Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
David Hume natural tendencies to virtue
David hume ethics
David hume ethics
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: David Hume natural tendencies to virtue
Jenna Novy
Professor Engar
Intellectual Traditions
David Hume and Immanuel Kant on Morality One of the earliest groundworks for morality stem from the teachings within the Bible. It is written that “What comes out of a person is what defiles him. For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person” (Mark 7:20-23). Interpretations of this verse yield the conclusion that if immorality comes from within, then righteousness and morality comes from without- from God. This explanation of morality was accepted for thousands of years, so when philosophers
…show more content…
However, because virtues and vices are relatively universally understood, most people’s moral conduct is comparable. The ideas of virtue and vice are paramount to Hume’s theory, so it is necessary to lay down a strong foundation regarding what these terms mean. Hume breaks virtues down into two types: natural virtue and artificial virtue. Natural virtues are agreeable in all situations, whether one resides in a large society or not. Artificial virtues, on the other hand, are a result of man’s exposure to civilization. They extend beyond familial ties and are useful for amiable interaction within a society. Natural virtues are a sure guide to happiness, while artificial virtues are spread and cultivated throughout a society to provide long-term contentment (Denis, Wilson). One of the first virtues that Hume discusses is that of benevolence. He writes that, “nothing can bestow more merit on any person that his having a very high degree of the sentiment of benevolence” (Hume 7). It is the ultimate natural virtue and the mark of a moral human. In contrast, a vice is any characteristic that is odious to humankind. Hume decries the vice of luxury, which has been known to have a corrupting influence on government and a major cause of faction, sedition, and civil …show more content…
He proposes that the motive behind leading a virtuous life is not to promote personal happiness but rather to act upon a duty that each human has towards his fellow humans. In fact, Kant states that an action done for the means of anything other than duty is less moral. A person may feel good about completing a charitable act, but that feeling should not be what drives them. The duty that each human is responsible for is outlined by moral laws, which are intrinsically valid. Kant writes in his Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals that, “[A Moral Law’s] application to human beings doesn’t depend on knowledge of any facts about them (anthropology); it gives them, as rational beings, a priori laws—ones that are valid whatever the empirical circumstances may be” (Kant
The three essays that make up On The Genealogy of Morals each deal with a certain stage of cultural development of morality. In order to establish chronology, the second section should precede the first, as noted by Dennett (Darwin's Dangerous Idea, 1995) . Essay I deals with the origins of "good" and "bad" as pertaining to the master and slave moralities. Essay II delves into the origin of guilt and bad conscience, while Essay III offers a discussion of the "ascetic ideal." I will concern myself only with the second phase of morality (Essay I), as it encompasses important aspects of the other two, but I will later give a brief discussion of Essays II and III in light of the explanation of the very origin of morality that Nietzsche is out to disprove.
The particular instances on which Hume first focuses are those relating to two social virtues: benevolence and justice. It is obvious, he says, that our benevolent qualities are important. To say of a person that he or she is sociable, good-natured, humane, merciful, grateful, friendly, generous, is to 'express the highest merit, which human nature is capable of attaining'(29). It is equally apparent, he suggests, that these qualities are esteemed because they proved for, "the happiness of mankind, the order of society, the harmony of families, the mutual support of friends…over the breasts of men"(34). The usefulness of these forms of benevolence is an essential condition of the attention we give to them, a inference that is understood, once morals acts of a particular type cease to be useful, they cease to be valued (30-32). In addit...
David Hume sought out to express his opinion in which sentiment is seen as the grounding basis for morality. This sentiment is acting as the causal reasoning for why we have morality or act in a moral way. David Hume, as well as Kant, believe that causal necessity governs humans lives and actions. In this essay, I will show how Hume, provides an argument in favor of sentiment being the foundation of our morality, rather than his predecessors who favored reason. To do this, I will begin to outline Hume’s theories, highlighting his main ideas for grounding morality on sentiment and bring up some possible counterarguments one of which being Immanuel Kant's theories and how that might potentially weaken his argument and how the roots of morality
In every field of study that exists, experts research, test, and reach conclusions; later they often debate, their ideas clashing to see which holds the most merit and which is the best to continue researching. This is the basis of our understandings, turning the personal knowledge of experts into shared knowledge that can be used to better the lives of everyone, and this comes from the disagreements in our Areas of Knowledge (AoKs). Before we delve further, we need to define some terms. Facts are understood as something that is the case, or as information that makes a sentence true. Experts are understood to be people that possess a significant amount of knowledge in an area at a greater level than the general public, and discipline is understood
Actions of any sort, he believed, must be undertaken from a sense of duty dictated by reason, and no action performed for expediency or solely in obedience to law or custom can be regarded as moral. A moral act is an act done for the "right" reasons. Kant would argue that to make a promise for the wrong reason is not moral - you might as well not make the promise. You must have a duty code inside of you or it will not come through in your actions otherwise. Our reasoning ability will always allow us to know what our duty is.
