Lecture 08

Summary

This module delves into moral philosophy, examining concepts like good, right, duty, justice, equality, and love. It discusses the challenges of defining 'good' and the ambiguity it holds in different contexts. The lecture touches on the complexities of rights, the tension between duty and love, and the varying interpretations of justice and equality. It also introduces 'Purusharthas,' the four goals of life in Indian philosophy. The session aims to equip students with the ability to identify moral positions and engage in ethical decision-making.

Takeaways

• 🔍 The course module delves into philosophical concepts such as good, right, duty, justice, equality, love, and purusharthas to understand their moral implications.
• 🤔 Defining 'good' is challenging; it's easier to identify a good person but difficult to articulate what 'good' means, highlighting the complexity of philosophical terms.
• 🗡️ The concept of 'good' varies; a good knife is functional, while a good person is morally commendable, indicating different interpretations based on context.
• 🤝 Differences in opinion often stem from varied interpretations of philosophical terms, emphasizing the importance of understanding others' viewpoints.
• 📚 Philosophical discourse is crucial for defining terms like 'good' and understanding their implications on individual and societal levels.
• ⚖️ 'Rights' can be understood as being correct or incorrect and as entitlements, with the interpretation depending on one's frame of reference.
• 💼 The concept of 'duty' is linked to one's role in life, but prioritizing duties and understanding what motivates them (duty vs. love) can be complex.
• ❤️ The tension between duty and love as moral motivators is highlighted, with different cultures valuing one over the other.
• ⚖️ 'Justice' is a multifaceted concept, with disputes often arising from differing views on what constitutes just action or punishment.
• 🌐 'Equality' is a widely supported term, but its meaning—whether of opportunity, outcome, or other—varies, leading to different interpretations and policies.
• 🧘 'Purusharthas' refers to the goals of human life according to Indian Philosophy, which include Dharma, Artha, Kama, and Moksha, adding a cultural perspective to moral concepts.

Q & A

What is the main focus of the second module in the course on Moral Thinking?

The second module focuses on exploring philosophical concepts such as good, right, duty, justice, equality, love, and purusharthas, and how they are understood and applied in various contexts.

Why is it difficult to define the term 'good'?

Defining 'good' is challenging because it is a philosophical term that is also used colloquially. While it's easy to identify goodness in people or objects, providing a precise definition requires a level of accuracy and rigor that is not present in everyday usage.

What is the difference between a 'good knife' and a 'good person' as per the script?

A 'good knife' is defined by its functionality, specifically its ability to cut well. In contrast, a 'good person' is characterized by moral qualities rather than functional excellence.

How do philosophical terms influence the character of an individual or a nation?

The way philosophical terms are theorized and articulated shapes the moral framework that guides the behavior and decisions of individuals, organizations, and nations.

What is the importance of understanding the other's point of view when engaging with differences of opinion?

Understanding the other's point of view is crucial for meaningful dialogue and argumentation. It allows for a deeper comprehension of differing philosophical concepts and worldviews, fostering learning and the pursuit of truth.

What is the script's stance on the relationship between duty and love?

The script presents a tension between duty and love as moral motivators. It suggests that different cultures and philosophies may prioritize one over the other, and it questions which should be chosen when there is a conflict between the two.

How does the script differentiate between 'right' as opposed to 'wrong' and 'right' as human rights?

The script differentiates 'right' as opposed to 'wrong' as a judgment of moral correctness, while 'right' as human rights refers to entitlements that individuals have, which may be distinct from moral judgments.

What is the complexity surrounding the concept of justice as discussed in the script?

The script highlights the complexity of justice by showing how different groups might fight for justice with differing interpretations of what constitutes justice, such as revenge versus state-administered punishment.

What types of equality are mentioned in the script, and what are the challenges associated with them?

The script mentions equality of opportunity and equality of outcome. The challenges include the impossibility of true equality of opportunity due to inherent genetic differences and the practical and philosophical issues with enforcing equality of outcome.

What are 'Purusharthas' and how do they relate to the goals of human life in Indian Philosophy?

Purusharthas are the goals of human life in Indian Philosophy, which include Dharma (duty), Artha (wealth), Kama (desire), and Moksha (liberation). They represent the multifaceted aspects that give meaning to human life.

