Russell, Bertrand: Ethics [Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy] - 0 views
-
Russell’s view is that the good life is one inspired by love and guided by knowledge
-
neither love without knowledge
-
knowledge without love
- ...24 more annotations...
-
but love is in a sense more fundamental, since it will lead intelligent people to seek knowledge in order to find out how to benefit those whom they love.
-
“scientific knowledge and knowledge of particular facts.”
-
All moral rules must be tested by examining whether they tend to realize ends that we desire.”(374)
-
In his youth, Russell took the utilitarian view that the “happiness of mankind should be the aim of all actions”
-
dignity of which human existence is capable is not attainable by “devotion to the mechanism of life”, and that unless the contemplation of “eternal things” is preserved, humankind will become “no better than well-fed pigs.”
-
He believed that (1) “good” is the most fundamental ethical concept and (2) that “good” is indefinable
-
a priori certain propositions about the kind of things that are good on their own account.
-
-
-
Russell, on the other hand, gives no such list of things which are good in themselves,
-
regard consequences or results as of vital importance for judging an action as right or wrong. In other words both are teleologists or consequentialists, like the utilitarians.
-
mpact of the First World War, which Russell passionately opposed
-
of human passions similar to that of psychoanalysts. Russell started believing that fundamental facts “in all ethical questions are feelings”, (Russell 1917, 19) and that impulse has more effect in moulding human lives than conscious purpose.
-
d we ought to act so as to maximize the balance of happiness over unhappiness in the world, and says: “I should not myself regard happiness as an adequate definition of the good, but I should agree that conduct ought to be judged by its consequences.”
-
According to him, once “good” is defined, the rest of ethics follows:
-
According to Russell, when we assert that this or that has value, we are giving expression to our emotions, not to a fact which would still be true if our personal feelings were different.
-
he first of these sentences, which may be true or false, does not, says Russell, belong to ethics but to psychology or biography
-
he second sentence which does belong to ethics, expresses a desire for something, but asserts nothing; and since it asserts nothing it is logically impossible that there should be evidence for or against it, or for it to possess either truth or falsehood.
-
Russell adopts as his guiding principle David Hume’s maxim that “Reason is, and ought, only to be the slave of the passions.
-
esires, emotions or passions
-
nly possible causes of action. Reason is not a cause of action but only a regulator.
-
The world that I should wish to see,” says Russell, ‘is one where emotions are strong but not destructive, and where, because they are acknowledged, they lead to no deception either of oneself or of others. Such a world would include love and friendship and the pursuit of art and knowledge.” (11)
-
esires are not “irrational” just because we cannot give any reason for them.
-
wondering once again whether there is such a thing as ethical knowledge.
-
since it must involve appeal to the majority,
