(7)Linking Morality with Expediency

Where should the line be drawn when considering if telling a white lie should be deemed moral or not? Like we discussed in class, telling the grandmother who isn’t going to live much longer that she’ll be ok can be considered a moral act because you are trying to give her that inner strength that will make this statement true.  She won’t be hurt by it in the end, it could only help her and increase overall happiness both in her and within the family.  However, telling your friends that your “ugly” girlfriend is your cousin because you’re embarassed to be with her, is an immoral act.  If she was to find out this was said to your friends, she will be not only angry but hurt and would decrease overall happiness because you would feel bad and of course she would be upset.  Although these are two extreme examples, expediency should not be equated with morality because telling one white lie could lead to telling more in order to protect yourself.  If you’re trying to help your grandmother get better is different than involving someone else and leaving them open to being hurt.

Is Utilitarianism Too Demanding?

I personally believe that Utilitarianism is not too demanding.  If anything it should help our society because it looks out for the greatest amount of people.  If a decision is deemed moral under utilitarianism, it has effected a large amount of people in a positive way.  Of course sometimes people will look out for themselves and make the decision that they will personally benefit from, but I feel that people should be morally responsible for the well being of their peers.  Although people don’t HAVE to bring happiness to others, what would our society be like without things like charity and concern for each other’s well being?  Utilitarianism is not too demanding and we should always think about how our actions will effect others.

Mill’s Group Interpretation

So far, this has been a challenging task to try and interpret this section of Mill’s Utilitarianism.  So far, my group has found that Mill’s objection is that there is no general doctrine which interprets the will of God.  In other words, utilitarianism is a Godless doctrine. His defense to this God’s tru desire is the happiness of the creatures he created.  Afterall, their happiness was the purpose of their creation in the first place.  Concluding his defense, Mill says God has provided all the necessary resources for humanity to develop morals based on his wisdom.

Higher vs. Lower Pleasures

Higher pleasures such as love, art, intellect etc. are not necessarilly better than the lower pleasures of life.  Some people enjoy individual things more than others and everyone has a different opinion of what gives them the greatest pleasure.  When Mill mentions an objection to utilitarianism saying utilitarianism links morality with pleasure and this makes morality bad and mean, his response is people can feel different, better pleasures than “swine.” He’s saying there are pleasures above those that a “pig” would indulge in.  Sure, some people may find the most pleasure out of the lower pleasures, but many would find the most pleasure in the higher pleasures.  Those who experience the higher pleasures have the right to make their own decisions about what gives them the greatest enjoyment.  I don’t think higher pleasures are better than lower pleasures, it all depends on what you want out of your own life and all human beings have the right to decide this on their own.

If DCT is False, Bad For Religion?

 If Divine Command Theory is false, is it bad for religion? In other words, does it take something important away from the idea of God to say that he does not control morality?

If Divine Command Theory is false, it is not bad for religion.  The idea that whatever God says goes makes it appear that he is out of reach for his followers.  People pray to him and turn to him when they need support or reassurance.   If DCT were false, he becomes much closer to the people that look up to him. He is still a higher power, but now he has more human traits that everyone could learn from.  The idea that he is morality and doesn’t make mistakes gives the sense that we look up to an untouchable being.  I believe if DCT were false, it would be a good thing for religion and would allow an average person to feel closer to God and his spirituality.

Utilitarianism

I believe we are morally responsible for the outcomes of our actions to a certain degree.  Of course no one can predict the future so if a moral action is performed without any prior knowledge that something negative will result, then we should not be held liable for the negative outcome.  For example, if you save a young child from drowning and 20 years later they become a serial killer, there would have been no way to predict that by saving one life many more would be lost and effected.  At the same time, this young child could become the next President, or invent a cure for cancer.  If you looked the other way and let the child drown, neither of these outcomes would be possible and I would personally consider this an immoral action. 

 Utilitarianism is defined as the theory than an action is morally good if it increases overall happiness.  The example given above does not agree with this definition because at the time, saving the child makes him and his family happy. If he became President of found a cure for cancer, this would also increase the overall happiness of the people he will effect.  But if he does turn out to be a serial killer, then he will be causing more pain and sadness in the future in a way that would not have been able to predict.  Utilitarianism says something is good or bad depending on the effect of happiness, but if we cannot predict what will happen then who is to say the outcome will be good or bad.

Could unreasonable and irrational be a Moral God?

Devine Command Theory is the idea that good things are good because God says so.  When considering if an unreasonable or irrational God can be a moral God we have to consider what it is to be rational or irrational.  One that is irrational does not make correct, or moral decisions because they do not correctly process their surroundings and possible outcomes.  However, according to DCT, whatever God says is moral so then who decides what is unreasonable or irrational.  We can now argue that something that may be considered irrational could be rational if God decided he wanted to consider it good and moral.

Cultural Relativism

As I researched cultural relativism, I came across a story that made me think about what this idea really consists of.  To summarize the story, an 18 year old girl in Germany was burned to death by her own father because she would not marry the man he chose for her.  Being a 22 year old female who grew up in the United States, I could never see how this could be accepted in a society.  Even after performing this horrific act to his own daughter, the German judge sentenced him to a reduced term because the court determined he was just practicing his culture and religion.  This man not only took his daughter’s right to make her own decisions, but he took her right to live as well.  This example is a reason why cultural relativism is not the right way to look at situations that occur within different cultures.  It is in no way an excuse to kill your own offspring and he should have received a maximum sentence as he would of if living in the United States.