[Ø KEY] PROJECT
A Guide for Understanding
Philosophers – Ethics
(Aristotle-Mill)
By: Brent Burton
Research revealed many of the ideas, issues, and questions that tend to be a common concern amongst
various ethical philosophers. Additional research uncovered the methods which different philosophers
employ in attempt to resolve those issues and answer those questions. Using the research results, this
guide was created to provide a framework from which readers can peer into the minds of significant
philosophers and see their ideas regarding ethical issues.
1
Dedication
This document is written in memory of the University of Kansas philosophy professor Tony Genova
(1930 – March 20th, 2010), who is largely responsible for kindling my passion for philosophy.
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank the people who helped me with the [Ø Key] Project: Sarah Edgerton, Evan Harmon,
Trevor Hedberg, and John Meurs. I would also like to thank anyone who has contributed to my ethical
knowledge throughout the years, most notably the professors Dale Dorsey, Dawn Gale, and Tony
Genova.
2
Table of Contents
Dedication ..................................................................................................................................................... 1
Acknowledgments......................................................................................................................................... 1
Introduction to the Document ...................................................................................................................... 3
Aristotle (384-322 BC) ................................................................................................................................... 5
Aristotle’s Definitions................................................................................................................................ 5
Aristotle’s Q&A ......................................................................................................................................... 6
Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) ........................................................................................................................ 7
Hobbes’ Definitions................................................................................................................................... 7
Hobbes’ Q&A............................................................................................................................................. 7
Richard Cumberland (1631-1718) ................................................................................................................. 9
Cumberland’s Definitions.......................................................................................................................... 9
Cumberland’s Q&A ................................................................................................................................... 9
Samuel Clarke (1675-1729) ......................................................................................................................... 10
Clarke’s Definitions ................................................................................................................................. 10
Clarke’s Q&A ........................................................................................................................................... 10
Francis Hutcheson (1694-1746) .................................................................................................................. 11
Hutcheson’s Definitions .......................................................................................................................... 11
Hutcheson’s Q&A .................................................................................................................................... 11
David Hume (1711-1776) ............................................................................................................................ 12
Hume’s Definitions.................................................................................................................................. 12
Hume’s Q&A............................................................................................................................................ 13
Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) ....................................................................................................................... 14
Kant’s Definitions .................................................................................................................................... 14
Kant’s Q&A .............................................................................................................................................. 14
John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) ...................................................................................................................... 15
Mill’s Definitions ..................................................................................................................................... 15
Mill’s Q&A ............................................................................................................................................... 15
Classification Table...................................................................................................................................... 16
Glossary ....................................................................................................................................................... 16
References .................................................................................................................................................. 18
3
Introduction to the Document
This document is designed to present the ideas and beliefs of historical ethical philosophers in a manner
which is clear, concise, accurate, and easy-to-follow. It is intended to be used as a key for making
distinctions about philosophers that classify and separate them into their perspective categories so that
they can be easily compared. The words “ethical” and “moral” will be used interchangeably throughout
this document. The exception to this rule is when either of the words appears in a philosopher’s direct
quote. In such cases, the words retain the philosopher’s personal definition/understanding of the word.
Currently this document only contains a select few philosophers who are primarily from the western
tradition. The three main philosophers that are covered thus far are Aristotle, Hobbes, and Hume. The
completed document would contain numerous more philosophers; ideally, it would continue to grow
until it contained the ethical philosophy of every significant philosopher.
Each Philosopher’s section is divided into three main parts:
(I) Pertinent information, classifications, and categorizations that identify them
This section is broken down further into four sections. Under “Lived” is the philosopher’s lifespan, their
birth date and death date. Under “Origin” is the philosopher’s place of birth and the subsequent places
which he or she resided. The arrows () represent a shift from one location to the next and are roughly
chronological. Under “Classifications” are the terms used to denote different philosophical camps
concerning ethics that are applicable to the given philosopher. A tilde (~) appearing before the
classification denotes that the classification loosely applies to the philosopher. Under “Ethical/Moral
Texts” is a list of the works written by the philosopher which contain a significant amount of their ethical
philosophy.
