dont understand moral philosophy! dont want to fail first year!

picked it as a subsidary at uni and dont have a clue! can you say your own opinions or does what you say have to be what other philosophers have said. also if anyone else is doin this module -is there a particular book that would be very useful? have exams in january on this and have nothing to revise from-the lecture notes are sooo watered down! and i dont have any other notes so i must get a book i can revise from. HELP- dont want to fail first year! the module includes cultural relativism,psychological egoism, aristotle and virtue theory,utilitarianism and evalutating it and kantian ethics.

Reply 1

Oddjob39A

Go here;

http://plato.stanford.edu/

Find the articles relating to each subject you have covered, they are very in depth 'notes'

Analyse and criticise every position and try to develop a coherent system of your own which is generated from the foibles of each of the moral theories. This then helps in arguing for and against each one as you have your own 'view' instead of just re-hashing the disjointed views of others.

Aristotle - Look for the Nicomachean Ethics or the Eudaimonian Ethics (a bit obtuse but easy to get into once you get the general jist)

For utilitarianism look for Mill, basic theory is that happiness in society (following on from Aristotle) is simply something to be implemented and used. Should people recieve the death sentence? Yes; as long as it brings about a greater happiness in the society than it does sadness. Once this is reversed, so should the policies etc.

Kant - Hypothetical and categorical imperatives, the above website should make this pretty clear, however; Kant is notroiously hard to get into, so don't get bogged down and just get the general feel of it. ' do upon others as you would like to be done to you' etc

Cultural relativism and psychological egoism are a bit more general and the stanford site should clear those up.

Reply 2

emma t

thank you sooo much! also will have a choice of 4 exam qs wud it be a bad idea to revise the easier topics in depth?

Reply 3

Oddjob39A

I wouldn't say revise the easier topics, revise the views which you agree with as this means it will be easier to bring in your own opinions on the topic and reach that coveted 'original commentary' criterion for gettin those high marks!

i.e. if you agree with Aristotles concept of the happy life well lived, know this back to front and inside out, so you can then use it to rip apart Mill's utilitarianism with your own examples/views etc

Once you do this, you start writing a philosophy essay instead of an essay on the history of ideas :cool:

Reply 4

Invocation

emma t

picked it as a subsidary at uni and dont have a clue! can you say your own opinions or does what you say have to be what other philosophers have said.

Both, definately. Though bare in mind a philosopher has most probably already said what you think is original input.

also if anyone else is doin this module -is there a particular book that would be very useful? have exams in january on this and have nothing to revise from-the lecture notes are sooo watered down! and i dont have any other notes so i must get a book i can revise from. HELP- dont want to fail first year! the module includes cultural relativism,psychological egoism, aristotle and virtue theory,utilitarianism and evalutating it and kantian ethics.

dont understand moral philosophy! dont want to fail first year!

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you