Presentation on theme: "Morals By Agreement Barretto | Cinco | Dykimching, Lumauig | Miranda."— Presentation transcript:
Morals By Agreement Barretto | Cinco | Dykimching, Lumauig | Miranda
DAVID GAUTHIER Born in Toronto in 1932 Educated at the University of Toronto (Bachelor of Arts with Honors Degree) (1954) Became a chairman of the Philosophy Department of the University of Toronto Also became a member of the Philosophy Department of the University of Pittsburgh Became a Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Philosophy of Science
DAVID GAUTHIER Known for his three books: -Practical Reasoning -The Logic of Leviathan -Morals by Agreement Inspiration and influence from Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Thomas Hobbes Certain interest in political philosophy, economic rationality and practical rationality Developed a Contractarian Moral Theory within the framework of rational choice
According to Gauthier Value is subjective Four things to consider: Utility, Morality, Rationality and Reason Morality = distinction between what's good and bad, right and wrong Rationality = based on reason or logic (logical, practical etc.)
According to David Hume... The theory of morals are only useful if it recommends duties that promote the interest of individuals. More often than not, the morality of an act only becomes our concern when the act clashes with our individual interests.
Reactions of Gauthier... Theory of morals shouldn't just recommend duties that promote the interest of individuals. Else, theory of morals will be superfluous. If usefulness is to be considered in a theory of morals, that theory of morals must recommend duties that reason also endorses.
"If moral appeals are entitled to some practical effect..., it is not because they whisper invitingly to our desires, but because they convince our intellect.”
Assumptions The following two cases are IMPOSSIBLE: 1. Reason is only a tool for deciding matters of fact, and that it does not affect the "sphere of action". 2. Reason is just a "handmaiden“ (or servant) of interest, and that every moral action that doesn't promote one's interest also contradicts reason.
ACTIONS ACTIONS THAT PROMOTE INDIVIDUAL INTERESTS RATIONAL ACTIONS Assumption #2: This diagram is false.
Assumptions 3. Morals are a part of the theory of rational choice. 4. The rational principles for decision-making include some that constraints the actor pursuing his own interest in an impartial way (which are moral principles). 5. Decision-making must begin with clear conceptions of value and rationality, in a form applicable to choice situations.
RATIONAL ACTIONS ACTIONS THAT PROMOTE INDIVIDUAL INTERESTS Reason has a practical role related to but transcending individual interest. Actions that doesn’t promote individual interests can still be rationally justified. Morality is a rational constraint on the pursuit of individual interest.
RATIONAL ACTIONS ACTIONS THAT PROMOTE INDIVIDUAL INTERESTS MORALITY
Objectives To provide a justificatory framework for moral behavior and principles To validate the conception of morality as a set of rational, impartial constraints on the pursuit of individual interest.
MAIN POINTS Reason has a practical role related to but transcending individual interest, so that principles of action that prescribe duties overriding advantage may be rationally justified. In a way, we are to defend the traditional conception of morality as a rational constraint on the pursuit of individual interest. an individual chooses rationally only in so far as he constrains his pursuit of his own interest or advantage to conform to principles expressing the impartiality characteristic of morality.
STUDY OF CHOICE The study of choice begins from the stipulation of clear conceptions of value and rationality in a form applicable to choice situations. For each type of structure distinguished, the conception of rationality may be elaborated into a set of determinate conditions on the choice among possible actions.
ECONOMIC THEORY (classical and neo-classical) Examines rational behaviour in those situations in which the actor knows with certainty the outcome of each of his possible actions Assumes rationality of the actors
GAUTHIER’S COMMENTS Both economics and decision theory are limited in their analysis of interaction, since both consider outcomes only in relation to the choices of a single actor, treating the choices of others as aspects of that actor's circumstances.
THEORY OF GAMES Overcomes this limitation, analyzing outcomes in relation to sets of choices, one for each of the persons involved in bringing about the outcome Considers the choices of an actor who decides on the basis of expectations about the choices of others, themselves deciding on the basis of expectations about his choice
The theory of rational choice is an ongoing enterprise, extending a basic understanding of value and rationality to the formulation of principles of rational behavior in an ever wider range of situations.
JOHN RAWLSJOHN HARSANYIDAVID GAUTHIER Insisted that the theory of justice is “the most significant part of the theory of rational choice” Explicitly treats ethics as part of the theory of rational behavior. Morality can be generated as a rational constraint from the non-moral premises of rational choice.