(II) The personal definitions and ideas that they use for various important words
In his An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding, David Hume says, “But if the question regard any
subject of common life and experience; nothing, one would think, could preserve the dispute so long
undecided, but some ambiguous expressions, which keep the antagonists still at a distance, and hinder
them from grappling with each other” (148). In other words, disputes in regard to the answers of such
questions are prolonged because of ambiguous expressions. In order to dispel any ambiguities, this
section provides the unique definitions used by the particular philosopher.
(III) Their answers’ to different ethical questions
This section provides the philosophers’ answers to various ethical questions. Some questions which are
commonly addressed by ethical philosophers include:


What is virtue and what are the virtues?
Does virtue benefit the virtuous?
4






Why should I be moral?
How are people motivated to act morally?
What is human nature?
What is the best life for a human?
What is happiness?
How can humans distinguish between moral good and evil?
5
Aristotle (384-322 BC)
Lived: 384-322 BC
Origin: [Greek] – Stagira (Macedonia)  Athens  Assos  Mytilene
(Lesbos) (335BC) Athens  Chalcis.
Classifications: ~Rationalism, Eudaimonist Constraint.
Ethical/Moral Texts: Nicomachean Ethics, Eudemain Ethics.
Aristotle’s Definitions
Happiness: Aristotle’s notion of happiness is closely bound to eudaimonia and summum bonum.
Eudaimonia is both an individual’s happiness and the general well being/happiness of all humankind.
Summum bonum is the ultimate end which all people should pursue. Happiness is the ultimate good
which all goods are directed towards, the end of all actions. It is choice worthy by itself, intrinsically
good and unconditionally valuable.
Eudaimonia: While in a state of nature all human actions aim towards eudaimonia (both an individual’s
happiness and the general well being/happiness of all humankind).
Summum bonum: The ultimate end which all people should pursue.
Virtue: The mean between two extremes (two ways of carrying out an activity). For example, braveness
is the mean between the two extremes of cowardice and rashness. The goal of virtue is aimed at the
best (ultimate) good which is happiness.
The virtues of character: Mildness, temperance, bravery, truthfulness, generosity, magnificence,
magnanimity, the virtue concerned with small honors, friendliness, wit, and shame.
The virtues of thought: Wisdom, knowledge, prudence, understanding, deliberation, comprehension,
and practical thought.
Aristotle’s requirements for being truly virtuous:




Prudence (which needs both cleverness and good deliberation)
Understanding 1st principles
Friendship
All of the individual virtues
6
Aristotle’s Q&A
Q: Is virtue in the interest of the virtuous?
A: Yes – Actions in accord with virtue are pleasant by nature, so that they both please lovers of the fine
and are pleasant in their own right. The activities of the virtues are concerned with the things that
promote the end (eudaimonia). By promoting the common good, a person secures the greatest of
goods for each individual person: “And when everyone strains to achieve what is fine and concentrates
on the finest actions, everything that is right will be done for the common good, and each person
individually will receive the greatest of goods, since that is the character of virtue” (Irwin 147).
Q: Why should I be moral?
A: Aristotle’s answer to this question can be explained by appealing to two constituent principles of his
philosophy: the good and the function argument.
3 types of goods:
1. Goods of the soul (the highest goods, actions and activities of the soul)
2. Goods of the body
3. External goods
The good depends upon how well an individual being, object, or entity performs its function. The
human function is virtue: “…the human good proves to be activity of the soul in accord with virtue, and
indeed with the best and most complete virtue, if there are more virtues than one” (Irwin 9).
Function Argument:
P1. Things with functions achieve the good by performing their function well.
P2. Humans have a (unique) function [division of the soul: appetite/reason].
P3. The human function is activity of the soul in accord with reason or requiring reason.
P4. The best use of the rational part of the soul is the activity of virtue.
C. The good, for humans, is the active life of virtue.
Therefore, you should be moral because it entails living the active life of virtue and the active life of
virtue is pleasurable in itself, because actions in accord with the virtues are pleasant in their own right.
7
Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679)
Lived: 1588-1679
Origin: [English] – Malmesbury (Wiltshire)  Oxford  Devonshire
 France  Devonshire.
