Thanks for this video: it’s a very clear survey of her essay, and how it fits into the tradition of moral philosophy - good work! I was wondering whether the ‘courageous thief’ issue could somehow be resolved by returning to her requirement in part 1 that a virtue must be beneficial. I guess that move would then lead to a need to consider each ‘courageous’ action on its individual merits, with some courageous actions being virtuous and others not - contingent on the ends … which seems to bring the argument back towards consequentialism of a sort.
Wow - what a wonderful, clear and informative lecture. I love how you can take the principles and readily translate them into various insightful examples.
This got me thinking about my own opinion on meta-ethics, and whether it ought to be able to answer the question of whether or not an attribute or issue is moral. One quibble, though. Arsenic obviously functions as a poison in treating wood. It's not there to stab the fungi to death. It's not there to negotiate with them, promising them some sugar it they go live somewhere else. It's there to poison them.
Thank you so much for this great talk on Foot's great paper!
Very insightful and massively helped me with my EPQ! I really appreciate it :)
Thank you very much for your videos, please continue with this, I consider it very valuable.
Thanks for this video: it’s a very clear survey of her essay, and how it fits into the tradition of moral philosophy - good work!
I was wondering whether the ‘courageous thief’ issue could somehow be resolved by returning to her requirement in part 1 that a virtue must be beneficial. I guess that move would then lead to a need to consider each ‘courageous’ action on its individual merits, with some courageous actions being virtuous and others not - contingent on the ends … which seems to bring the argument back towards consequentialism of a sort.
Wow - what a wonderful, clear and informative lecture. I love how you can take the principles and readily translate them into various insightful examples.
thank you!
This got me thinking about my own opinion on meta-ethics, and whether it ought to be able to answer the question of whether or not an attribute or issue is moral.
One quibble, though. Arsenic obviously functions as a poison in treating wood. It's not there to stab the fungi to death. It's not there to negotiate with them, promising them some sugar it they go live somewhere else. It's there to poison them.