One of the problems raised against Kant's view is that
An unjust act might promote more utility than a just act
moral truths are absolutes and absolutes cam conflict
there are no actions that are just
we have a duty to be unjust if it promotes happiness
Who wrote, "On Liberty"?
John Hospers
Robert Nozick
Immanuel Kant
John Stuart Mill
Kant's view is a rationalist view, which means that reason tells us which rules will promote the greatest good
"The gap between the rich and the poor is wide" is
descriptive
normative
imperative
none of the above
"the gap between the rich and the poor is unjust" is
How are we to choose which rules are best, according to rule utilitarianism?
Rules should be selected by faith alone
Rules should be selected by reason alone
Rules should be selected by experience alone
According to rule utilitarianism, moral rules are intrinsically valuable
The idea that all moral knowledge comes through experience alone is known as
Libertarianism
Rationalism
Utilitarianism
Empiricism
How are we to choose which rules are best, according to Kant
On a utilitarian view, moral truths may be known with certainty
According to libertarianism, what kinds of laws are justified?
Paternalistic laws
laws that require us to help others
laws that protect us from harm from others
all of the above
the object of On Liberty is to assert one principle. what is that principle
the categorical imperative
the Harm Principle
Gresham's law
the Principle of Utility
according to the principle defended in on liberty
the right act is the one that promotes the greatest good for the greatest number
we are never permitted to interfere with a person's liberty
paternalistic intervention in the lives of mature adults is not permitted
Mill argues that the reason we are free is that we are born with inalienable rights, on of them bing the right to liberty
What is meant by "utility" in On Liberty
Natural rights
Rational duty
Physical pleasure
None of the above
Even if a controversial view is true, if the majority believes it is false, the controversial view should not be allowed because it will make the majority unhappy, according to Mill
If a view is false and offensive to the greatest number, it should not be allowed because of the pain it will produce, according to Mill
Which of the following is true regarding Mill's view on the liberty of action?
We are only free to do those action that promote the greatest good for the greatest number
we are free to do anything at all
we are free only to treat humanity as an end and never as a means only
Does Mill think we should be able to do things that hurt ourselves if they hurt only ourselves?
Yes, because Mill thought we had a natural right to liberty
No, because when persons hurt themselves, even if they hurt only themselves, the amount of pain in the world increases
Yes, because allowing people to choose form themselves is an indispensable element in utility in the largest sense grounded on the permanent interests of man as a progressive being
What is Mill's view of what he calls "experiments of living"
They should be allowed only if they provide the greatest good for the greatest number
Experience has shown that they cause more harm than good
If people want to experiment with new or different lifestyles, they should be allowed to do so, as long as they don't harm others
according to the text and the lecture, justice is about what promotes the most utility
if a person has a negative right to something (a negative right to life, liberty, property, for example), that negative right requires that others provide something to the person with the right
According to Mill, paternalism promotes utility in the largest sense
According to Mill, unless a view is examined fully, frequently, and fearlessly
It will be held as a dead dogma, not as a living truth
it will be held in the manner of a prejudice with little comprehension or feeling of its rational grounds
the meaning of the doctrine itself will be in danger of being lost, or enfeebled, and deprived of its vital effect on the character and conduct
Who wrote, "What Libertarianism is"?
A right is a claim or entitlement to something
If a person has a positive right to something (life, liberty, property, for example) then others have an obligation not to interfere with a person's exercise of that right. They have no obligation to do or provide something for the person, only an obligation not to do something
If the right to life is a positive right, we have an obligation to provide the bare minimum needed to stay alive
If the right to life is negative, we have only the obligation not to kill each other unjustly
If the right to property is a positive right, people are entitled to the property they need
Kant thinks lying is wrong because of the emotional pain it causes, not merely the physical pain
On Kant's view, moral truths may be known with certainty
Kant's view is deontological. That means it is rooted in religion rather than consequences
which of the following is an imperative?
People always act on the maxim they can will as a universal law
treating humanity always as an end is right
be happy!
According to Kant, pleasure is intrinsically valuable
A hypothetical imperative is in the form, "If you want X, then do Y!"
Kant thought moral imperatives are hypothetical imperatives
A will is a good will if and only if it sincerely desires to do the right thing and always acts according to that desire
If a person does the right thing by keeping a promise, that act has no moral worth if it solely out of love for the prewar, on Kant's view
A good will, according to Kant, is the will that chooses according to reason and is not swayed by desire
Kant's view is like rule utilitarianism in that
according to both, moral rules can be know with certainty
according to both, human happiness is an essential component of morality
according to both, the formulation of rules is an important part of moral deliberation
According to Kant, it is always wrong to treat a person as a means
On Kant's view, lying to keep from hurting a person's feelings treats that person merely as a means
Treating a person better than he or she deserves treats that person as an end by recognizing the intrinsic value of that person
Which of the following is a correct formulation of Kant's Categorical Imperative?
act only on that maxim that you can at the same time want to be a universal law
so act as to treat humanity, whether yourself or others, in every case as an end withal never as a mens only
people always act on the maxim they can at the same time will that they should become a universal law
if a person does what is right out of self-love the act has no moral worth, according to Kant, but if it is done out of love for humanity, that person's act has great moral worth, according to Kant
when Mill says that we have the liberty of tastes and pursuits, he means only that we have the liberty to think and say what we choose
Kant's view is a relativist view
On Kant's view,
we know that lying promises are wrong through our universal experience of the pain that lying promises cause
we know that lying promise are wrong because the rule that allows it leads to contradiction
all moral imperatives are hypothetical imperatives
if a person does the right thing because reason says to do it, the act has no moral worth unless the person is motivated by a genuine love of humanity
