Lecture 7

Intrinsic value- Things that are valuable for their one sake

Extrinsic value - which instrumentally valuable. Meaning it is valuable for what it begets. It
is not intrinsically valuable

Example

Weekdays are extrinsically valuable Since you wait for the weekend. In this context
weekends are of intrinsic value.

Infrastructure is of extrinsic value. Since the ends matter. Infrastructure helps build better
lives but are not valuable in themselves.

Money is extrinsically valuable. Money gets you assistance, time, freedom. Money is
instrumental in getting other things.

Extrinsic values are directed towards intrinsic values.

Money is directed towards comfort, a flourishing life etc.

Exercising brings about better health. Done for something other than itself.

Playing games is intrinsically valuable. One enjoys the process.

Goals and consequences are intrinsically valuable.

A painter paints and a singer sings because it gives them joy. It becomes intrinsically
valuable to them.

When one sings as a performance, the reaction of the audience matters to assess the value of
the singing. There is something more than just singing out of joy.

Bathroom singers sing for joy and is of intrinsic value.

Expression is of intrinsic value

Performance is of extrinsic value

Why have moral philosophers held intrinsic values as foundational?

Because it answers the “recursive whys”

X- why x - because y - why y- because z

the bedrock question has always been of intrinsic value.

What is the good life - this classical question is actually a question of identifying intrinsic
values. Pleasure/Excellence/Peace.... - the answer to this question lays out a worldview of
individuals, societies, constitutions, civilizations.

The hedonist would consider pleasure it be of final value. Do what you do to get maximum
pleasure.

Aristotle through eudaimonia would say focus on excellence. All decisions and actions
should steer towards excellence.

The Upanishadic philosophy would focus on peace or salvation to be the focus of all
decisions and actions on takes in life. Peace would be the final thing one should be attaining.

When one answers the question “what is a good life” we are actually answering “What are
the core intrinsic values one has”. Either as a constitution or as a nation.

Intrinsic values are like the pole star of your life. Because that will guide you.

• The same value can be intrinsic for one and extrinsic for another eg., knowledge is
intrinsically valuable to the curious and extrinsically valuable to the one who wants to bring
about change in world of lived experience.

Example Technology as the application of science.

Intrinsic value or extrinsic value is not the property of the act but the ascription of the agent.

The same act can be looked upon as having extrinsic and intrinsic value. In reality these
concepts are not water tight.

• GE Moore defines intrinsic “goodness” as irreducible

• What has intrinsic value precedes the question what is intrinsie value.

• Peter Geach problem of reducing “good” - 'X is a yellow bird' is 'X is yellow' & 'X is a
bird'; can the same thing be applied to 'X is a good singer"?

Universal and situational ethics.

Universal claims are independent of the local frames of references. This they become global
in its application.

Situational claims arise from the nuances of the particular frame of reference.

Moral and religious ethics

When one claims to be spiritual but not religious. One is probably advocating that one has
moral values but are not grounded in religion.

Religious ethics can stand independently as well as religious grounds unlike moral ethics.
Lecture 8
Good

There is a difference between good knife and a good human.

A good knife is good because if it’s functionality

A good human is good because of his humaneness.

This is why we cannot accept the colloquial sense of the word good in philosophy. The good
out to be universal.

Difference in opinion is simply the different articulation of philosophical terms in our world
view.

To engage with the other to argue in order to arrive at the truth or equilibrium, we need to
understand the other‘S point of view.

A good person may change depending on the cultural context we are talking of.

Rights

As the opposite of wrong or human rights. When one is asked to make the right decision. One
needs to be aware of the frame of references from where the binary distinction between right
and wrong are being drawn.

Duty

Immanuel Kant states that when one indulges in an act of assistance through the sense of duty
then it is right. When one indulges in act of assistance out of love or emotion it is incorrect.
There is a difference between acting from duty and acting from love.

When these two moral motivations are in conflict. Which one to choose ?

The Bhakti marg in Indian philosophical tradition states that moral motivation is rooted in
love. Vis à vis the military is powered by the sense of duty rather than love.

Justice

Justice is a moral notion that exhilarates a lot of emotions and feelings.

For one party justice could be X while for the other party justice could be not X.

Both are fighting for justice but don’t know how to define it.

If X has been wronged by Y. Then Y should be punished by X or Z.

In medieval times revenge was considered to be an act of justice. In modern democracies, the
state will punish the criminal not the victim.

