Utilitarianism

I decided to take a look at the philosophy on ethics of Jeremy Bentham and the idea of utilitarianism. utilitarianism stemmed from the thinking of Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill; in short terms, utilitarianism seeks to improve the happiness of everyone, because not only are we affected by our own actions, but the people who surround us are affected as well. We should do what is right for the group, rather than what is most right for ourselves.

Bentham, a lawyer, believed that laws should only be passed in the interest of the group, not the individual and should maximize the happiness and pleasure of everyone. He also had ideas about "happiness sums", that our happiness could be measured  by how much pain or pleasure our feelings produced. Bentham made assumptions that humans will seek pleasure over pain and that happiness could be calculated by that pleasure it brings us. He was very scientific and mathematical in his thought processes and the idea of utilitarianism is very political.

To me, this idea is very strange. My beliefs run alongside Nietzche's beliefs of every man for himself. I think that Bentham had an unrealistic idea of society that everyone will agree and have the same beliefs and they will all always be happy. But in reality, people have very different ideas and morals and we can hardly ever reach a common ground. That's why I believe that we should focus on ourselves, and we are only responsible for our own happiness and our own actions, not the happiness and actions of others.

I think that Bentham had everyone's best interest at heart, utilitarianism, and modern communism is a very unrealistic and unsuccessful way to run society.

10 Commandments vs. 5 Precepts

After reviewing the 10 Commandments and the 5 Buddhist Precepts, I noticed many similarities. The most obvious similarity is that they are both short lists that instruct and guide people how to live. Both include the importance of refraining from stealing, killing, sexual promiscuities, and lying. Another similarity is that though there are many other guides and rules within each religion, these must be taken with the utmost importance. Both of these texts also assume that the moral standings by which they follow are accurate and should be applied to all.

It was much easier to see the differences between the 10 Commandments and the 5 Buddhist Precepts. The 5 Precepts are much more direct and simplified than the 10 Commandments. The Precepts focus on what one should NOT do, and are more about the way one goes about their individual life. The 10 Commandments, though they do include rules that warn about what one should not do, are more focused on the respect of God. The aspect of religion and worship was not discussed in the 5 Precepts. The first four rules within the 10 Commandments are focused on God and the requirement that the worshipper respect God no matter what. The 10 Commandments also makes many more assumptions than the 5 Buddhist Precepts, such as the assumption that there is only one God and that all parents automatically deserve respect. Of course, these two religions are quite different so it makes sense that they have a different perspective on the way one should go about their life. It is interesting, however, that you find similar themes within the Holiness Code, the Buddhist Precepts, and the 10 Commandments.

Individuality & Equality

In ethics three of the most important things to me are individuality, equality, and happiness. (I’ll get to the happiness part later) Individuality and equality may seem slightly contradictory but I will explain how they are different. I believe that every person is different. We all have different ethics and morals, based on how we were raised and what our experiences taught us. Your political morals and beliefs are shaped by those things, and I don’t have any problem with someone disagreeing with me about politics, as long as they can explain why they hold those beliefs. The same idea holds true for most of the areas of ethics. I don’t really care if we have the same ethics or not, as long as each person sticks to their ideas. If someone is vague, or indecisive, I wouldn’t have much confidence in their morals. In terms of equality, I believe that every person should be treated as equals. One of the biggest problems in our society is how people who are different are treated as lesser. I believe every person, not just in our country but around the world, should have equal opportunities in all forms. Intelligence, gender, sexual orientation, financial situation, race, religion, disability, appearance, etc. These are all things that define people and create stereotypes. I think that these are things that should embellish the equal base of each person. These are things that should help to define our individuality, not to create limits on our ability. In my opinion, a middle-class, black, jewish lesbian from australia with a slight speech impediment has just as much potential as a rich, white, christian man from the US. The things that make them different only make them more interesting individuals.

