Introduction to Ethics 

You also need self control and discipline to apply ethics.

This is excellent. Thank you for your work and sharing with us.

Great Work people. Keep it going. Repeatly come to you right after Wikipedia on all research. Your lectures have no fluff and get right to the point avoiding personal opinions and presenting instead the argument and fairly presenting both sides. Great Great Work., Your subscribers will grow. Be Patient don't get discouraged.

Excellent presentation! Thank you for sharing.

This was wonderful in many regards. Well done. Too many big words and obscure connections/tangents for me to follow. I tried. Im a simple man. Guess Ill go work in the garden. You know.... on bended knee, head bowed , hands in the dirt. My neighbors will be over tonight with fresh bread for the table. We all eat good. All are welcome.

Your videos are awesome and very informative! Keep it up! :)

This is very clear, thank you. More on Kant's contribution to ethics would be appreciated in the future. Regards.

I swear I find physics easier to understand than ethics . Thank you for the video, although still confused, not so much now. (maybe)

Being new to Philosophy, I've been studying this discipline for about two years now and subsequently having my interest renewed in your RU-vid channel as well as the internet website that's curated by you as well, I have come to a conclusion that the information presented and the interpretations of the concepts, thoughts and ideas of Philosophy's founding members; Kant, Nietzsche, Plato........etc. after listening also to lectures by other professionals that occupy RU-vid channels, your channel has information and interpretations that are the most accurate, also knowing that this opinion is merely from my own personal perspective, that with the knowledge I've gained and the insights acquired from your video lectures your channel is first and foremost the best choice I can make in my pursuit of mastering Philosophy to the best that my ability will allow me to. Your video lectures seem to be the most accurate as well as achieving the truest form of unbiased interpretation. So as one who considers himself a lifelong student of Philosophy, this will only aid to my pursuit of mastery of the world's greatest discipline. Thank you and please keep pushing forward in the pursuit of universal knowledge and freedom.

Thanks, very accessible for me

YOU ARE GODSEND AND THE FACT THAT YOU MAKE THESE VIDEOS SO CONCISE YET SO FULL OF INFORMATION? GOD BLESS YOU! EXAM IN AN HOUR AND COS OF YOU IMMA KILLL IT!

tx for this video, I learn something that is good

Your videos are so thoughtful and well put together. Thank you so much for making them!

Great video! Just one thing to say, I couldn't read anything in the video but was just listening to the narration, it was a bit hard keeping up. Otherwise, it was AWESOME!

I love the Academy of ideas and I'd love to study of that place I just wish I understood this video to keep up the good work

Having just finished The Outsider, I find Camus' opening quote rather ironic.

Incredible!

"One ought to like this video" kkkkk

We appreciate your content

🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 00:00 📜 Albert Camus' quote introduces the importance of ethics, emphasizing that ethics guide human behavior in society. 00:41 🧭 Ethics originated in ancient Greece, with Socrates and the Sophists as early moral philosophers, and it focuses on the study of what's good and bad in life and what's right or wrong in conduct. 02:31 🤔 Key questions in ethics include what makes actions moral or immoral and why individuals should follow ethical theories. 03:13 🌍 Meta ethics explores whether morality is objective, with a focus on whether moral judgments can be objectively true or false, independent of personal opinions. 03:53 🤷‍♂️ Moral subjectivism holds that moral judgments are expressions of personal preference, while moral realism (objectivism) asserts that moral judgments can be objectively true or false. 04:50 ❓ The "is-ought problem" questions whether one can logically derive what ought to be from what is the case, as explored by David Hume. 06:04 ⚖️ Teleological (consequentialist) theories evaluate actions based on their consequences, while deontological theories ground morality in authority, not consequences. 07:31 📜 Deontological ethics holds that actions are not evaluated solely based on consequences but on some form of authority, often including divine law. 08:30 🤨 Some philosophers have questioned whether ethics can effectively transform individuals into virtuous beings, with varying degrees of skepticism about its practical impact. Made with HARPA AI

As an ethical man I liked your video

I'm sorry, I could only focus on the amazing Canadian accent.