Equality

Everyone vouches for equality. But what is equality?

Equality if outcome, equality of opportunity?

Equality of opportunity- everyone be given equal opportunity.

People against each other are also fighting for equality but with different renditions of
equality.
Lecture 9
Why do we need to understand these concepts

1. Individual clarity. To understand one’s own position to Things.

2. Collective discussion and decision making. In order to engage in better arguments and
discussions. an argument is focused to wards discovering truth, a quarrel is to only
hold one’s truth to be final and pressing on it.
3. Understanding the trajectory- individual or collective

Good

These may be empty concepts or formal concepts that need to be fleshed out or given content.

Happiness, Pleasant, Pleasure, Morally good, Functionally good, aesthetically good,

superlative, useful, excellence.

Adjective to Substantive good Good as an adjective is where you can qualify something as
good. Example a good knife.

Substantive good is something that is good in itself. Some philosophers have tried to locate it
and end up calling substantive good as indescribable.

Common good

The common good is the good life which the community argues for or defines to be. Example
family, marraige are considered to be common good.

Concept of good should not be looked at something that is fixed and uniform. It will be
defined by the institution or person separately.

These abstract terms are given content depending on the paradigm that they belong to. The
community defines the good in a paradigm.

G E Moore’s naturalistic fallacy talks about the notion of good.

Rights

Entitlement by the very nature of being Natural rights

Just by being human we are entitled to certain rights. Eg. UDHR gives us the right of defence
in a court of law before a punishment is given.

Sources of rights

By the virtue of being a citizen of a particular country we are given some rights.

Through history rights have been grounded in religion. In modern times the source is the law
and constitution.
Negative (non-interference) and Positive (claim) rights

Negative rights is the right to free speech. Where there is no interference by others. One can
express without anyone’s interference.

Positive right would be right to education. Where one can put a claim on the state.

Universality - Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This is a textbook example of the

universality of rights.

Duty

Rights entail duties - one's right to X holds only when it is someone else's duty to provide X.

• Duty or obligation is the primary concept of deontological approaches to ethics (Oxford

dictionary of Philosophy)

There is no reciprocity here. There is no consequentiality here. They are intrinsically

powered.

Justice

It is more highlighted in its absence than presence. we understand it less but feel more
strongly about it.

Plato's Thrasymachus - 'just' is what the powerful call just!

Rawls vs Nozick debate on justice Retributive and distributive

Distributive justice - how we ration limited benefits amongst a higher demand.

Retributive justice- how revenge can become a form of justice.

Justice and Punishment

Rational of punishment should be deterrence, retribution, reform.

Difference between a philosophy and an ideology

Philosophy is revisable.

Ideology is a commitment, no more revisable.

Equality

Again, similar to justice in use - more vociferously argued for, than defined.

Formal equality: treat like cases alike - if two people are alike in all aspects, they should be
treated alike; of course two people are never alike & thus the principle is only formal.
Moral equality: a rejection of natural hierarchy; equality in terms of dignity.

Equality of opportunity vs equality of outcome....

investing in education for underprivileged class is an example of equality of opportunity.

example of Equality of outcome is progressive taxation

Lecture 10
Love

How can love be a source of ethics?

• As a source of ethics - fellow feeling, fraternity - Ethics of Care The sense of care
comes out not from rationality but out of simple feeling of love towards others.
• Ethics of Care depends on the following 2 things
o Context- Example a neighbour is affected by a disease. You will be more
affected if a stranger would be affected across the globe.
o Relational- We are naturally more concerned about people we are related to.
This is an accepted feature of ethics of care.
• The consequence of this is that ethics becomes partial since one is selectively
concerned
• Virtue Ethics is 'What is the right thing to do?' Vs. 'What sort of a person should I be?'
o Virtue ethics is more agent based than act based
• Character/Motive more imp than rules/principles or consequences of an action. From
'act-based' to 'agent-based'
• A malicious person may still have it within his power to perform actions that don't
reflect that malice. But the malice exists. How would you assess this?
o Example two patient in coma. One looking with gratitude towards care giver,
one looking with remorse towards care giver. Virtue ethics says we can
differentiate this
o Example a case of sexual harassment by a gaze. Even if it is not acted upon.

According to bhakti whatever emerges from love becomes right action.

Purushartas

Ends or goals of life

1. Social:
1. Artha - material wellbeing;
2. Kama - satisfaction of desires;
3. Dharma - moral well-being;
2. Personal
1. Moksha - Liberation or spiritual self-realisation.

