Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
3.2.22 Teleological Issues: Egoisit Theories - Coggle Diagram
3.2.22 Teleological Issues: Egoisit Theories
Teleological Issues
Egoisit Theories
Epicureanism
Paul was confronted the theory
Acts 17:11
Main reason behind ethical choice is pleasure
Pain to you is morally wrong
Not all pain is bad
Leprosy
Pleasure is morally good
Not all pleasure is good.
Sadism
torturing animals
You cannot predict the future pleasure
Issue: Different kinds of pleasure
Physical
Mental
soul
Leads to Hedonism
Pleasure is a fleeting goal
Pleasiure is incadentally related to instance
Only God can be a an epicurean
Is it wrong Biblically
God created pleasure
Its wrong to make choice on pleasure alone
Epicuris
Machiavellism 1600's
Motive behind actions is success
Everything goes in the name of success
No Love only control and power
Don't let other take advantage of you
Break promises
Fool the gullible
Don't be generous
Be generious with other peoples money
Complete self interest
Problems
Secular theory
We don't know what the future holds
It is not in man to walk and direct his steps - Bible
Does not define what success is
Machiavelli
Utilitarianism
Jeremy Benthum
What is good to the greatest number of people
Wanted best of all egoist
Happiness is the goal
Life, liberty and the persuet of happiness
Pain
Pleasure
Intense and length
1 more item...
End justifies the means
Problems
If pleasure leads to pain
Who gets included in this greatest number
John Stewart Mills And Betham
Mills
"No intelligent human being would desire to be a fool."
Higher pleasures are better then lower
Intellectual better then sexual
Ways of making decisions
We learned through evolution what is best
If someone comes up with a better idea then we can change
Egoist is more about you then others only.
Situational Ethics
Pope 1500's
If you must choose between two sins choose the lesser
J. Fletcher
Priest
Rope factory
Phylospher
His Goal was to fight Christian legalism
Because people were stringent
Chris
Situational ethics with accountability
Not really egoist, just find the most loving thing to.
unfalling faith in human ability
Cons:
Eve in the garden could determine that to eat was the most loving thing to do.
Abraham and Sara
Best thing to do was to have Hagar as saraget.
Fletcher never defined love to him.
Adultery
Sometimes the best thing to do is to have adultery with a lonely women
Con: You're restricting and taking love from the spouse.
six thesis
Only intrinsic value is love
Intrinsic
value that cannot be taken away
Ruling norm of any christian decision is love.
Love and justice are the same thing.
Justice is love coping with a situation that requires fair action
Love wills neighbor's love wither we like them or not.
Levels of love
love of self self sate
love of neighbor for own sake
Love of neighbor for neighbor sake
Love of self for neighbors sake
love addresses each situation when it is approached
Decisions made situationally not prescriptively
Example
Life boat
Picking up a man drowning a man to save the rest
Why didn't man jump in himself
Its the idea that you can decide how it can be most loving deciding for others what is best.
Pro's
Even Biblical Ethics have flex
David breaking God's law but doing the right thing
Cons
Jesus was an iternant preacher only
Love to who?
Wife or other lady
God is a situational ethesis
Consequentialist: to do with consequences
We put a premium on being right instead of being loving.
Fletcher: Situational Ethics
Better alternative to SE
Fletcher
Situational ethics
Pro
Con
Examples are extreme and uncommon
Do we really trust God's ethical counsel
Adam and Eve
Ellen White
It is about the small things
Our character is tested in the small things
Testimonies
Moral delima
No easy answer