Phl162 Assignment 31 In Pojmans Who's To Judge We Get The St

Phl162 Assignment 31 In Pojmans Whos To Judge We Get The Story

In Pojman’s "Who’s To Judge," we get the story of a tribe of Hitlerites. What’s going on with this tribe? How does Pojman think we should react to this tribe? Do you agree with his reaction? Explain why, why not. (100 words)

What do you think of Pojman’s list of 10 candidates for objective moral principles? Which principles are you most unsure belong on the list? Which do you feel the most confident about? Are there principles he hasn’t mentioned that you think belong on the list? (80 words)

The very short reading on ethics and science (from James Rachels) tries to explain how we could think about morality, as different from tables and spoons but still different from feelings about chocolate ice cream. How does Rachels think we should think of morality (moral principles or values)? What do you think of his view? Do you have worries about it? What do you think are its strengths? (100 words)

Paper For Above instruction

In Pojman’s "Who’s To Judge," the narrative revolves around how a tribe of Hitlerites should be perceived and how we ought to respond to their actions and beliefs. Pojman advocates for a stance based on moral objectivity and universal principles, emphasizing that moral judgments are not merely subjective but grounded in objective standards that transcend individual or cultural preferences. His reaction suggests that we should reject moral relativism when dealing with such tribes, upholding universal moral condemnation of atrocities and oppressive ideologies. I agree with Pojman’s view because moral standards provide a necessary basis to oppose heinous behaviors, ensuring justice and human dignity are preserved globally. Recognizing the universality of moral principles helps prevent morally corrupt societies from justifying atrocities under cultural relativism or nihilism.

Regarding Pojman’s list of 10 candidates for objective moral principles, I find the principles related to justice, honesty, and respect for persons the most convincing. These foundational principles underpin social cohesion and individual rights, which are crucial for moral reasoning. However, I am most unsure about principles like specific cultural norms or preferences being inherently moral. While I am confident about principles such as fairness and non-maleficence, I wonder whether all listed principles genuinely qualify as universally objective or if some are merely aspirational. I believe principles like ‘respect for autonomy’ and ‘truthfulness’ are vital but would include others like compassion and humility, which Pojman did not explicitly emphasize.

The short reading from James Rachels presents morality as a system of moral principles or values that guide human conduct, differentiating morality from mere feelings or personal preferences. Rachels suggests we should think of morality as rational principles aimed at promoting human well-being and fairness, which can be critically examined and justified rather than being based solely on subjective feelings. I think his view rightly emphasizes the rational and community-based nature of morality, which can foster moral progress. However, I worry that this approach might overlook emotional and cultural aspects that also shape moral understanding. Its strength lies in promoting logical consistency and universality, making moral debates more objective and transparent.

References

• Pojman, L. P. (2002). Ethics: Discovering right and wrong. Oxford University Press.
• Rachels, J. (2003). The element of morality. In J. Rachels & S. Rachels, The elements of moral philosophy (4th ed., pp. 3-19). McGraw-Hill.
• Shafer-Landau, R. (2012). Whatever happened to truth? Oxford University Press.
• Singer, P. (2011). The expanding circle: Ethics, evolution, and moral progress. Princeton University Press.
• Gray, J. (2009). Gray’s anatomy of morality. Oxford University Press.
• Hare, R. M. (1981). The language of morals. Oxford University Press.
• Foot, P. (2001). Morality as a system of rule-idealization. In P. Foot, Natural goodness. Oxford University Press.
• MacIntyre, A. (2007). After virtue. University of Notre Dame Press.
• Aristotle. (2009). Nicomachean ethics. Translated by R. C. Bartlett & S. D. Collins. University of Chicago Press.
• Kant, I. (1993). Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals. (M. Gregor, Trans.). Cambridge University Press.