Amazing video, did you get the way of organizing the process of taking an action (the drawing/diagram on the chalkboard) from anything or did you just integrate your understanding of ethics generally to construct it yourself? And if so, would you allow anyone to use this framing to explain ethics in their own content?
@@PhiloofAlexandria It did seem incredibly novel, I've always conceptualized a lot of the individual perspectives in a vacuum. More or less the action into outcome binary. But having a full diagram like this really paints how interlocking all these concepts are, and how much our society really struggles to incorporate elements of all of them through democratic means. The story of you and your father in the car is a great one to illustrate how even with the best intentions no single frame of reference is going to just intuitively be the best focus in every scenario. I'm a rule utilitarian by intuition but your dad seemed to be right lol Might be my favorite video on the channel so far for how many philosophical concepts are so densely packed with no fat added.
Seriously, this way actually helped. I am completely lost in my ethics class. It’s all babble to me as I’m not an abstract person. I deal with healing the physical body as a nurse. I kept thinking, can we take a universal scenario and approach it as each theory would address. Instead it’s just pieces of this and that all over the place from my Professor. But people seem to really love this stuff. I just say be a good person to everyone.
This is a fascinating way of talking about moral theory. When I had an intro course in ethics there was no mention of the structure of decision-making, but it's clear that this can be used to describe a taxonomy of various moral theories. I assume the same structure would work to show differences between non-consequentialist theories as well - and also the areas where they overlap with consequentialist theories. Is there a book that would survey moral theory using this approach?
I'm not aware of one, but I'm working on a Historical Dictionary of Ethics right now that will adopt this approach. I'm also thinking of working on a book putting various strands of my thinking about ethics together; this would be one of them.
@@PhiloofAlexandria I hope I get to see more of this kind of analysis in your other videos. It raises a lot of interesting questions. I'm also curious how these positions are justified. Consequentialism seems to rely on the skill of the moral agent in telling the future, which seems like a problem.
Great topic. One of my favorite philosophers is the Ecologist Guy McPherson - "I would like to think that people are capable of rational thought and of living in a rational manner but there has been study after study that demonstrates that that’s not likely" Very, Very true. he also thinks we're all going to die as a Civilization by 2030. This view helps me manage my depression. The end is near.