Whenever there is a conflict between dharma and kama an artha. Dharma should prevail.
Lecture 11
In this lecture we will look into a lived experience of how a particular paradigm may have a
notion

Starting from the notion of egoism and altruism

Egoism

the paradox which is that it is a catchall theory

In the case of altruism one has to sacrifice the good for oneself for the good of others and
gains joy or satisfaction in turn.

It is considered to be a celebrated quality.

Where do these moral theories affect the world?

Ayn Rand has been known for defining a generation with her contribution to literature.
Having a role to play in laying the ground for capitalism.

She brings a nexus between philosophy and literature.

“Literature is the vehicle of philosophy”

The virtue of selfishness → Chapter One → The objectivist Ethics

Though altruism talks about selflessness and is venerated, she talks about the virtue of being
selfish.

A new concept of Egoism?

• History of morality, of mankind's ethics - more harm than us

o What has been the history of morality?
o Who has it decided what is good and right?
o Has it caused more harm than good?
• Ethics as objective (necessity) vs subjective(luxury)?
o Ethics considered to be subjective generally
o Each to his own ethics
o If this is so then ethics is only the luxury of the aristocratic class to reflect
upon it
• What makes values possible?
• Morality: Is there anything rational irrational about it?
o If morality is irrational then one cannot even talk about it
• Source of morality - whims, revelation, metaphysics, society, survival, mortality..?
• Indestructibility and morality argument - examine

A capitalistic world order, promotes freedom and hence it is a morally just world order
In a capitalistic world order there are lesser limitations and promotes flourishing.

Redefining selfishness

Taking it away from negative connotation it carries

Ayn Rand is protesting against the altruistic engrained in her where selflessness what greatly
appreciated while selfishness is considered deplorable.

She reconceptualizes the term

She calls it to be rational selfishness

A world where you are able to focus on your own goals without harming the other.

Philosophy is represented in movies, stories, epics and literature.

This way philosophy surpasses the boundaries of time.

The Puranas, the Panchatantra, the Jatakas are stories which embody a certain moral value.

A pessimistic view remained about ethics, where ethics seemed to cause ore harm than
benefit.

This led to taking ethics as subjective and nothing more than intellectual talk.

Ayn Rand questions what even makes values possible?

1. Whims- One just feels it to be the right thing to do

1. This is considered to be the emotivist theory
2. Also called “Boo-Hoorah”
3. They hold that there is nothing right or wrong
4. Whatever feels good (Hoorah) is good and whatever feels bad (Boo) is bad
5. Nothing is intrinsically good or bad we just have emotions about it
2. Revelation- Which a religious interpretation.
1. Saints and sages say they have a connection another world order
2. They give a dictate which is considered to be morally right
3. Metaphysics
1. Physicalism or naturalism is to look at good and bad in the natural world
2. For example anything that brings happiness is considered to be good
3. Utilitarianism is considered to be a type of such moral order
4. Survival
1. Modern day TV shows are a good example to show how survival becomes the
bench mark to decide what is right and what is wrong
2. Any practice which promotes the species survival becomes the right practice
5. Mortality
1. If you were immortal or indestructible how would your moral framework be

The purpose of thought experiments is to unearth one’s own position

Taking the thought experiment of if we were immortal what would our moral framework be
like

1. We would not be in a hurry

2. We would not be afraid of dying

Ayn Rands states that our mortality relevant to our morality. They are crucially related.

• Self-destruction as self-contradictory? Contrast with freedom superseding survival.

o Is taking one’s life self-contradictory?
o When one destroys oneself for a superior cause, does that become valid?
Lecture 12
The 3 stages of reading

3. Browse through it
4. Understand the details of the argument
5. Develop your own reactions to it

A philosopher is expected to master just 1 text. Moving from reading a lot to read deep by
multiple reading.