Morals By Agreement Must generate, strictly as rational principles for choice, and so without introducing prior moral assumptions (being impartial) satisfy the traditional understanding of morality. Conception of morality is seen as a set of rational, impartial constraints on the pursuit of individual interest, not to defend any particular moral code
Morals By Agreement A connection between reason and interest exist in so far as the interests of others are not affected. A person acts rationally if and only if she seeks her greatest interest or benefit
Maximizing Conception of Rationality Universalistic Conception of Rationality rational person still seeks the greatest satisfaction of her own interests Insists that what makes it rational to satisfy an interest does not depend on whose interest it is. Thus the rational person seeks to satisfy all interests. Neither conception of rationality requires that practical reasons be self-interested. OPPOSED CONCEPTIONS OF PRACTICAL RATIONALITY it is not interests in the self, that take oneself as object, but interests of the self, held by oneself as subject, that provide the basis for rational choice and action it is not interests in anyone, that take any person as object, but interests of anyone, held by some person as subject, that provide the basis for rational choice and action.
Note On the universalistic conception all persons have in effect the same basis for rational choice -- the interests of all -- of the impersonality or impartiality of reason The rational requirement that all interests be satisfied to the fullest extent possible directly constrains each person in the pursuit of her own interests. The main task of our moral theory -- the generation of moral constraints as rational -- is thus easily accomplished by proponents of the universalistic conception of practical reason.
A person is......an independent center of activity, endeavoring to direct his capacities and resources to the fulfillmment of his interests. He considers what he can do, but initially draws no distinction between what he may and may not do.
Morals by agreement offer a contractarian rationale for distinguishing what one may or may not do. Moral principles are introduced as the objects of fully voluntary ex ante agreement among rational persons In so far as individuals would agree to constraints on their choices, restraining their pursuit of their own interests, they acknowledge a distinction between what they may and may not do.
Thoman Hobbes Glaucon Kurt Baier: The reason for existence of a morality is to yield reasons which overrule the reasons of self-interest in those cases when everyone's following self-interest would be harmful to everyone.
John Rawls: A contractarian views society as “a cooperative venture for mutual advantage” among persons “conceived as not taking an interest in one another's interests” Thus the contractarian insists that a society could not command the willing allegiance of a rational person if, without appealing to her feelings for others, it afforded her no expectation of net benefit.
Each joins in the hope of benefiting from the adherence of others, but fails to adhere in the hope of benefiting from her own defection. A necessary condition of such agreement is that its outcome be mutually advantageous; our task is to provide a sufficient condition.
Four Core Conception The proviso against bettering oneself through worsening others The morally free zone afforded by the perfectly competitive market The principle of minimax relative concession The disposition to constrained maximization
First: Bargaining problem proper: selecting a specific outcome given a range of mutually advantageous possibilities, and an initial bargaining position. Second: Determine the initial bargaining position. Develop own theory of bargaining.
Principle of Minimax Relative Concession Requirement that the least relative benefit, measured again as a proportion of one's stake, be as great as possible Captures the ideas of fairness and impartiality in a bargaining situation, and so serves as the basis of justice
Contractarian Theory of Morals Strength Weaknesses A “Case Study” Arguments Against
Strength "Enables people to demonstrate the rationality of impartial constraints on the pursuit of individual interest to persons who may take no interest in others' interest.“ Morality is given a sure grounding.
Weaknesses Requires a context of mutual benefit. Does not assume any fundamental concern with impartiality, but only a concern derivative from the benefits of agreement.
Weaknesses Not everyone will receive equal benefits Coercion among unequals
The Western Society Resorted to cooperative ventures, training individuals to work for his own good to be able to contribute to society. Lead to increased mutual benefit: – Rise in the quantity of material goods – Increase in population – Increase in the average life span
The Western Society Individualistic AND cooperative Limited constraints Freed from coercion: individual progress and social advance are linked together Elements of law, religion, and education
Technology Allows individuals who do not contribute to social progress to benefit
Arguments Against 1.) Glaucon: Each person has the secret hope that they can be successfully unjust. Human desires are not touched by Contractarianism.
Arguments Against 2.) Each person would prefer a natural harmony in which he/she could fullfill him/herself without constraint. Cooperation is only the second best form of interaction, next to market.
If human individuality is to bloom, then we must expect some degree of conflict among the aims and interests of persons rather than natural harmony. Market and morals tame this conflict, reconciling individuality with mutual benefit.
Can these ideas lead to practical truths? Are we telling a story about ideas that will seem as strange to our descendants, as the Form of the Good and the Unmoved Mover do to us?
“According to Gauthier, moral constraint on the pursuit of individual self-interest is required because cooperative activities almost inevitably involve a prisoner's dilemma: a situation in which the best individual outcomes can be had by those who cheat on the agreement while the others keep their part of the bargain.” (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
Tricia’s dilemma SAO Director SilenceFile case Tricia Do favorTB, DBTX, DB ExposeTB, DXTX, DX TB = Tricia’s benefit DB = SAO Director’s benefit TX = Tricia’s loss DX = SAO Director’s loss