What is the ultimate aim for students after completing the course on Moral Thinking?

The ultimate aim is for students to be able to identify moral positions, construct moral arguments using moral concepts, and engage in ethical decision-making.

Outlines

00:00

🤔 The Concept of 'Good' and Philosophical Challenges

The speaker introduces the second module on Moral Thinking, focusing on the philosophical exploration of moral concepts such as good, right, duty, justice, equality, love, and purusharthas. They emphasize the difficulty in defining 'good,' noting that while it's easy to identify a good person, defining the term precisely is challenging. This difficulty is common with philosophical terms that are also part of everyday language. The speaker suggests that how we theorize these concepts affects the character of individuals, organizations, and even nations. They illustrate the ambiguity of 'good' by contrasting a 'good knife' with a 'good person,' highlighting the functional versus moral interpretations of the term. The speaker also touches on the importance of understanding differences in opinion, which are rooted in the articulation of philosophical terms in our worldviews, and the need to engage with these differences to learn and seek truth.

05:01

📜 Exploring 'Rights', 'Duty', and the Tension Between Them

The discussion moves to the concept of 'rights', distinguishing between rights as opposites of wrongs and as entitlements, such as human rights. The speaker points out the ease of making judgments but stresses the importance of understanding the frame of reference from which 'right' and 'wrong' are defined. They then delve into the concept of 'duty', questioning how duties are prioritized and what motivates them. The example of Immanuel Kant's view is given, where duty is seen as a moral imperative, contrasting with actions driven by love or emotion. The speaker explores the potential conflict between duty and love as moral motivators, suggesting that different civilizations and contexts might prioritize one over the other. They also introduce the tension between duty and love, using examples from Indian philosophical tradition and military service to illustrate different moral motivations.

10:09

🗣️ The Complexities of 'Justice' and 'Equality'

The speaker addresses the concept of 'justice', noting that it is a deeply emotional and contentious term. They use the example of two groups fighting for justice but with differing views on what constitutes justice. The discussion explores the authority to establish wrongs and administer punishment, contrasting the idea of revenge as justice with the modern democratic approach where a third party, like the state, arbitrates. The concept of 'equality' is then introduced, questioning what kind of equality is being sought—equality of opportunity or outcome. The speaker challenges the idea of perfect equality of opportunity due to inherent genetic differences and ponders the feasibility of equality of outcome, where taxation might level wealth. They note that opposing protesters might both claim to fight for equality but have different interpretations of what it means.

15:10

🌟 'Purusharthas': Goals of Human Life in Indian Philosophy

The final paragraph introduces 'Purusharthas', which refers to the goals of human life as understood in Indian Philosophy. The speaker outlines the four main goals: Dharma (duty), Artha (wealth), Kama (desire), and Moksha (liberation). They emphasize that these goals provide meaning to human life and are often considered in moral terms. The speaker concludes by encouraging students to recognize the variations in interpretations of moral concepts and to identify these interpretations in arguments, policies, and personal beliefs. The aim is for students to develop the ability to construct moral arguments and engage in ethical decision-making, using the moral vocabulary learned throughout the course.

Keywords

💡Moral Thinking

Moral Thinking refers to the process of reflecting on moral issues, making judgments about right and wrong, and understanding the principles that guide our actions. In the video, this concept is central as the course aims to explore various moral concepts philosophically, examining their implications on our understanding of good, right, duty, and other ethical notions.

💡Good

The term 'good' is used to describe something or someone that possesses positive qualities or is morally upright. In the script, the concept of 'good' is problematized, as it is easy to identify a good person but difficult to define the term precisely. The video suggests that 'good' can have different meanings in different contexts, such as a 'good knife' being functional versus a 'good person' being morally commendable.

💡Egoism

Egoism is the ethical stance that one should act in one's own self-interest. The script mentions Egoism as one of the concepts discussed earlier, suggesting that it contrasts with altruism and is part of the broader exploration of moral motivations and their implications on ethical decision-making.

💡Ethical Relativism

Ethical Relativism is the belief that moral principles are not absolute but are instead relative to the culture or individual. The script alludes to this concept, indicating that it is one of the theories that participants should understand as they delve into the complexities of moral concepts and their interpretations.