These values make me a lot like Nel Noddings. I know we haven’t really looked at her yet, but I agree with almost everything I’ve read about her. She was a strong feminist, but even more importantly, she has spread the appreciation of education and care in our society. She believed that education was the central source of spreading good morals in children. This quotation I found summarizes the connection between my ideas and what she said about ethics. “We need to give up the notion of a single ideal of the educated person and replace it with a multiplicity of models designed to accommodate the multiple capacities and interests of students. We need to recognize multiple identities.” To me, one of the most important things is giving people equal opportunities. In our world, the simplest way to do that is through education. I believe that all children should have the same opportunity, not just to go to school, but to be treated as equals at school and to learn in a safe environment where they don’t have to be afraid of being a certain gender or race etc.
As for the happiness, I believe that the purpose in life is to achieve happiness, or come as close as we possibly can.  This is actually what I wrote my paper at St. Pauls about so I’m just going to share with you pieces of what I wrote over the summer:

“Does happiness exist? Perhaps pure happiness is unattainable, and we have to keep reaching for it, but can never touch it, for it will burn our imperfect lives. And yet, we reach. Perhaps pure blissful happiness is something we can only dream of, but happiness itself is no foreign concept. We experience moments of joy every day, and these moments prove that what we are searching for is waiting to be found.

The reason we work so hard throughout our lives is to obtain the money and resources we need to live successful, healthy lives. In today’s society we rely too much on our material belongings so its actually become possible to ‘buy happiness’. However, we must remember that these possessions cannot replace happiness. We cannot rely on items or even other people to make us happy. This is something we must do for ourselves.

There would be no such thing as happiness if there was no sadness. While we all want our lives to be void of pain, it is necessary to contrast the good moments. If we were always happy, nothing would be special and nothing would be important. Sadness must exist for us to feel happiness. Therefore, it is impossible to be completely happy all the time. While maintaining happiness would be ideal, it is not rational because it would lose its meaning over time.

When making difficult decisions, I often think of this. I consider how each choice will immediately, and in the long run, affect my emotions. This doesn’t always solve my problems, but it gives me a different outlook on the situation.  It is important to remember that if you are doing something that does not make you happy now, and will not foreseeably make you happy later, it may not be worth your time. The one condition is if it is making someone else happy. In order to maintain our happiness we must also care for the happiness of those around us. This means doing what others ask as well as going out of our way to help them. Often, these actions will be self-rewarding because they can give you a sense of givingness or accomplishment.

Ultimately, you just have to live. You can make decisions and surround yourself with people who will make you happy, but it is up to you to emotionally create your happiness. Searching too hard or reaching too far won’t work. The most effective thing you can do is to always be optimistic and positive. When you keep an open mind to all people and ideas you can create the ideal environment for happiness.

Negative thoughts and emotions will always be present, but we don’t need to acknowledge them. We need to remember that being happy is what ultimately matters, and that it is achievable if we stay in an optimistic mindset. All the little things will just make the next happy moment even closer to pure bliss.”

I guess this makes me a lot like Aristotle because his philosophy focuses on a pursuit of happiness. He even said “Happiness depends on ourselves,” which is very close to some of the things I said before we even started discussing morals.

Ethical Ideology

For the past couple weeks, we’ve been focusing on the study of ethics and the work of different philosophers who are historically significant.  Some of these philosophers include Plato, Aristotle, Bentham, and Hume.  The study of ethics is the attempt made by philosophers to characterize what it means to live a good, meaningful life.  As we’ve seen, there are a wide take on the ethical ideologies that philosophers have laid out over the centuries.   With the quiz that we took at the start of the week after getting back from April break, the philosopher that most closely aligned with me was Aristotle, and in all honesty, this surprised me. 