Thanks.

Can I use your video for my presentation?

What are the basic ethics which are applicable to all human beings all the time ?

beautiful

What is the name of the ethical theory that says that what is good is whatever glorifies God the most?

"In answer to those philosophers who claim that no relation can be established between ultimate ends or values and the facts of reality, let me stress that the fact that living entities exist and function necessitates the existence of values and of an ultimate value which for any given living entity is its own life. Thus the validation of value judgments is to be achieved by reference to the facts of reality. The fact that a living entity is, determines what it ought to do. So much for the issue of the relation between “is” and “ought.” -Ayn Rand, "The Objectivist Ethics", The Virtue of Selfishness, 17

Very informative !! Thanks ! I was reading a book by Mises and he was constantly mentioning eudaimonism and I was a litle lost. But now a have a basic view of this subject and I know that my Chsirtian ethics are in the so called deontological class. Well I persnaly don't feel confortable with all this talk about ethics...The normal human dose not see ethics as something man made to say so. Even the Teleological ones are actualy based upon the ethics that evry human beign perceives in his normal daily life !! You could construct a ethical system that respects the philosophical standard but it will be actualy bad perceived by the normal human beign in the real life. Comunism had a lot to say about ethics and I spoke with a marxist-leninist a few weeks ago and he told me that it is ok to kill the rich people because it is for a greater good and all actions that bring that greater good are good.....

Only real thing in itself is time; though this has no relations, a vice of gravity.A falsification of gravity. It still presses on you! A question is relative only to itself, what we have here is a problem with pride! Just to bring the fairness of pride is the best way to approach ethics. All fairness attributes itself to an employed reasoning, to say a standing of pride in fairness . . . Really it is just about vitality . . . the turn will follow another turn!

1. What was the quote from Albert Camus? 2. Where is Ethics originated? 3. Name the first critical thinker in history? 4. According to the Video, what is Ethics? 5. Who gave a better definition of Ethics? 6. Give the difference between Ethics and Morality? 7. What anthropologists are doing? 8. What are the 2 permanents questions in the studies of Ethics? 9. What is Meta-Ethics? 10. What is the Key Question of Meta-Ethics? 11. What is the opposite of moral Objectivity? 12. What will be almost the same as moral Objectivity? 13. Name the famous Scottish philosopher that examined those questions of objectivities and relativism? please help

Interesting lesson. Ethics is the study of morality between right and wrong. Egoism, like you mentioned earlier is an ethical theory that deals with self-interest. Like Kanye West, he's an egomaniac. He even claimed himself that he was a god once. It goes to show that ethics doesn't just teach you the difference between right and wrong, it also teaches you to keep your ego in check. There's a measurement between confidence and arrogance in the confidence spectrum. You can be confident, but don't be arrogant. There's a difference.

2+2=4 in the infinite ring of integers Z. 2+2=0 in the finite ring Z/2Z of integers modulo 2. 2+2=1 in Z/3Z. 2+2=0 in Z/4Z Etc Addition (and multiplication) depends on the underlying number system. In short, 2+2 does not always equal to 4!

And ethics is always existing where thou is not a "wild beast". We have wants and needs and strategies for realising them. We are more or less cognisant of the processes.

I don’t see which path -teleological or deontological- picks Taylor’s statement. I ended up with the same question… What is worth striving for?

"Virtue cannot be taught, no more than genius." As it turns out, you CAN teach genius. And I see people learning virtue all the time. That guy was an idiot. Great video. I subscribed.