💡Universalism

Universalism, in ethics, is the view that there are universal moral principles that apply to all people, regardless of culture or personal beliefs. The video script touches upon this concept, highlighting the need to understand and theorize moral concepts to determine their impact on individuals, organizations, and nations.

💡Duty

Duty refers to a moral or legal obligation that an individual has to perform certain actions. In the script, duty is discussed in relation to one's position or station in life, emphasizing the conflict that can arise when multiple duties seem to demand attention, and the philosophical debate on whether actions motivated by duty or love are more morally commendable.

💡Justice

Justice is a moral concept that involves fairness, impartiality, and the administration of deserved rewards or punishments. The video script explores the complexities of defining justice, using examples such as revenge versus state-administered punishment to illustrate how different interpretations of justice can lead to conflicting views.

💡Equality

Equality is the state of being equal, especially in status, rights, or opportunities. The script discusses different interpretations of equality, such as equality of opportunity versus equality of outcome, and questions the feasibility and desirability of achieving complete equality, which is a central theme in discussions of social justice and ethics.

💡Love

Love, in the context of the video, is presented as a moral motivator that can sometimes conflict with duty. It is discussed in contrast to duty, with the script suggesting that acts of assistance or kindness driven by love might be seen as less morally commendable than those driven by a sense of duty, depending on one's philosophical perspective.

💡Purusharthas

Purusharthas are the four aims of human life in Indian philosophy, which include Dharma (duty), Artha (wealth), Kama (desire), and Moksha (liberation). The script mentions Purusharthas as an example of how different cultures and philosophies can have varied interpretations of what constitutes the goals of life, which is a key theme in the exploration of moral concepts.

💡Ethical Decision Making

Ethical Decision Making is the process of making choices based on ethical considerations, often involving moral principles and values. The video script concludes by emphasizing the importance of understanding and applying moral concepts to construct moral arguments and make ethical decisions, which is a key skill the course aims to develop in its participants.

Highlights

Introduction to the second module on Moral Thinking, focusing on philosophical concepts.

Discussion on the difficulty of defining 'good' and its colloquial use versus philosophical rigor.

Exploration of the functional sense of 'good', such as a good knife versus a good person.

The importance of theorizing moral concepts and its impact on individual and societal character.

The ambiguity in the meaning of 'good' and its philosophical discourse.

Emphasis on understanding differences in opinion as differences in worldview articulation.

The variation in the understanding of 'good' based on cultural and social contexts.

Introduction to the concept of 'rights' and its twofold understanding as right versus wrong and as entitlements.

The challenge of making judgments involving terms like 'right' and 'wrong' without understanding the other's frame of reference.

Discussion on 'duty' and how it relates to one's position or station in life.

The philosophical debate between duty and love as moral motivators.

Immanuel Kant's view on duty versus love in moral actions.

The tension between duty and love in different cultural and philosophical traditions.

The concept of 'justice' and the emotional and feeling aspects it invokes.

Examples of how justice can be perceived differently and the authority to administer punishment.

The complexity of 'equality' and the different types of equality such as outcome and opportunity.

The philosophical and practical challenges in achieving equality of opportunity.

The concept of 'Purusharthas' in Indian Philosophy and its relevance to moral thinking.

The goals of human life according to Indian Philosophy: Dharma, Artha, Kama, and Moksha.

Encouragement for students to identify variations in interpretations and engage in ethical decision-making.

Transcripts

Hello everyone, today we start the second module of this course on Moral Thinking.

And in this module, we will talk about some concepts and look at them philosophically,

how they make sense of us.

So we will look at good, right, duty, justice, equality, love, purusharthas.

And of course, we have talked about Egoism, Ethical Relativism, and Universalism, in certain

details.

So, today, I am going to just brief you out in this session about, what is the problematic

about these concepts that we talk about, the notion of good.

Now, if you look at the notion of good, good is something, and if you start come down to

define, or if you are asked to define, what good is, try this exercise, and you will find

yourself in a pondery.

It is easy to identify, what is good.

We have a sense of identifying a good person, a good human being.

But when asked to elaborate, or define what we mean by good, there arises the difficulty.

