PHIL 322 Early Modern Philosophy Unit 6

16th century England. Raised Calvinist but his religious beliefs are unclear. Empiricist. Contributed to the field of optics. Major philosophical works - Leviathan (class reading)

It refers to a society united under a government "commonwealth". The Leviathan is a symbol of a powerful creature on earth.

1. WHY, if at all, should people give up the liberty they naturally have and form a government (the sovereign or leviathan) with liberty restricting laws?

2. HOW do we do it, if it should be done?

3. WHAT type of government is best?

To live in a "state of nature" where there is no government and no laws. Hobbes -> we can't live (for long) in such a condition. Why not?

1. Because we live in a world with scarce resources

2. But mainly because of human nature

Hobbes was a materialist about people. He denied any immaterial soul, the world is just matter moving through space and time.

It's unclear. he talks as if he does, but suggests God is also material but infinite. He thinks of God as personal. He doesn't think there's a great deal else that we can know about God, except that he created the world.

Yes. Everything we do is necessitated by earlier states of the world and the laws of physics

Yes, in a compatibilist sense.

Hobbes believed that all of us are determined by nature to be selfish (psychological egoism). Because we can't be happy or get what we want without surviving, self-preservation is the fundamental driving force in human nature. He believes when people like this live in a world of scarce resources, conflict becomes inevitable.

We can't flourish, or even survive, in a state of nature. All your time would be devoted to self-defense, and no advanced culture or science would be possible.

Follow the laws of nature.

1. Seek to make peace with others, but if they won't make peace with you, do what you have to do to survive.

2. Make peace by forming a "covenant" with them (now called a social contract)

3. Keep your agreement. Don't violate the social contract.

1. I will give up as much of my natural liberty as others will, but no more.

2. We will appoint a "sovereign" (leader) who will make laws to keep the peace.

3. We will endow this sovereign with all the powers needed to enforce the laws.

Given our self-interested nature, we must be threatened into keeping our agreement.

Hobbes favors a monarchy.

The sovereign has to have pretty much absolute power. He believes that only an all-powerful sovereign will be able to protect us from other people and other nations and keep the peace.

Hobbes admits it's possible but think it's unlikely and definitely worth the risk. We can rebel when the sovereign no longer protects us. Knowing this, a self-interested sovereign won't oppress us.

18th century England. Famous legal theorist and philosopher. Major philosophical works - Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (class reading)

Ethical theory and applied ethics

Study of ethics itself.

1. Metaethics

2. Normative ethics

Building a system of ethics that tells us what our most general moral obligations are

Part of normative ethics. Focus on providing moral rules we should obey. Bentham offers us a rule based theory.

Believes rules require us to ALWAYS choose the action that has the best results. Bentham was a consequentialist. Consequentialists need a theory about how we figure out what results are the best results. Must know what has intrinsic value first.

Believes some actions are right or wrong regardless of their results

Something that is valuable for itself. Example: happiness, power, etc.

Something that is valuable as a means to obtain what's intrinsically valuable

Says only one thing in the world actually has intrinsic value Bentham says ONLY happiness is intrinsically valuable

Says more than one thing in this world has intrinsic value

Says only happiness is intrinsically valuable Bentham is a value monist and hedonist because he believes only one thing has intrinsic value and that one thing is happiness

The morally right action is one that, from among the available alternatives, probably will maximize the long-term happiness of the WORLD in general

How can we possibly calculate the expected utility every time we have a moral choice to make? Common sense will suffice in the vast majority of cases

Bentham sees hedonistic utilitarianism as a moral axiom. A fundamental moral truth that can't be derived from any more basic moral principle and shouldn’t need to be because it’s self-evidently true. Bentham says that when pressed, the defenders of the alternatives always end up justifying them by reference to happiness.

Yes tot both. All happiness is intrinsically valuable, regardless of the source or the person experiencing it. Does Bentham endorse sadism? - No, the sadist's happiness is instrumentally evil. So, Bentham thinks we should not punish criminals? - No, because punishing prevents more unhappiness than it causes for the criminals

Deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitation, restitution, and retribution theory

Dissuading others by making an example of the criminal. Forward looking justification

Physically restraining the criminal to prevent more crime. Forward looking justification

Reforming the criminal so they don't commit more crime Forward looking justification

Restoring/compensating the victim of crime Forward looking justification

Giving criminals what they deserve for their crime, morally Backward looking justification

Bentham says only the punishments with forward looking justification can be used to justify any punishment of crime and only to the extent that by achieving these can we promote general happiness

Hangman case: We can prevent an unhappiness causing riot by hanging an innocent man. Does HU say it's right then? Bentham says no. The right action is the one which is such that if everyone did this in similar circumstances, then we would have the best hedonic results.