Contemporary Moral Problems by James E. White Chapter 1: John Stuart Mill(Utilitarianism)

In this part of the chapter the author shared the essay of John Stuart Mill. John Stuart Mill is an
influential British Philosopher. He wrote several books about ethics, morality and philosophy. In his essay
the main topic was utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is the idea that the moral worth of an action is determined
solely by its contribution to overall utility that is, its contribution to happiness or pleasure as summed
among all persons. Basically it is the action with the greatest good for the majority. This is the ethical
theory that I agree with. I think that the right thing to do is the one that would benefit the majority.
Utilitarianism is also about actions which would bring happiness to the majority. Another interesting topic
discussed in this essay is of what sort of proof the Principal of Utility us susceptible. Mill argues that the
only proof that something is desirable is that people actually desire it. It is a fact that happiness is a good,
because all people desire their own happiness. Thus, it is clear that happiness is at least one end, and
one criterion, of morality. However, in order to show that happiness is the sole criterion for morality, it is
necessary to show that people never desire anything but happiness. Mill says that people do desire
things like virtue, which in common language is distinguished from happiness.

Contemporary Moral Problems by James E. White Chapter 1: Mary Midgley(Trying out one’s new sword)

In this part of the chapter the author the author shared the essay of Mary Midgley. Mary Midgley
taught philosophy at the University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne in England for over 20 years. She authored
several books about morality, human nature, and philosophy. This is why I think that Mary Midgley would
be able to tell a lot of interesting insights and theories about morality. In this essay Mary Midgely criticized
moral isolationism for being immoral. Mary argued that it is immoral because there is no justification or
any moral reason on why people criticize cultures that they do not understand. I agree with Mary Midgley,
people should not criticize cultures that they don’t understand because there is no reason for doing so.
People should morally criticize something if they find it immoral or wrong but if there is nothing wrong with
it then just leave it be. I also found Mary’s example about the samurai really interesting. It’s about a verb
in classical Japanese which means “to try out one’s new sword on a chance wayfarer.” A samurai needs
to cut a wayfarer with his sword in order to try it out and defend his honor. By not doing so the samurai
will be dishonored and offend his ancestors. A lot of people criticized this Japanese culture but are they
so different. Their culture allows human experimentation which could also lead to the death of another
human being and yet they criticize the Japanese. Also if they do not understand it then how could they
have the right to criticize it?

Contemporary Moral Problems by James E. White Chapter 1: Friedrich Nietzsche(Master and Slave Morality)

In this part of the chapter the author shared Friedrich Nietzsche’s essay about Master and Slave
morality. Friedrich Nietzsche was a German Philosopher and poet. Some of his famous works were The
Birth of Tragedy, The Gay Science, and Thus Spake Zarathustra. Having a background about morality I
think that he would be able to share some interesting insights about morality and ethics. Friedrich
Nietzsche thinks that a healthy society should allow people who are wealthy and influential to exercise
their ability to grab power. Friedrich Nietzsche thinks that a strong person follows a “master-morality” and
a weak person follows a “slave-morality”. I don’t entirely agree with Friedrich Nietzsche on his view of a
healthy society. I think that it is ok for people to exercise their will for power if they can but it must be done
with a good motive. A person’s bid for power must have a purpose.  If a society allows people with selfish intentions to grab power then it will give way to corruption and dictatorship. Also a society that lets people grab power as long as they can causes greed and as we all know most of the bad things that happen in our society comes from greed and mostly greed for power.

Contemporary Moral Problems by James E. White Chapter 1: John Arthur(Religion, Morality, and Conscience)

In this part of the chapter the author shared John Arthur’s essay about morality and religion. John Arthur is a professor of philosophy and director of the program in Philosophy, Politics, and Law at Binghamton University. With this background I trust that John Arthur would be able to share some interesting insights about morality and its connection with religion. Many people think that Religion has been a motivation for a lot of people to do the right thing. But John Arthur argues that people do the right thing because they were raised to do good and because they are worried about the consequence. I think that this is true because people who have no religion are also able to do the right thing. Some are driven by conscience and some are driven by fear but obviously religion is not the only motivation to do the right thing. John Arthur also argues that religion is not a good basis for determining what is right and what is wrong. One reason is because religion itself is unclear. There are a lot of religions out there and it is hard determine which ones to follow or is real. Religion also has different interpretations and this is why religion is an unreliable basis for what is right and what it wrong. In my opinion religion can still be a basis for what is right and what is wrong for the things that needs guidance like stealing and killing. Almost all religions condemn stealing and killing and there are still a lot of people refuse to kill because of their religion.

Contemporary Moral Problems by James E. White Chapter 1: James Rachels(Egoism and Moral Scepticism)

In this chapter different ethical theories were discussed by different personalities. The different
ethical theories were divided into five types namely: theory of the right, theory of the good, virtue theory,
rights theory, and feminist theory. I think that dividing the different ethical theories into five types is a good
idea. These five ethical types are always in conflict. Theory of the right are ethical theories based on what
is right while Theory of the good are ethical theories based on what is good. But what’s good isn’t always
what’s right and this is why I think that dividing the different ethical theories is a good idea. I believe that it
may somewhat help resolve the conflict between these different types of ethical theories.
The first ethical theories shared in this chapter are the ones from James Rachels. James Rachels
is a University Professor at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. He authored three significant books
about morality. I think that with James Rachel’s background he would be able to share a lot of interesting
theories and insights about ethics. Since most of the time morality is used as a basis for something being
ethical or not I think that a person who knows a lot about morality would be able to share some important
theories and insights about ethics.
James Rachels shared two assumptions about people’s ordinary way of thinking about morality. His first
assumption was about people considering the well being of others and his second assumption was about
people being selfless and sometimes acts in the interest of others. I think that these two assumptions are
what most people think about morality. Their actions are sometimes based on what would benefit others.
Two topics that I found interesting from James Rachels are psychological and ethical egoism.
Psychological egoism is the view that all men are selfish in everything that they do, that is, that the only
motive from which anyone ever acts is self-interest. I think that this is true because I find that in most
people even if their actions looks like it is done for the benefit of others it is actually only for their own self.
Ethical egoism on the other hand is a normative view about how men would usually act in a way that
would benefit himself.
I think James Rachels’s discussion about egoism was good. He was able to state clearly his observations
on how people react or take action for the benefit of their own and sometimes of others. James was also
able to link egoism with ethics and how people decide whether their action was ethical or not based on
their ego.

Migz’s Facelist

Check out my Facelist here.

Posted by: Miguel Eduardo E. Tablan

Migz’s Amchart

Check out my Amchart here.

Posted by: Miguel Tablan

My Facebook App

Check out my Facebook App here.

Posted by: Miguel Tablan

Migz’s poly9

Check out my poly9 here.

Posted buy: Miguel Tablan

Migz’s Popurl

Check out my Popurl here.

Posted by: Miguel Tablan