And this is in general, the phenomenon with philosophical terms.

Because philosophical terms are also terms that we use in day-to-day life, in our colloquial

world, and lived experience that we inhabit.

Yet, when we are asked to define it, when we expect a certain level of accuracy, rigour,

or tightness to these concepts, it starts becoming difficult.

And that is where, we have the need to theorise it.

And how we theorise these crucial moral concepts, also determines, as we have earlier seen,

the character of the individual, organisation, constitution, nation, state.

So how do we articulate them.

So, let us take a simple notion as good.

Now, when we look at good, what do we mean by good.

A good can be something like, a good knife, and a good person.

Right.

Would these two be the same.

And that is a question, that opens up the difficulty, or in a certain sense, the ambiguity

in the meaning of the word, good.

So, good has a meaning, a sense of being functional.

So, a good knife is a knife that cuts well.

Whereas, a good person is not a person, who is excellent in any particular ability, but

it is a moral sense of the term.

Right.

And that itself, and this is a discourse, a lot of philosophical discourse has taken

place in defining, what do we mean by this term, good.

And we will come about to it, in some detail, in the next session.

But, just to open you up, that this is, what is the problematic around this idea, and why

shall we, or why can we not accept our colloquial understanding of the good.

And here, let me take a step back, and emphasise that, how do we handle differences, differences

of opinion.

And, what are basically differences of opinion.

Differences of opinion are the differences in the articulation of philosophical terms,

in our worldview.

Right.

Let me repeat that.

Differences in opinion, are the articulation of philosophical terms, philosophical concepts,

in our worldview.

So, if we want to engage with difference, if you want to understand the other, if you

want to argue, argue, and not quarrel with the other, argue in the spirit of learning,

in the spirit of arriving at the truth, or at an equilibrium, we need to understand the

other's point of view.

And it is here, what we hold, or how we articulate, how we understand these philosophical terms,

will help us make sense of, what does the other position mean.

So, just as a good person, in certain milieu, may mean somebody who is kind and charitable.

In certain other conditions, it may mean somebody who is pleasing, and who is comforting.

So, there is a variation on, how we understand good.

And, it is far more complicated, than we come out to be.

Let us look at the second term.

Let us look at rights.

And, two ways of, right is also, when you understand it in the terms of, as opposed

to wrong, and as human rights, right, as rights that one has, rights as a sense of entitlement.

So, to judge, well, most of the time, it is easy to make a judgement.

But especially, when we are unthinking about the terms, as has been articulated by the

other.

So, when one is expected to take a judgement, which involves a term, say, making a call

of right and wrong, one needs to understand the frame of reference, from which right and

wrong is defined.

Sense of duty.

Duty seems something fairly.

Now, let me put it in forms of certain questions.

And, you are suppose employed, then, or you are a student, your duty is to study.

So, given that your position is emanating from your position or station in life, there

are certain duties that emanate from your position or situation in life.

But how do you make a priority between these call for duties.

Say, what you have been paid for, if you receive a salary for something, does that become your

duty, exceeding the duty that comes to you, as being a child or a sibling.

And what is it, that powers duty.

And then, there are philosophers like, Immanuel Kant, what rigorous claims that they make,

that all moral life is through a sense of duty.

And duty is very well understood, in contrast with love.

So, Immanuel Kant went ahead, and his claims implied that, when one indulges in an act

of assistance, from the sense of duty, it is right.

But when one indulgence from an act of assistance, from love or emotion, it turns out to be incorrect.

So, there seems to be a conflict between duty and love, that functioning out of duty, and

functioning out of love.

Depending on the civilisation or milieu that you subscribe to, one might look at duty as

something superior to acts powered by love.

One may look at acts powered by love, as superior to power by duty.

And here again, like we discussed earlier, the judgement is not exclusively on the nature

of the act, but the motivations of the act.

The same act can be from a sense of love, or from a sense of duty.

And when these two moral motivations, conflict, which is the one that needs to be chosen.

So, what is the kind of frame of reference that we build, that whether we should function

out of duty, or functioning out of love.

Now, if you look at the example of the Bhakti Marg, in Indian Philosophical tradition, they

will play a lot of emphasis on love.

