wanting of helping fellow man and being a good person; humanism is popular from the days of founding fathers. The unique nature of humans and the way they behave cannot all be explained by just one theory; the way a human behaves is the combinations of all philosophies and sciences that mankind has created.
Also stated in his book was the goal to create peace among the warring states by reinforcing good morals such as education, heaven, and ethics through the use of Mencius and Confucius philosophical ideas of creating a fair government. These ideas of peace helped restore the current government system for law, their judicial systems, as well as the ruling class. Xunzi’s most famous dictum was that “the nature of man is evil; his goodness is only acquired training.” What Xunzi preached was thus essentially a philosophy of culture. “Human nature at birth,” he explained, “consists of instinctual drives, which left to themselves, are selfish, anarchic, and antisocial.”
Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote Self-Reliance during the time period when transcendentalism emerged, thus based his essay off of this ideology. Transcendentalism is known as the philosophy that divine truth is present in all created things and that truth is known through intuition, not through the rational mind. This principle seems to be a reoccurring theme throughout many of Emerson’s essays. In fact, he is known as a transcendentalist philosopher. In Ralph Waldo Emerson’s Self-Reliance, Emerson is convincing his readers that self-reliance is more important than being dependent on others by using metaphors and pathos.
William Golding who was a novelist that believed human is born with the tendency to do evil, Jean-Jacques Rousseau had his own idea. Rousseau once quoted that “society’s negative influence on men centers on its transformation of “amour de soi” into “amour-propre” (The Basics of Philosophy). Saying that the environment changes one person from a positive self-love with human desire for self-preservation, combined with the human power of reason into a kind of artificial pride which forces man to compare himself to others, creating fear and allowing men to take pleasure in the pain or weakness of others (The Basics of Philosophy). Also
Rousseau and Voltaire have differing views on modernity. Rousseau sees arts and sciences as something that corrupts manners. Our conscience detects the difference between good and evil and we transport ourselves to another universe when we read ancient history. Voltaire, on the other hand, sees history only as a source of wars and disasters and it is our reasoning that frees us from wrongdoing. Also, the discovery of the ability to think for ourselves comes very
He took interest in the Islamic religion in which he thought was very barbaric or a genuine humane religion: as well as Hinduism. His interest in different religions, actually inspired famous quotations in his different works for example “All is for the best in the best of all possible worlds” which is from his famous novella Candide. Voltaire wrote Candide as mocking to the idea that God created it all; since he does not believe in the existent of God he mocks the idea. Voltaire as a philosopher took the advantage of the beliefs of other people and since God is perfect, he created an Enlightenment novella that illustrates characters who believe in the “good of all evil”. You could say he created characters that mock his ideas of God.
Moreover, the outcome of the relativism of the faith was the relativism of behavior. When rock solid mores, moral absolutes, give way to relativism, you end up with twentieth-century situation ethics, where morality is dictated by the situation and the subject. Also out of relativism came twentieth-century world-come-of age theology, where the secularity of the world is celebrated. University professors can debate whether relativism is relative, but when wrong becomes right people become confused and disillusioned. 6
Each one has expressed the importance of Aristotle’s view of leadership and opposing the way man has been conditioned to accept knowledge through science and reasoning. Levine and Boaks state that “the broadly Aristotelian account… demonstrates that leadership can and should be conceived of as a master virtue that, correctly understood, serves human flourishing” (2013). Keeping in mind that Aristotle’s Responsibility and the Primary Virtues of Character (Sachs, 2002) and Lewis’ The Abolition of Man (1944), in order to be a leader one must be ethically just, or what you will come to find as moral development. This is the concern of goodness and goodwill for your companions and leading because it is a beautiful, chosen virtue (Ethics, III, 1117a, 10). This courageous leadership translates to Lewis’ preservation of Man, not because you are conditioning man, but because you will make sacrifices in order for man to survive.
The Enlightenment was a time where people were beginning to find out that they could speak out against their oppressive leaders and bring to light many of the wrongdoings happening within the many institutions at the time. Two main philosophes who argued for the Enlightenment and its benefits to society in the 18th century were Immanuel Kant and Voltaire, also known as Francois Marie Arouet. These two prominent thinkers criticized the current social, political, and religious systems in place at the time. While both philosophers argue that the Enlightenment is essential to human growth, they both use different ideas and criticisms to prove their point. Both Kant and Voltaire argued that Enlightenment is important in mankind’s growth as a whole