Classifications: ~Rationalism, Skepticism, Eudaimonist Constraint.
Ethical/Moral Texts: Human Nature (the Fundamental Elements of
Policy), Leviathan, of Liberty and Necessity, De Cive, De Corpo Politico
(of the Elements of Law, moral and politic).
Hobbes’ Definitions
Power: The ability to fulfill our desires, both future and present.
Honor: (not linked with virtue, but rather, linked with power). “Honorable is whatsoever possession,
action, or quality, is an argument and sign of power” (Raphael 30). Being honored or feared is power
and hence honorable. “To believe, to trust to rely on another, is to honor him; sign of opinion of his
virtue and power. To distrust or not believe, is to dishonor” (Raphael 31).
Virtue: Belief of the man and the truth of what he says: belief of his virtue, to have faith, to trust or
believe a man. Virtue is valued for eminence [high rank of repute] and signifies an opinion of that man’s
veracity [conformity to truth]. Intellectual virtues are abilities of the mind which are praised, valued,
and desired in themselves.
Happiness: Happiness is subjectively determined, everybody’s happiness is different. We desire
pleasure as a means to happiness, our desires move us to action; hence, all our actions tend towards
happiness. We seek power (ultimately) to secure pleasure, happiness.
Hobbes’ Q&A
Q: Should I be moral? Why?
A: Yes – you should be moral in order to avoid living in a state of nature. A state of nature, according to
Hobbes, is a state in which no government or drafted laws exist which happens to be a state of war
where every person is in competition with every other person for the preservation and improvement of
their own life. While in a state of war (life is short, hostile, rapacious and lonely), all human actions aim
towards a person’s subjective desires for pleasure and power without regard for the general wellbeing
of humankind. In order to escape the state of war, we must form, and live under, a leviathan which
outlines how everyone is expected to act: “Fear of oppression, disposeth a man to anticipate, or to seek
aid by society; for there is no other way by which a man can secure his life and liberty.”
Q: Is virtue in the interest of the virtuous?
8
A: Yes – Being virtuous is in your interest because it removes you from the state of nature, while not
being virtuous will cause you to fall back into the state of nature placing you in a vulnerable position.
Q: What is human nature?
A: “Man’s nature is the sum of his natural faculties and powers, as the faculties of nutrition, motion,
generation, sense, reason, etc” (Human Nature, I.4).
9
Richard Cumberland (1631-1718)
Lived: 1631-1718
Origin: [English] – Cambridge (Peterborough).
Classifications: Rationalism, Utilitarianism.
Ethical/Moral Texts: De Legibus Naturae (1762).
Cumberland’s Definitions
Cumberland’s Q&A
10
Samuel Clarke (1675-1729)
Lived: 1675-1729
Origin: [English] – Cambridge  Westminster.
Classifications: Rationalism, ~Utilitarianism.
Ethical/Moral Texts: A Discourse concerning the
Unchangeable Obligations of Natural Religion, and the
Truth and Certainty of the Christian Revelation.
Clarke’s Definitions
Clarke’s Q&A
Q: Is virtue in the interest of the virtuous?
A: No.
Q: Are our moral obligations determined by our sentiments, or are moral facts determined by our
faculty of reason?
A: They are determined by reason.
11
Francis Hutcheson (1694-1746)
Lived: 1694-1746
Origin: [Irish] – Ulster  Glasgow  Dublin  Glasgow.
Classifications: Sentimentalism, Utilitarianism, Empiricism,
Hedonism.
Ethical/Moral Texts: An Inquiry concerning the Original of Our
Ideas of Virtue or Moral Good, An Essay on the Nature and
Conduct of Passions and Affections with Illustrations on the Moral
Sense.
Hutcheson’s Definitions
Hutcheson’s Q&A
Q: Is virtue in the interest of the virtuous?
A: No.
Q: Are our moral obligations determined by our sentiments, or are moral facts determined by our
faculty of reason?
A: They are determined by our sentiments.
12
David Hume (1711-1776)
Lived: 1711-1776
Origin: [Scottish] – Edinburgh  Flèche (Anjou)  Edinburgh.
