Gathering Opinions for a Term Paper

[kashley]

Hello all,

I am working on a term paper for a philosophy class, and I wanted to get some opinions. Considering this is philosophy, the topic is largely debatable. Well, entirely debatable. I am arguing whether or not ethical principles are a priori (known without experience) as the author, Bertrand Russell, claims. Russell's sole ethical principle that he believes is a priori is that all men pursue a good. He considers this broad enough of a principle that it applies to all men. I am establishing my argument, and I have done research, but I was curious to gather some opinions.

So, this is a VERY subjective question...I know. But, do you think that men pursue a good? That, even in doing things that are pure evil, they are pursuing some sort of good? Part of my argument will look at what exactly 'good' means as far as Russell believes, like whether he thinks the idea a good is unique to each man.

But, just for this question, let's assume that 'good' means exactly that. Do you believe that every single person, without exception, pursues good?

Thanks, everyone!

 

[Yuray]

But, just for this question, let's assume that 'good' means exactly that.

"good" in this case is too subjective. Russel implies that "good" means that all man does is for the benefit of man and nature, and if things go wrong, the intent of "good" was the unseen underlying, if not intentional, catalyst. Russel wanted to believe this postulation, but he was / is, wrong. In his utopian view, it is a noble mention however. Another meaning for "good" could be self serving. For instance, doing something that brings one pleasure could be seen as "good". Lets not forget about pedophiles, narcissists, rapists, murderers etc. "Good" feelings and satisfaction come to the perpetrators of the aforementioned acts, but we all know "goodness" in a broader term was not the catalyst. His statement is a broad enough principle for sure, but to the exclusion of evil, which as well, is known to exist.

But, do you think that men pursue a good? That, even in doing things that are pure evil, they are pursuing some sort of good?

C'mon kashley, you know this is utter nonsense. (so say so in your term paper.).......if you need evidence, read some Schoppenhauer.

Do you believe that every single person, without exception, pursues good?

Another question for rhetorical debate. Nonsense. Listen kashley, write what you feel, not what the prof might want to read, or by polling others. The prof knows Russel is wrong. Make your mark, write an antithesis to good, and mans part in it. There is far too much proof to refute Russel. While you're at it, read the book " Plato and a Platypus Walk Into a Bar".

Philosophy is for the birds, although they are inquisitive birds. Study something that pays money! There are only so many philosophy related teaching jobs, and the pay is not good. (That is of course if philosophy is your major).

All the best
Yuray Priori

 

[David Baxter PhD]

I agree. The only way one can consider the actions of some people as motivated by "good" would be to define "good" as "good for that person", i.e., the person performing the evil action.

 

[kashley]

Haha, thank you for the responses. I think I am definitely going to emphasize the subjective definition of good as a main thing that negates Russell's argument.

And, luckily, I am not majoring in philosophy, but we have certain requirements to graduate, and this class fulfills one of the requirements in my humanities section. I am actually double majoring in Communication Studies and Psychology.

 

[Yuray]

Hey kash, keyword "good " in Wikipedia. There should be enough info to marginalize Russels statement. The understanding, / definition, / tenability, of altruism has come a long way since Russels death. Oddly enough, most philosophers (old school) built their careers by disagreeing, for the most part, with other philosophers before them. One thing for sure about philosophy, is that nothing is certain! Philosophy encapsulates quite well the true meaning of subjectivity, and confusion!

I think I am definitely going to emphasize the subjective definition of good as a main thing that negates Russell's argument.

excellent choice!

 

[kashley]

Thanks a ton for the help! And it's definitely true that nothing in philosophy is certain. We have just started exploring the philosophic take on skepticism. Probably the most simplistic route of philosophy, considering you can answer every question with "I don't know." Including your own existence.

 

[Yuray]

Including your own existence.

ummmm.....................as Rene Descartes put it, " I think, therefore I am"...............another way to say it would be, "my feet stink, therefore I smell"..........and on, and on ....and on..! there is no end to speculation! good luck on the paper!

 

[David Baxter PhD]

"I think I think. Therefore I think I am. (I think...)"

 

[Daniel E.]

as Rene Descartes put it, " I think, therefore I am"

Reminds me of Thoughts Without A Thinker: Psychotherapy From A Buddhist Perspective.