• Self-destruction as self-contradictory? Contrast with freedom superseding survival.

o Is taking one’s life self-contradictory?
o When one destroys oneself for a superior cause, does that become valid?
o To be focused and take choices that help you lead your life is the purpose life.
o humans have the choice of doing it or not doing it. If they choose to not doing
it they are not following the purpose of life and thus they becomes self-
contradictory or self-destructive.
o We need to see where the author give us insights.
o In philosophy “Critique” is to “set the limit of”
o When you are thorough with the philosophy or text, you can answer questions
not thought through by the author.
o Ayn Rand = Author = Objectivist Ethicist
• '…life as the standard of value...' - value cannot be spoken of independent of life.
[OR] ultimate values stand on their own/ no relation between ultimate values/ends and
facts of reality - examine.
o If we are indestructible can we have the notion for value? For Ayn Rand we
cannot
• “...today's moralists agree that ethics is a subjective issue and that the three things
barred from its field are: reason-mind-reality.' - challenge this premise of modern
ethics.
o There is a competing ethical standpoint which talks of moral values exist
independent of human existence. While for Ayn Rand, values exist only
because humans exist.
o Ayn Rand challenges the thought of modern ethics. She alleges that in her
times that moralists of today hold that morality is a subjective issue and
reason, mind and reality.
o Modern ethics of her time held that ethics does not affect the world out there it
based on whims and other such elements.
o Ayn Rand challenges this claim and
• (Hu)man consciousness as volitional - perception - reason - concept formation
thinking...
o These are all choices that we as humans make
• ... an unfocused mind is not conscious.
o When we are unfocused we are not human
• 'For man, the basic means of survival is reason.'
o Plants have their way of survival by absorbing nutrients. Animals have life
cycles
o Humans have reason as their tool
 • Responsibility - 'Nature gives him no automatic guarantee of the efficacy of his
mental effort.' - subsidy/assistance belittle human freedom and responsibility?
o Ayn Rans is saying that w have the choice to employ our focus or not to. And
to determine that values that we follow yet it does not mean that we will get a
result even of we put in mental effort. This reward is not guaranteed by nature.
o Another example is when parents raise children, Children make incorrect
choices. When we protect the child from consequences from their acts, we do
not allow them to learn from the consequences of their acts.
o When we are given subsidies does it belittle human responsibility
o Ayn Rand would say that subsidy and assistance would block the learning
loop of the individual to understand from the consequences of his unwise
decisions
• Exercising freedom and taking responsibility for choices - the human predicament. No
instinct or template for decision making - burden of freedom?
o Plants and animals have default mechanism set for them.
o Human beings don’t have this template, this gives them freedom and is also a
burden at the same time.
o Existentialist talk of it as the “burden of freedom”
• Freedom to be conscious or unconscious - the penalty of being unconscious (of
unthinkingly following the default mode) is destruction.
o Having the choice of being aware or not being aware of the things around us.
o I do not lie because my parents and my religion tells me so. I have not thought
it through.
• And this is where the science of ethics is required to arrive at the values that survival
requires. Ethics is not for the after world, but this world, for the living.
o This is not the same as survival ethics.
o This can be better understood as human flourishing
o Ethics is for this world not the after world. She is basically pointing at religion
o Ayn Rand looks at beyond the metaphysical background of ethics
• 'Ethics is an objective, metaphysical necessity or man's survival-not by the grace of
the supernatural nor of your neighbours nor of your whims, but by the grace of reality
and the nature of life.' (p.19)
o Ethics is not by religion or by society nor by emotions, but by the grace of
reality and nature of life. It is a feature of the lived reality we have.
o Example, we all know the downsides of junk food. Even though we know of
it, we still choose to consume it. That equates to self-destruction.
• 'The Objectivist ethics holds man's life as the standard of value-and his own life as the
ethical purpose of every individual man.' (p.21)
• Value is that which one acts to gain and/or keep-virtue is the act by which one gains
and/or keeps it.' (p.21)
• Objectivist ethics:

Values: Reason, Purpose, Self-Esteem

Virtues: Rationality, Productiveness, Pride

Reason by Rationality

Purpose by productivity
Self-Esteem by Pride

Ayn Rands philosophy revolves around the capitalistic perspective

Which is inclusive of productivity which gives them purpose

There is pride in not taking subsidy or assistance

Productivity

• Productiveness sustains life ... sets man free of the necessity to adjust to background
(environment) - freedom from suffering, freedom to create (solutions)
o Most of inventions has come from capitalistic societies.
o Where productivity and celebrated is the ideal world order
• 'Productive work is the central purpose of a rational man's life, the central value that
integrates and determines the hierarchy of all his other values. Reason is the source,
the precondition of his productive work-pride is the result.' (p.21)
o Entrepreneurs and start-ups that are solving the problem of the world.
• "Since man has no automatic knowledge, he can have no automatic values; since he
has no innate ideas, he can have no innate value judgements.' (p.24)
o To the subjectivists who say that there is nothing innate
o That there is nothing ingrained
o Ayn Rand would agree with the subjectivists here
o But we can think through our values