That it is, the moral urge emanates out of love, vis-a-vis, if you look at the sense

of duty.

And, I think classically, one can understand military service as a sense of being powered

by the sense of duty.

That well, it is a duty that has to be done, irrespective of whether one feels for it,

or does not feel for it.

It is duty, and therefore it has to be done.

So, in that sense, it seems mechanical, it seems loveless.

So, we will push this, I would not say dichotomy, but this tension between duty and love, as

two moral motivators.

Then let us look at this notion of justice.

Now, justice is quite a deeply, not problematic, but a moral notion that, that accelerates

a lot of emotions and feelings.

So, if you look at justice, you find that well, two groups that are probably protesting,

maybe in a school, maybe in a college, or maybe out there in a democratic country, both

very often seem to be fighting for justice.

And, both seem to be claiming that, we want justice.

And, both are like loggerheads also.

So, for one segment, justice is say, X.

And for the other segment, justice is not X.

So, both are fighting for justice, but how is justice to be defined.

Let us take a simple example, to flesh it out into an example, so that one can make

sense of this.

If X has been wronged by Y, then, so Y should be punished by X or Z, Z here being the third

party.

Now, if you look at, if two parties are in dispute with each other, and one has wronged

the other, and that is established, who has this authority to establish it, and who has

the authority to administer punishment.

Say certain, or medieval senses of justice in many parts of the world, always meant that

well, if X has been wronged by Y, or then Y has to inflict an equal damage on X, and

that settles justice.

That revenge is also an action of justice.

Most modern democracies function on that well.

If X has been wronged by Y, it is the state, Z, which will give a punishment to X.

So, when we introduce a third person, or a third party that arbitrates, and awards punishment,

that turns out to be justice.

Right.

Now, then let us look at, Equality.

Now, Equality is again a term, it is a favourite term.

And, most people would say that, we want Equality, we fight for Equality, we vouch for Equality.

But, what is Equality?

Equality of outcome, equality of opportunity, equality of what kind of equality.

And that is where, the difference in the formation of equality, difference in the articulation

of equality, comes into being.

So, one level of equality, may be equality of opportunity, that all of us deserve an

equal opportunity.

But, can that be ever possible.

Because, the genes that you are endowed with, is something that has come to you, from your

parents, from your family line.

Can that, or should that be neutralised in a race.

So, if one looks at equality of opportunity, to what level can it be done.

Equality of outcome is, well, no matter what you earn, say you should be taxed, according

to as you earn, so that all of us at the end of the day, are equally rich, or equally poor.

How many of you would vote for such a policy.

So, what exactly do we mean by equality, and the articulations of equality.

So, it is very often possible that, opposing protesters, protesters opposing each other,

both vouch for equality, and both are asking for equality, but have different renditions

of equality.

And finally, we will come to the notion of Purusharthas.

Purusharthas would mean, what is the goals of human life, according to Indian Philosophy.

So, the goals of life, as put out, and a lot of it can be understood in moral terms.

And many of us may be familiar as, Dharma, Artha, Kama, and Moksha, as the goals of human

life.

So, some things that gives meaning to human life.

So, these are some of the concepts.

There are many concepts that we come across.

But, these are some of the concepts that, after this very introductory course, you should

be able to see the debate behind it.

You should be able to identify, what kind or what interpretation of a particular concept

is used in an argument, or in a policy, or in a state, or in a person.

So, to first open yourself to look at the possible variations in interpretations.

And then, to be able to identify the interpretations, that we have.

So, with this, do think over, what kind of interpretations that you have come across,

and where you see a difference.

A philosophy class is successful, where there is difference.

Because then, we are able to see a variation in interpretation, and thereby start a dialogue.

So, with this, we have a brief introduction of, what is going to be done in Module 2.

Maybe a little bit on Egoism and Altruism.

But, most of it has been covered in the first module.

So, we will look at it, as a Gursery glance, as how it can be revised, or put in terms

of moral vocabulary.

So, the idea for you to do, after this course, is that, you should be able to construct a

moral argument.

You should be able to identify, sorry, first identify the moral positions held.

And then, construct moral argument, using moral concepts, thereby doing, what very often

is called as, Ethical Decision Making.

Okay. .