Overall Kant’s concepts of ‘The Good Will’ and ‘The Categorical Imperative’ can be applied to any situation. His ideas of moral law, good will, duty, maxims, and universal law all intertwine to support his belief. As a whole his concept enables the Kingdom of Ends, which is the desired result of the morality of humanity. Everyone is to treat everyone based upon true good will actions instead of personal gains, this way no one gets used. In all Kant trusts if this is achieved there will be universal peace across humanity.
David Hume sought out to express his opinion on ethics in which sentiment is seen as the grounding basis for morality. These theories can be seen as a response to the theories proposed by philosophers where they believed reason is considered to be the basis for morality. In this following essay I will show how Hume provides an argument in favor of sentiment being the foundation of our morality, rather than reason. To do this, I will begin to outline Hume’s ethical theories, highlighting his main ideas for grounding morality on sentiment and bring up some possible counterarguments that might potentially weaken this argument.
I argue that Hume's ethics can be characterized as a virtue ethics, by which I mean a view according to which character has priority over action and the principles governing action: virtuous character guides and constrains practical deliberation. In a traditional utilitarian or Kantian ethics, character is subordinate to practical deliberation: virtue is needed only to motivate virtuous action. I begin by outlining this approach in Aristotle's ethics, then draw relevant parallels to Hume. I argue that virtuous character in Aristotle is understood in terms of "self-love." A true self-lover enjoys most the exercise of the characteristic human powers of judging, choosing, deciding and deliberating. A virtuous agent's self-love enables sizing up practical situations properly and exhibiting the virtue called for by the situation. But if an agent's character is defective, the practical situation will be misapprehended and responded to improperly. I argue that though Hume claims moral judgments are the product of sympathy, they are actually the result of a complex process of practical reflection and deliberation. Although Hume writes as though anyone can be a judicious spectator, there is reason to think that persons of calm temperament, who enjoy deliberation and have a facility for it, are more likely to perform the corrections in sentiments that may be necessary. If this is so, an agent's character has priority over his or her practical deliberations.
Hume’s ultimate goal in his philosophic endeavors was to undermine abstruse Philosophy. By focusing on the aspect of reason, Hume shows there are limitations to philosophy. Since he did not know the limits, he proposed to use reason to the best of his ability, but when he came to a boundary, that was the limit. He conjectured that we must study reason to find out what is beyond the capability of reason.
Kant’s moral philosophy is built around the formal principles of ethics rather than substantive human goods. He begins by outlining the principles of reasoning that can be equally expected of all rational persons regardless of their individual desires or partial interests. It creates an ideal universal community of rational individuals who can collectively agree on the moral principles for guiding equality and autonomy. This is what forms the basis for contemporary human rig...
Through his discussion of morals in the Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, Immanuel Kant explores the question of whether a human being is capable of acting solely out of pure duty and if our actions hold true moral value. In passage 407, page 19, Kant proposes that if one were to look at past experiences, one cannot be certain that his or her rationalization for performing an action that conforms with duty could rest solely on moral grounds. In order to fully explain the core principle of moral theory, Kant distinguishes between key notions such as a priori and a posteriori, and hypothetical imperative vs. categorical imperative, in order to argue whether the actions of rational beings are actually moral or if they are only moral because of one’s hidden inclinations.
Before Hume can begin to explain what morality is, he lays down a foundation of logic to build on by clarifying what he thinks the mind is. Hume states that the facts the mind sees are just the perceptions we have of things around us, such as color, sound, and heat (Hume, 215). These perceptions can be divided into the two categories of ideas and impressions (215). Both of these categories rely on reason to identify and explain what is observed and inferred. However, neither one of these sufficiently explains morality, for to Hume, morals “. . .excite passions, and produce or prevent actions” (216)....
In Appendix I., Concerning Moral Sentiment, David Hume looks to find a place in morality for reason, and sentiment. Through, five principles he ultimately concludes that reason has no place within the concept of morality, but rather is something that can only assist sentiment in matters concerning morality. And while reason can be true or false, those truths or falsities apply to facts, not to morality. He then argues morals are the direct result of sentiment, or the inner feeling within a human being. These sentiments are what intrinsically drive and thus create morality within a being.
Natural virtues are immediate, instinctive, and emotional responses to situations. Human beings do not have to learn these. They are certain moral instincts we “naturally” have. Hume states that there are two categories within natural virtues: social and non-social. Non-social natural virtues are useful to the person themselves, such as prudence and temperance. Social natural v...
In this paper I will defend David Hume’s Moral Sense Theory, which states that like sight and hearing, morals are a perceptive sense derived from our emotional responses. Since morals are derived from our emotional responses rather than reason, morals are not objective. Moreover, the emotional basis of morality is empirically proven in recent studies in psychology, areas in the brain associated with emotion are the most active while making a moral judgment. My argument will be in two parts, first that morals are response-dependent, meaning that while reason is still a contributing factor to our moral judgments, they are produced primarily by our emotional responses, and finally that each individual has a moral sense.