desh ([personal profile] desh) wrote2003-01-13 09:07 pm
  • Add Memory
  • Share This Entry

Ethical Philosophy meme

http://selectsmart.com/PHILOSOPHY/

A caveat: I'm no philosopher, so some of the questions were a bit too dense for me, and I don't really know what the answers mean either...Someone ([livejournal.com profile] gotmilkbl?) help!

1.Kant (100%) Click here for info
2.Mill (97%) Click here for info
3.Sartre (92%) Click here for info
4.Bentham (84%) Click here for info
5.Aquinas (68%) Click here for info
6.Rand (65%) Click here for info
7.Prescriptivism (62%) Click here for info
8.Epicureans (59%) Click here for info
9.Aristotle (58%) Click here for info
10.Hobbes (53%) Click here for info
11.Nietzsche (50%) Click here for info
12.Hume (47%) Click here for info
13.Plato (45%) Click here for info
14.Spinoza (45%) Click here for info
15.Stoics (45%) Click here for info
16.Noddings (42%) Click here for info
17.Augustine (27%) Click here for info
18.Ockham (26%) Click here for info
19.Cynics (23%) Click here for info
Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

[identity profile] jox.livejournal.com 2003-01-13 08:50 pm (UTC)(link)
I started to answer those questions and then my brain started to hurt.

cool beans

[identity profile] shekkichebaz.livejournal.com 2003-01-13 11:06 pm (UTC)(link)
i was also 100% kantian, go figure,
and not very cynical at all.

shekkichebaz

[identity profile] gotmilkbl.livejournal.com 2003-01-14 04:46 pm (UTC)(link)
I actually took that awhile ago and I was also 100% Kantian. However, I highly doubt that everyone who got that respoonse is truly a Kantian (I know I'm not) and I doubt that their views really coincide all that much. I found this test to be highly innaccurate, based on the little descriptions you'll find if you take the links which hardly give a complete picture of any of their philosophies. So pretty much, take this whole test with a large rock of salt.

[identity profile] myq.livejournal.com 2003-01-14 07:18 pm (UTC)(link)
hahaha....JS Mill is so you, Josh.

[personal profile] desh 2003-01-14 07:24 pm (UTC)(link)
I've actually known that for a long time. Back in....1997? The summer after 10th grage, a bunch of my friends at camp took a philosophy class. I decided to grab Chris's readings and have a look myself, and I LOVED Mill. So now, that I know about a grand total of maybe 2 or 3 philosophers instead of just 1, I still call myself a utilitarian.

So I hope you weren't being sarcastic. I don't think you were...

[identity profile] myq.livejournal.com 2003-01-14 08:15 pm (UTC)(link)
I don't really feel like debating or anything. Yeah, Utilitarianism does sound like something you'd support -- but it just seems like such a simple and flawed concept. From my understanding, Mill simply argues for the greatest good for the greatest amount of people. Maybe my logic is flawed, but...

So why wouldn't we take all of Bill Gates' money and distribute it to starving African children?

Why do you support and live in America? We use up a vastly improportionate amount of resources compared to what we produce. We have most of the world's money and food. We are arguably the world's only hegemonic power. Why don't we all give up that power and money? I'm sure China, with its huge population, could benefit from it.

Why don't we support Communism? "Greatest good" for the "greatest amount of people."

Gladiator games in Rome amused thousands at the price of few lives. According to Utilitarianism, that would be morally acceptable.

It seems to me that self-interest seems much more reasonable than Utilitarian beliefs. By looking out for ourselves, we indirectly help others. We shouldn't sacrifice our individuality for the good of the many.

-Mike
Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only