The cost effectiveness of conscientality: the awesome phenomenon with 9 heads up on cloud Sunday; the border with purity, hopefully in love - the trust of sharing and actually caring, exposed without an unfair unbalanced at aaalllllllll selfish burden, of whose winning some irrascibe eternal battle for the victory of their side of judgement, about ideas and creation as pleasant together. It isn't God. It might still be Spirit to respect, even understand when forgiveness is self-evident to the preposterous inevitability of anyone even being set up by some hidden apparent bitterness at anytime biting something they shouldn't. And that is what animals are as loved and cared for, morally.

ethic is the only way to rich and happiness.the law of relationship between person and the whole social is what goes around ,and comes around. this is also called the gold law of cause and result.that means if people think good for others\say good for others\do good for others,the entire social will give the person goods:rich\safety\happiness. otherwise,the person will get poor\difficult\sadness. certainly,the gold law will take at least three years to let result become true.

The last 3 statements, I conclude that a code of ethics will elevate me, me, as an individual, I have made a decision to live a certain way. This could not be forced upon me, I maybe coerced into lies, but, to live honestly I make a choice and adhere, this way I am elevated, there is no other way. Therefore, am I in most agreement with Schopenhauer? He's meant to be pessimistic, however, honesty combined with reality feels good to me, which I think is Schopenhauer's attitude too. Unless I've misunderstood, I'd love feedback

In order to understand ethics shouldn’t one first understand the nature of the thing to which ethics apply? In other words: the way one ought to act is determined by one’s nature; so you would have to understand the nature of man and his end before you can understand the necessary actions he ought to take to achieve that end. I say ought because man has free will and even though he knows he should do something he is free to choose not to do it.

This is really unfair, I am trying to reference this video for my current research but there absolutely is no information about the presenter. In fact I'm very much interested in that Richard Taylor's quote and I prefer to use it as-is. Any ideas where I can get the source of the quote? Please help!

There is an element of truth in Moral Realism, in that ethics do contribute to a objectively better society and standard of living. But it's also subjective in how much value we as people attach to those improvements. Idealogical extremism is a classic example of rejecting the objective in favour of the subjective. Schopenhauer's statement misses the point. Like education, ethics and aesthetics provide a framework within which people can operate. The value is in being informed, not inspired.

I like feel you can logically come up with a conclusion of what "ought to be". Take slavery of example. Just because something is doesn't mean it's what something should be. Something simply being doesn't make it ethical.

one ought to like this video..done

Is the act of ignoring questions moral? Is it ethical? Is it wrong? Is it verbal abuse? Is it the norm?

Apparently going to the gym made me loose my ethics.

That's how he pronounced it. It just sounded like he pronounced the 's' because the word following Camus was 'stated'

Have you read Mises Human action?

Can you do a video about the philosopher J. Krishnamurti?

NIce .....

It would have been easy to understand if you said it a little more slowly otherwise everything is okay, thank you so much😊

Why no discussion of consequentialism and utilitarianism?

I find that society can become very toxic when lacking simple humility. Humility gives us a spiritual alternative to this toxicity. Beware of personality flaws like: comparing one another, criticizing, complaining, controlling and having a competing spirit.

Lol @One ought to like this video!

"My own counsel will I keep."

Immense blessings. 🌻

One last criticism: i thought this video was great. Clever and concise. But you haven't mentioned the concept of VIRTUE. And you've taken it for granted that all ethical systems are concerned with individual action. I agree with you because only individuals ACT, but the Greeks you mentioned believed virtue was to be pursued by the collective/polis.

We have ethics in our school.. And I'm totally confused with it. I just came to browse RU-vid so I can understand something but since I'm not fluent in English yet, I'M JUST MORE CONFUSED omg

Schopenhauer did as well.

Nice video. Are you perhaps from New England?

I think there is a fundamental obstacle in accepting any theory of Ethics seriously, that is the vastness of the universe and the insignificance of human life and suffering, in comparison. Did any one try to address this problem? Only Albert Camus?

"Microsoft Sam" has come a long way - almost sounds human now.

3:17 If the Party sais that 2+2=5, then it is so

It's fine I'll just reference the video from the Academy of Ideas, 2013 and quote Richard Taylor as written...

Yay, ethics that make no sense and says nothing about anything, that's just what I needed. Philosophy seems entirely devoid of meaning, can we have a field called Fantasy, please? I might even go to a university if I could get a PhD in Fantasy.