Happiness

• "Happiness is that state of consciousness which proceeds from the achievement of

one's values. (p.24)
• "To hold one's own life as one's ultimate value, and one's own happiness as one's
highest purpose are two aspects of the same achievement. Existentially, the activity of
pursuing rational goals is the activity of maintaining one's life; psychologically, its
result, reward and concomitant is an emotional state of happiness.' (p.25)
o An Altruist would call this as being selfish
o Ayn Rand states that One’s happiness is one’s greatest purpose
o Whence we pursue rational goals like taking care of our health we act rightly
o Talking existentially → to pursue rational goals is to preserve one’s life
o Talking psychologically → the joy of creating something and being proud of it
• Happiness is not primary/irreducible; "(Hu)man's life" is the primary standard.
Emotions are not tools of cognition.
o Human life is the centre and happiness comes as a result of it
o Just because something feels good does not make it right
• Fallacy of hedonism - happiness can be the purpose, but not the standard of ethics.
Desire is not an ethical primary.
• Moral cannibalism of all hedonist and altruist doctrines lie in the premise that the
happiness of one man necessitates the injury of another.
• Both the altruist and hedonist necessitate that the happiness of one leads to injury to
another person
• Objectivist ethics negates this moral cannibalism and advocates for rational
selfishness
• Rational selfishness is → “…rational interests of men do not clash-that there is no
conflict of interests among men who do not desire the unearned, who do not make
sacrifices nor accept them, who deal with one another as traders, giving value for
value.' (p.27)
o Rational interests of men do not clash. Conflict of interest i snot possible
o They do not desire things they do not deserve
o Neither do they sacrifice for others nor do they want others to sacrifice for
them
• "The principle of trade is the only rational ethical principle for all human
relationships... It is the principle of justice.'
o Friendship is about you adding value to other’s life and they adding value to
yours. If it is one sided it is parasitic
o You can be sympathetic to someone but if it is not returned it is not friendship
per se
o Trading is the way of human life. Even in meeting friends, you trade
experience and value.
• Gains from social existence: Knowledge & Trade

Social existence is supposed to be celebrated

Humans are not meant to be isolated

• ..physical force only in retaliation and only against those who initiate it → holdup
man example - no man may obtain any values from others by physical force.
o For example India’s no first use policy concerning nuclear weapons
• Government - protect men's rights. Night watchman.
o The role of the night watchman is to just make sure no one is harming another
o The government is limited to being the night watch man
o They just protect human’s rights
• 'Without property rights, no other rights are possible.' (p.29)
o A mango tree in a public space rarely has the chance for the fruit to ripen
o A mango orchard that is private has place for it to flourish
• The foundations of capitalism as the world order
o Capitalism is a way of celebrating life
• Unashamed of life and celebrating life, for life' not 'fear' is source of al morality!
o For the objectivist ethicist, we should celebrate life by producing
o The source of our ethics is life not fear of social reprimand or dear of being
posted to hell
Lecture 13
Yellow - What is Important.

Pink - That can lead to further questions.

Blue - ideas with much deeper ramification which can be taken much further.

Atlas Shrugged is a novel by Ayn Rand and is quoting from there

She is collating her philosophy spread across her different works.

She is first intimidating a tradition form of ethics. her skepticism is visible. This sort of ethics
which led to more people being unhappy than happy.

“What is morality, or ethics? It is a code of values to guide man’s choices and actions—the
choices and actions that determine the purpose and the course of his life. Ethics, as a science,
deals with discovering and defining such a code.”

“Let me stress this. The first question is not: What particular code of values should man
accept? The first question is: Does man need values at all—and why?”

One should always answer the “why?” first before the “what?”

Why precedes the what question

“ A “whim” is a desire experienced by a person who does not know and does not care to
discover its cause.”

She has considered the history of ethics as being the product of whims and not properly
thought of.

Various attempts have been made to alter this.

Earlier what was done in the name of religion is now done in the name of society.

Society on the other hand was considered to be nothing but a small set of individuals who are
a select few top elite. This is also known as Methodological individualism .

His opens up the debate between methodological individualism and methodological

collectivism. In the latter many participants of the group steer the ship and make the
difference.

Ayn Rand states that society follows methodological individualism