Classifications: Sentimentalism, ~Utilitarianism, Empiricism.
Ethical/Moral Texts: A Treatise of Human Nature, An Enquiry
Concerning the Principles of Morals, An Enquiry concerning
Human Understanding, Of the Standard of Taste.
Hume’s Definitions
Benevolence: (friendship, charity, compassion, etc.) is a [natural] genuine virtue, it is useful for people,
and it is praised / esteemed. The internal motivation for benevolence is sympathy. We desire to see
others do well and we take pleasure in satisfying our desires. Hence, we get pleasure when we are
benevolent.
Justice: Honesty with respect to one’s own property. We have a general sense that justice is in our self
interests (since property is in our interest) and this is the motive for being virtuous. With justice comes
utility.
Utility: Things are praised because of their utility. Justice is useful to society -utility- it has a tendency to
the public good. The virtues have a tendency to the good of society, or to that of the person possessed
of them. The virtues are useful, either to society, or to the person possessed of them. The useful
qualities of the mind are virtuous, because of their utility.
Passions: The influencing motives of the will – that which determines what ideas are acted upon.
Two types of Passions:


Violent- e.g., lust, anger, revenge, and rage.
Calm- e.g., benevolence, resentment, appetite to good, aversion to evil, and perception of
beauty.
Reason: (reason as a faculty) reason/science is the comparing of ideas and the discovery of their
relations.
Impressions: Perceptual experiences of the external world.
Ideas: Copies of our impressions.
13
Virtue: It is the nature, and, indeed, the definition of virtue, that it is a quality of the mind agreeable to
or approved of by everyone, who considers or contemplates it. Virtue is both a mental quality in the
person contemplated, and a perception by those who contemplate the person.
Hume’s Q&A
Q: Is virtue in the interest of the virtuous?
A: Yes – being virtuous is in the interest of the virtuous because it produces pleasure in them. Hume
says, “An action, or sentiment, or character is virtuous or vicious; why? because its view causes a
pleasure or uneasiness of a particular kind” (Raphael 20). Hence, we take pleasure in seeing other
people’s virtuous actions and we take pleasure in knowing that the actions we make are virtuous.
Counter-argument: The Sensible Knave: a smart criminal who does not respect justice (knave) and gets
away with it (sensible). The sensible knave can reap benefits by committing non-virtuous acts.
Hume’s response: The sensible knave thinks that he is better off by committing and getting away with
injustice because he attains additional riches, but he is wrong; in reality, he has bad taste, i.e., he thinks
cash equals happiness. The invaluable enjoyment of character—peaceful reflection of one’s own
conduct—is of a higher value/pleasure than the pleasures attained by riches. The pleasures of the moral
sense are more valuable than any other pleasures.
Q: Are our moral obligations determined by our sentiments, or are moral facts determinable by our
faculty of reason?
A: Hume argues that reason alone is not sufficient to distinguish between moral good and evil, but
rather, it requires our sentiments.
a) Reason is perfectly inert, and can never either prevent or produce any action or affection.
b) Since morals have an influence on the actions and affections, it follows, that they cannot be
derived from reason.
Hume backs up these claims with the following argument:
1. Reason is the discovery of truth or falsehood.
2. Truth or falsehood consists in an agreement or disagreement either to the real relations of
ideas, or to real existence and matter of fact.
3. Whatever is not susceptible of this agreement or disagreement is incapable of being true or
false, and can never be an object of our reason.
4. Our passions, volitions, and actions are not susceptible of any such agreement or disagreement
because they are original facts and realities, complete in themselves and imply no reference to
other passion, volitions, and actions (Raphael 9-10).
Therefore, it is impossible for our passions, volitions, and actions to be either true or false and to be
either contrary or conformable to reason.
14
Immanuel Kant (1724-1804)
Lived: 1724-1804
Origin: [German] – Konigsberg (Kalinigrad).
Classifications: Rationalism.
Ethical/Moral Texts: Groundwork of the Metaphysics of
Morals.