The splendors and miseries of philosophers.

What is the difference between morals and ethics?

Angraj Hindi m de deta to kya ho jay?

Ethics = a piece of paper Morals = whatever you want

Teleological and Deontological ethics are a contrast that I could spend 5 years thinking about before I reach a conclusion 😂

Good is subjective

Just watched this video in an ethics class... Was that Jordan Peterson talking or is the Canadian accent deceiving me?

Or is ethics our attempt to justify the way we choose to use our divisive mind? Great stuff btw.

this is why everybody hates moral philosophers.

Ethics professor from the order

I'm surprised you didn't mention Thomas Aquinas or natural law talking about objective ethics. If you're interested in David Hume you'd probably find Mises' treatment of subjective value theory interesting in Theory and History, and Epistemological Problems of Economics.

2+2=5; You must not only obey big brother, you must also love him...

Ethics the study of Human conduct. Am I right?

i have no moral or ethical prejudice against ads..altho i always block them.

What come first reason or Will!?

Ethics is the theory, morality is the practice? Political idealism vs Political Idealism? Cicero vs Machiavelli? Dentology, Utilitarian, Virtue Ethics. I prefer the Virtue Ethics framework, specifically Stoicism. 🤔😊🦉

Who else is here because of the Good Place???❤️😂

Virtue ethics actually comes from China. It was later developed by the Greeks but they did not come up with the idea. Why is it that the greeks take credit for so many things they did not invent? As recently as last year we found out they weren't inventors of trigonometry like previously thought, either! It's kind of ridiculous.

You should contrast ethics with economics and history more than anthropology. I think you'd find Mises' Human Action and Theory and History very interesting

중국, 인도,한국,일본,등등,학교들의 도덕책들과 윤리책들에, 십계명들도 넣을 필요들이,있는듯 합니다.예절들 관련한,죄들에 관한 감소들 필요. 십계명중에 4계명에서 10계명까지는,예절들이 많이 포함되어있기에,들어갈 필요들 있는듯 함. God(Our Lord),given this messages.

Mee

Voluntary=Moral, Involuntary=Immoral, not difficult

Can some1 write a summary pls?

do you not know the Good Place?

Tyquan vs Milo wish me luck

The fundamental question of ethics remains: "What is the best way to live?" It is a question that is relevant only when other rational beings exist.

can someone recommend me good books based on ethics( it does not matter how much time has passed since i made this comment)?

I'm here because I need to make an essay .

croakers and ethics in business care for me to site the professor ? bagels bagels sight is v maurine

Ethics should not only be a study of good and bad conduct. It should be involved with every facet of human activity. We don't see this today. People involved with the study of ethics need to grow a pair and put their studies into practice. Have a voice on human issues for Christ's sake. Not just another paper on ethics that all of maybe 50 people in the world will ever read. It's not a profitable or employable venture today, unfortunately. This will change once human politicians, lawyers, and so-called leaders are replaced by incorruptable computer human representatives. We are not capable of neutral reasoning for the rest of humanity. It's strange we are capable of producing robots that would lead us better than we ourselves would. Shows have close to the caves we still are. I think a real linkage between computer scientists and ethicists could bring a real change to a completely corrupt and shitty state of affairs in world politics.

deontological ethics = karma, christian, created mostly by fear, or people that were indoctrinated and too cognitively dissonant to break from their bred-bounds. teleological view are ones that will serve the individual, and each individual more which will lead to a more prosperous group aswell.

Who else is here because of school🙋

What's pro man? Pro God? pro nature ? Means?

I feel that this subject is quite a lot of endless talk, but not necesary not meaningfull. What is Ethics was defined, then what is morality. But what is then good and bad ? You should reach a point were no definition can be given and something must be accepted at face value...Or that is something that people don't like to admit, especialy those in the pursuit for knowledge and truth.

I think morality is based on opinions. Many morals are widely agreed upon, but that does not make them true.