Zachary Carick

Ethics
Read 119-139 & 171-206
p. 151 #1-2
p. 209 #2
2) Selfish-gene theory- that selfless acts for a group actually promote survival of the
creatures genes.
People behave selflessly towards others based on the expectation that others must then return
that same behavior.
What we want to do isnt always selfish-What we want may not actually be selfish since
peace of mind is not provided any actual advantage considering it is a mental state versus
saving a life for the other. There is a clear difference between doing something in order to
appease ones mind versus doing something to achieve ones own advantage.
Falsification is not possible- the theory of egoism can be considered faulty because it
does not allow other options for behavior. This implies that all other possibilities are wrong. A
true theory must allow for the possibility that it is not the truth.
The fallacy of the suppressed correlative- Selfishness is relative and egoist selfishness
would be too general in that acts considered selfish versus selfless in the contemporary sense
would both be selfish for vague reasons even though they are clearly based on different causes
and situations.
1) Nihilism seems like it was created by a philosopher going through a phase. Relativism
seems true enough, except that human nature exists. Hard universalism is too forceful.
Saying that in African tribes, they know killing the lion is wrong, would be incorrect
because they do not consider it wrong, even though it would be considered poaching to
our more advanced civilization. Therefore I have to align most with soft universalism. It
provides a general agreement without being dogmatic.
Nihilism- The belief that nothing matters in the end and therefore all more differences are
trivial. There is no real way of using moral reasoning with this as all morals are accepted.
Relativism- There is no universal moral truth. Each culture will have its own values that
cannot be applied to other civilizations.
Soft Universalism- People and cultures, despite major differences can agree on basic
moral similarities.
Hard Universalism- There is one universal moral code that applies to all people
regardless of culture and upbringing.
2) What is normal for a culture is moral for that culture. This statement falls under the
idea of ethical relativism. In most cases I would venture to say that this is correct.
Unfortunately, there are extreme groups that may take over in a society so that their
newly instilled normal is not what is moral for the society. Take the Nazis or the
Taliban for example. Their deeds are infamous, but not associated with the moral culture
of their people. They made murder and tyranny normal, but by no means was that moral
for the people they controlled.