Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'poems', 'No Moral Difference' and 'Letters to the Lord Marquis of Newcastle'

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     specify just one area for these texts


5 ideas

16. Persons / F. Free Will / 5. Against Free Will
If a man suddenly develops an intention of doing something, the cause is out of his control, not in his will [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: When first a man hath an appetite or will to something, to which immediately before he had no appetite or will, the cause of his will is not the will itself, but something else not in his own disposing.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (Letters to the Lord Marquis of Newcastle [1652])
Those actions that follow immediately the last appetite are voluntary [Hobbes]
     Full Idea: Those actions that follow immediately the last appetite are voluntary.
     From: Thomas Hobbes (Letters to the Lord Marquis of Newcastle [1652])
22. Metaethics / A. Ethics Foundations / 2. Source of Ethics / j. Ethics by convention
Nomos is king [Pindar]
     Full Idea: Nomos is king.
     From: Pindar (poems [c.478 BCE], S 169), quoted by Thomas Nagel - The Philosophical Culture
     A reaction: This seems to be the earliest recorded shot in the nomos-physis wars (the debate among sophists about moral relativism). It sounds as if it carries the full relativist burden - that all that matters is what has been locally decreed.
25. Social Practice / F. Life Issues / 2. Euthanasia
If it is desirable that a given patient die, then moral objections to killing them do not apply [Rachels]
     Full Idea: The cause of death (injection or disease) is important from the legal point of view, but not morally. If euthanasia is desirable in a given case then the patient's death is not an evil, so the usual objections to killing do not apply.
     From: James Rachels (No Moral Difference [1975], p.102)
     A reaction: Seems reasonable, but a very consequentialist view. Is it good that small children should clean public toilets?
It has become normal to consider passive euthanasia while condemning active euthanasia [Rachels]
     Full Idea: It seems to have become accepted that passive euthanasia (by withholding treatment and allowing a patient to die) may be acceptable, whereas active euthanasia (direct action to kill the patient) is never acceptable.
     From: James Rachels (No Moral Difference [1975], p.97)
     A reaction: He goes on to attack the distinction. It is hard to distinguish the two cases, as well as being hard to judge them.