If I were to characterize what it is I hope to gain out of life, I would describe a virtuous, adventurous, purposeful and resilient life.  To see, to serve, to sacrifice, and to sacrifice are just a few of the ways I would characterize my idea of a good life.  Without confusing my aspirations for life with my ethical ideals, I would say that fulfillment is found in serving others, which is part of the reason why I chose to pursue a career in the Coast Guard.  Not only this, but I believe that is our individual duty to serve of others, not just a decision made by the 1% in uniform.  Beyond this, it’s important to cultivate a sense of curiosity about the world in order to fully enjoy the riches that life has to offer.  Travelling, reading, writing, exploring and learning are all ways to cultivate this sense of curiosity.  Perhaps the final component of my thoughts of living a fulfilling life is incorporating resilience into life.  Life tends to throw hardships to you when you least expect them, and having resilience at these moments is critical to growth. 

I suppose that because of this vision of a fulfilling life, Aristotle is in fact a strong fit for me.  Aristotle ultimately believes in the idea that the highest good and the goal of all human activity is the attainment of happiness.  You attain this happiness by living a virtuous life and by constantly learning about the world around you and your own self.  Virtuous acts require morality and conscious choice.  In other words, man has personal responsibility for his actions.  Only through action can a man achieve moral virtue.  So much of what Aristotle believes aligns with my ideals of living a fulfilling life.  Word for word, we each incorporate the idea of living a virtous life into our ethical beliefs, and he builds off of this idea by claiming service brings about fulfillment.  

Hume and His Assumptions

Hume was a very interesting philosopher to read in class. I say this because his assumptions on human reasoning (when he, himself  is reasoning) and rational thought is very skeptical. Unlike many philosophers, Hume’s philosophy is based off of the assumption that humans experience and find our sources of morality and religion based off of impressions (things we experience). But his ideas expand even more, or his idea of our thought on morality being based off of impressions is accompanied by another idea, being that humans use ideas (our reflections, abstractions, and so forth of thought) and what we reflect off of them. In these ideas and impressions we are mammals looking for repetition. This repetition isn’t the repetition per-sé, of shapes, but of habitual associations and natural needs. Humans need that impression that someone is looking out for them in an omniscient way -- to know that there is someone responsible for blessings and another force responsible for curses. Our humanly actions stem from that natural feelings we experience, and aren’t interfered by our reasoning.

In response to his assumption on moral sentiment and the existence of a supernatural figure, humans have a natural sense of virtue. This virtue stems from the idea of human ideas and impressions. Hume believed our basis and ideas of virtue are simply based upon the feelings and associations of pain and pleasure. We are beings in search of pleasure, wanting to avoid pain. If something causes us pain, we label it unvirtuous and continue on, making note as we live our lives. On the existence of God, Hume refers back to his original sources or principles that existence comes from human ideas and impressions. With this, Hume tries to argue that a cause for the belief in a god is due to the “supposedly proportional to the observed effect,” in the case being  that “manifested imperfections” seen on the world we live in could never support such a claim in a perfect creator.

My response to his own reasoning is that there’s more to the human existence than just ideas and impressions. It goes deeper. Ideas develop and so do impressions. There’s an instinctual and biological association to beliefs people develop, as well as psychological. Not just in mere thought and physical experiences. Yes, through experiences, such as science things are proven, but there are many things that require faith, and it is in the beauty of faith that people grow and blossom. Hume pulls a paradox on himself, as he uses his own mental capability and brain to reason and to grow in his ideas and experiences. As far as the idea of virtues, however, excluding his ideas on God, as I could write a book on what I think of his assumptions, however they are entirely worldly and objectifying, I have to agree with his assumptions that humans are beings looking for pleasure and discouraging/hating pain. It’s part of a classical condition humans experiences - if something causes them pain physically or emotionally, we simply avoid such a situation, which can shape our virtues and morals. I salute his overall efforts and his ideas, as they are notable, but they are, mostly to me, irrational and conceivably, irrelevant.

