PHI 105 - DeMarneffe (Exam 4)Graded A+, Exams of Science education
What does Kant mean by the "essential ends of humanity"? How, according
to him, is chronic drunkenness incompatible with these ends? - ANSWER•
The essential ends of humanity are primarily the development and exercise
of our rational capacities.
• If we spend our life in drunkenness then we are not exercising and
developing our rational capacities. It interferes.
If by "the essential ends of humanity" Kant means the development and
exercise of our rational capacities, why is it less obvious that prostitution is
incompatible with these ends than that suicide or chronic drunkenness is? -
ANSWER• Drunkenness and suicide are more obvious because they are
mental opposed to prostitution, which is more physical.
Identify two different ways in which prostitution might be incompatible with
the essential ends of humanity are understood a bit differently. - ANSWER1.
Both parties participating in prostitution are treating it as instrumental
Interferes with the person's capacity to love
Love and compassion- higher human capacity
2. Incompatible with the duty we have to ourselves
Failing to treat someone with the proper amount of respect
,Something disrespectful about prostitution (paying someone for sex)
What, in general, is existentialism, according to Sartre? - ANSWER• The view
that existence comes before essence
Why, offhand, does existentialism on this interpretation seem incoherent
given the standard metaphysical understanding of "essence"? - ANSWER• A
thing's essence lies in whatever properties it must have in order for it to exist
What we need in order to exist
• The essence is something a thing must have in order to exist therefore a
thing cannot exist before its essence
On what interpretation of "human essence" does existentialism make sense?
- ANSWER• As a kind of function (Aristotle)
- Before we have a function, we exist.
- We do not come with a function and in order to give ourselves a function
we must first exist.
Why does Sartre think that atheism entails existentialism? Does it on the
standard interpretation of essence? Why or why not? Does it on the
alternative interpretation? Why or why not? - ANSWER• Because if there is
not God, then human essence cannot precede human existence
On the standard interpretation of essence this is not possible, but the non-
existence of God does not entail that something can exist before it's essence
,which is impossible. Therefore atheism cannot entail existentialism.
• If there is no God we have no function or purpose before we exist, and any
function or purpose we must give to ourselves.
, Sartre seems to infer from the premise that essence does not precede
existence that existence precedes essence. What, if anything, is wrong with
this interference? - ANSWER• It is possible that they necessarily coexist (a
thing's essence and existence)
What, according to Sartre, is the "first principle of existentialism"? -
ANSWER• It is that man is nothing else than that which he makes of himself.
According to existentialism, value is subjective in one sense, but not another.
Explain. - ANSWER• It's created by human activity
Nothing is of value independent of human attitudes and actions
- The metaphysical grounding of value is human action and attitudes
• Subjectivism: an action is wrong for a person only if he believes it is wrong
and an action is right for a person only if he believes it is right.
- According to subjectivism, if someone believes
torturing/murdering/slavery/genocide is right, then it would be right.
- But we know it is objectively wrong to do things like this.
- Value is not subjective when it comes to human life
What does Sartre mean in saying that in choosing for oneself one chooses for
all mankind? What is his argument for this position? - ANSWER• We never
choose something unless we believe it is good/worth choosing
- To believe that it is worth choosing is to believe that it is worth choosing for
anyone under the same/similar circumstances.
- "In choosing for oneself, one chooses for all mankind."
- We cannot consistently say that something is good for oneself, but not for
anyone else under the same circumstances.
What does Kant mean by the "essential ends of humanity"? How, according
to him, is chronic drunkenness incompatible with these ends? - ANSWER•
The essential ends of humanity are primarily the development and exercise
of our rational capacities.
• If we spend our life in drunkenness then we are not exercising and
developing our rational capacities. It interferes.
If by "the essential ends of humanity" Kant means the development and
exercise of our rational capacities, why is it less obvious that prostitution is
incompatible with these ends than that suicide or chronic drunkenness is? -
ANSWER• Drunkenness and suicide are more obvious because they are
mental opposed to prostitution, which is more physical.
Identify two different ways in which prostitution might be incompatible with
the essential ends of humanity are understood a bit differently. - ANSWER1.
Both parties participating in prostitution are treating it as instrumental
Interferes with the person's capacity to love
Love and compassion- higher human capacity
2. Incompatible with the duty we have to ourselves
Failing to treat someone with the proper amount of respect
,Something disrespectful about prostitution (paying someone for sex)
What, in general, is existentialism, according to Sartre? - ANSWER• The view
that existence comes before essence
Why, offhand, does existentialism on this interpretation seem incoherent
given the standard metaphysical understanding of "essence"? - ANSWER• A
thing's essence lies in whatever properties it must have in order for it to exist
What we need in order to exist
• The essence is something a thing must have in order to exist therefore a
thing cannot exist before its essence
On what interpretation of "human essence" does existentialism make sense?
- ANSWER• As a kind of function (Aristotle)
- Before we have a function, we exist.
- We do not come with a function and in order to give ourselves a function
we must first exist.
Why does Sartre think that atheism entails existentialism? Does it on the
standard interpretation of essence? Why or why not? Does it on the
alternative interpretation? Why or why not? - ANSWER• Because if there is
not God, then human essence cannot precede human existence
On the standard interpretation of essence this is not possible, but the non-
existence of God does not entail that something can exist before it's essence
,which is impossible. Therefore atheism cannot entail existentialism.
• If there is no God we have no function or purpose before we exist, and any
function or purpose we must give to ourselves.
, Sartre seems to infer from the premise that essence does not precede
existence that existence precedes essence. What, if anything, is wrong with
this interference? - ANSWER• It is possible that they necessarily coexist (a
thing's essence and existence)
What, according to Sartre, is the "first principle of existentialism"? -
ANSWER• It is that man is nothing else than that which he makes of himself.
According to existentialism, value is subjective in one sense, but not another.
Explain. - ANSWER• It's created by human activity
Nothing is of value independent of human attitudes and actions
- The metaphysical grounding of value is human action and attitudes
• Subjectivism: an action is wrong for a person only if he believes it is wrong
and an action is right for a person only if he believes it is right.
- According to subjectivism, if someone believes
torturing/murdering/slavery/genocide is right, then it would be right.
- But we know it is objectively wrong to do things like this.
- Value is not subjective when it comes to human life
What does Sartre mean in saying that in choosing for oneself one chooses for
all mankind? What is his argument for this position? - ANSWER• We never
choose something unless we believe it is good/worth choosing
- To believe that it is worth choosing is to believe that it is worth choosing for
anyone under the same/similar circumstances.
- "In choosing for oneself, one chooses for all mankind."
- We cannot consistently say that something is good for oneself, but not for
anyone else under the same circumstances.