Kant’s Definitions
Kant’s Q&A
Q: Are our moral obligations determined by our sentiments, or are moral facts determinable by our
faculty of reason?
A: They are determined by our reason.
15
John Stuart Mill (1806-1873)
Lived: 1806-1873
Origin: English.
Classifications: ~Sentimentalism, Utilitarianism, Empiricism,
Hedonism.
Ethical/Moral Texts: Utilitarianism, On Liberty, The Subjection of
Women.
Mill’s Definitions
Mill’s Q&A
Q: is the sentiment of duty innate?
A: Mill believes that morality is acquired, that it is something we must cultivate. There is a sentiment in
human nature for benevolence which we must cultivate [educate] to universal benevolence. And, our
sense of consciousness is the sanction for just action and it must be cultivated. Hence, it is not natural.
This places Mill somewhere between Hutcheson and Hume.
16
Classification Table
Diagram 2.2 - This table depicts each philosopher and their respective philosophical camps.
An X designates a strong connection, and a \ designates a weak connection.
Aristotle Clarke Cumberland
Sentimentalism
\
X
X
Rationalism
\
X
Utilitarianism
Skepticism
Empiricism
Hedonism
X
Eudaimonist
Constraint
Hobbes Hume
X
\
\
X
X
Hutcheson Kant Mill
X
\
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Glossary
Empiricism: “The permanent strand in philosophy that attempts to tie knowledge to experience.
Experience is thought of either as the sensory contents of consciousness, or as whatever is expressed in
some designated class of statements that can be observed to be true by the use of the senses”
(Blackburn 114).
Eudaimonist Constraint: If morality is worth pursuing then it has to be bound to personal happiness; it
must be self-interested, or at least self-regarding.
Hedonism: “The pursuit of one’s own pleasure as an end in itself; in ethics, the view that such a pursuit
is the proper aim of all action. Since there are different conceptions of pleasure there are
correspondingly different varieties of hedonism” (Blackburn 161).
Rationalism: The notion that moral commands are known through reason and apply to all rational
beings. “Any philosophy magnifying the role played by unaided reason, in the acquisition and
justification of knowledge” (Blackburn 308).
Sentimentalism: The notion that our sentiments/senses/feelings guide our moral judgments. “The
position in moral theory especially associated with Shaftesbury, Hutcheson, and Hume, that sees ethics
as founded upon human sentiments, such as sympathy. It was especially defined in opposition to the
view that ethics is the deliverance of reason or revelation” (Blackburn 336).
Skepticism: The notion that humans, even with our rational ability, lack the capacity to accurately
determine moral principles.
Utilitarianism: “The ethical theory advanced by Bentham, both James and J. S. Mill, Sidgwick, and many
others, that answers all questions of what to do, what to admire, or how to live, in terms of maximizing
17
*utility or happiness. . . In J. S. Mill’s statement of the doctrine, ‘actions are right in proportion as they
tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness’” (Blackburn 377).
18
References
Blackburn, Simon. Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy Second Edition. Oxford University Press, 2005
D.D. Raphael, ed. British Moralists 1650-1800 vol. I Hobbes–Gay (Hackett Publishing Company, Inc.,
1991)
D.D. Raphael, ed. British Moralists 1650-1800 vol. II Hume–Bentham and Index (Hackett Publishing
Company, Inc., 1991)
Hume, David. A Treatise of Human Nature
Kant, Immanuel. Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Edited by Mary Gregor, Cambridge Texts in
the History of Philosophy
Mill, J.S. Utilitarianism. Edited by Roger Crisp. Oxford Philosophical Texts
Terrence Irwin, trans., Aristotle. Nicomachean Ethics, 2nd ed. Hackett Publishing Company, Inc., 1999
Tom Beauchamp, ed., Hume, David. An Enquiry concerning the Principles of Morals. Oxford
Philosophical Texts, 1998
http://w3schools.com/: The primary reference used for programming
http://www.iep.utm.edu/home/welcome : Used for the philosophers’ pictures – Aristotle, Hobbes,
Hume, Kant, and Mill
http://www.britannica.com/ : Hutcheson’s picture
http://www.nndb.com/people/462/000107141/ : Clarke’s picture