Ten Commandments vs. Buddhist Precepts

               The Ten Commandments of the Hebrew Bible and Buddhist precepts are quite alike. Both incorporate a sense of right and wrong in accordance to how certain actions affect others. Not every commandment of the Bible line up with a precept, but many do. For example, the concept of murder, stealing, sexual misconduct, lying, divisive speech, and covetousness are similar morals that both the Ten Commandments and the Buddhist precepts outline. All these deal with how one treats others, their interactions with others, and/or the affect of a certain action on others. I believe this shows the importance of a society and group and the idea that whatever we do, it has a direct impact on those around us. 
         The Ten Commandments and Buddhist precepts are very different as well. The Ten Commandments incorporate the idea of devotion to a single deity, more specifically, God. The Buddhist precepts are not this specific, but rather follow the idea that one must be devoted to the precepts, or moral code. In Judaism, and in Christianity, most of the commandments involve a certain devotion to God and by breaking or not following said commandment(s), one is disrespecting God and questioning his authority. The Buddhist precepts are very much focused on following a moral code in order for one to have a successful or short cyclic experience and to avoid placement in the lower realms. 

Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche

In regards to my own views on ethics and morals, I identify with Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche. I became pleasantly surprised with how accurate the philosopher test was as I started to research Nietzsche, and I found myself agreeing with nearly everything he believed in. His master/slave morality, eternal recurrence theory, disregard of modern culture, and sense of self-mastery intrigued me and captivated me in ways no other ethical principles have before.

Nietzsche’s master and slave morality is a really interesting concept that makes a lot of sense to me. It states that people higher in power, like people with wealth and a higher social class, set the values for good and bad. The master morality has the ideology that anything that is good is helpful, and anything that is bad is harmful. The slave morality combats the master morality, believing it is evil, therefore slave morality is seen as good. Good increases the utility for the whole of the group, not just the strong and wealthy, and there is no concept of bad, only evil, which decreases the utility of the group. I find this oddly fascinating… but it makes complete logical sense if you think about it long and hard enough. 

The theory of eternal recurrence is one of Nietzsche's most interesting and slightly confusing ideas. It's his idea that the universe goes through cycles of recurrence and it will continue to go through cycles for an infinite number of times through infinite time and space. It's something that I discovered that was worth mentioning, but it's a bit confusing to describe in detail. I highly recommend you guys look into it, but heres a passage from his book The Gay Science that can sum the idea up better than I can:

"What if some day or night a demon were to steal into your lonliest lonliness and say to you: 'This life as you now live it and have lived it you will have to live once again and innumerable times again; and there will be nothing new in it, but every pain and every joy and every thought and sigh and everything unspeakably small or great in your life must return to you, all in the same succession and sequence - even this spider and this moonlight between the trees, and even this moment and I myself. The eternal hourglass of existence is turned over again and again, and you with it...'"

Possibly one of my favorite things about Nietzsche is his disregard for modern culture and his belief that people should focus on themselves. Nietzsche believed that mass culture induces conformity and leads to a lack of human progression, so it's best to overcome and avoid it. In order to do this, humans need to achieve a sense of "Will to Power" which creates a focus on the self and achieving self-mastery. Nietzsche believes that humans need to be selfish and have passions in order to have virtues, and having virtues is the way to have a productive, healthy society. 

“Once you had passions and called them evil. But now you have only your virtues: they grew out of your passions. You implanted your highest goal into the heart of those passions: then they became your virtues and joys. And though you were of the race of the hot-tempered, or of the voluptuous, or of the fanatical, or the vindictive; All your passions in the end became virtues, and all your devils angels.”

- Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus spoke Zarathustra

In my opinion, Friedrich Nietzsche is one of the greatest philosophers of our time. He developed ingenious ideas and is aware that humans need to focus on themselves and develop passions in order to advance in society. He created the idea of Master and Slave morality, thought about the possibility of eternal recurrence, rejects conformity and mass culture, and is aware of the importance an individual's uniqueness has on society. I personally identify with all of these ideas (well, maybe not eternal recurrence, but it was way too cool of a theory to not mention) and I'm thrilled that I had a chance to see where these ideas originated.