Shared poli 202 midterm study guide PDF

Preview

Summary

Professor Davis in Poli 202...

Description

POLI 202: Western Political Heritage =Midterm - Study Guide https://quizlet.com/432100208/flashcards https://quizlet.com/_7bcle5 The terms in a quizlet -We need some help with the essays near the bottom Disclaimer: This is a study guide. It is not an exhaustive list of the questions on the test. Making it the latter would not be fair to students who came to class. There is no guarantee that anything on the test will also be on this study guide. However, this study guide is not designed to mislead you about what it is important from the first half of the semester. Also, the lectures are designed to target the most important information.

I. Concepts & Definitions Argument: a set of statements (premises) that are written to prove an end statement (conclusion) Premise: other statements in an argument trying to prove a conclusion Conclusion: what the arguer is trying to convince us of Valid/Deductively Valid: argument where it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion to be false-- i.e. if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true. Does NOT eliminate controversy or guarantee a true conclusion Sound argument: all the premises are true, and so the argument is valid

Hobbes Motion -

Observable movement Most basic thing Animals have two types: vital/voluntary

Vital/Voluntary -

Vital: things that always happen-- breathing, pumping blood, etc. Voluntary: motions you choose-- to speak, move, think

Appetites/Aversions -

When an endeavour goes toward something it is an appetite, when away an aversion Appetite + present = love (Appetite + not present= desire) Aversion + present = despair (Aversion + not present =fear) Desire = motion towards what causes it

Good/Evil -

Good is what you desire (object of appetites), evil is what you hate (object of aversions) There is no “highest good.” There are no facts about what “really is good,” apart from facts about what humans desire

Glory -

Joy arising from the imagination of one man’s power is glorying

Confidence -

Constant hope Believing in oneself because of past abilities

Felicity -

Success in satisfying your desires Continual progress of the desire, from one object to another. Always desiring something better (aka it is never achieved) A perpetual and restless desire of power after power, that ceaseth only in death.

State of Nature -

State of man: to be inquisitive of the events that they see Looks for the causes of one's own good and evil fortune

-

Perpetual fear of being ignorant of “causes” Solitary, nasty, brutish, and short While some men are stronger than others, even the weakest can kill the strongest, through wit or confederation Men who want the same thing that cannot be shared will become enemies No common power or laws, and therefore nothing is unjust Have rights of nature (liberty to do what you need to do to survive)-- only liberty (allow you to do things. Not claim (prohibit other people doing things)

State of War -

Natural state for people to be in in the state of nature Notion of time must be considered Not just fighting but time when fighting COULD occur Men want peace due to fear of death

Prisoner’s Dilemma -

-

You can either choose peace or attack Peace

attack

peace

Nothing destroyed

You lose

attack

You win

fight

It is always rational to attack

Three Equalizers in the State of Nature ●

●

●

Strength ○ The physical ability to do something. A rock has the freedom to move but lacks the strength: ○ Any person can defeat any other person Prudence (wisdom) ○ Predict the future based on past experiences (wisdom) ○ We don’t like to admit that people are smarter than us, each is satisfied with their share of prudence Ability ○ equally capable of achieving a certain level of ability of rationally pursuing their own ability ○ We all have equal hopes of attaining our ends

Competition -

A cause of war. Both sides are competing for something, but if side X is stronger than side Y, Y should back down because it is weaker. But if X and Y are both relatively the same size, then both will attack because it leads to gain. Relates to prisoner's dilemma. We can attack each other for the sake of gain (Invade for

-

gain) Everyone wants the same things, attack for gain

Diffidence -

-

Another cause of war where one side attacks another for safety and/or reputation. We both know competition is possible. If I wait until you attack, I am put in a bad position. If I attack first, I am in a better position. But you know that I know that one of us could attack first. DISTRUST. Attack for the sake of Safety. (Invade for safety) Distrust, attack for fear of safety Refers to the uneasiness or anxiety that all individuals, including and especially law-abiding ones, have about their own security and standing vis-à-vis one another.

Vainglory -

Glory achieved from things thought about you (often lies) and not actual achievements Attack for reputation

Law of Nature -

A general rule that prevents a man from doing anything to harm his own life Discovered through reason Anti harming other people Law of Nature must confirm to the Golden Rule (do unto others as you would have done unto you) (Think Gandhi)

First Law of Nature -

We can seek peace and follow it Every man ought to endeavor peace, but do anything you can to survive

Second Law of Nature -

We can defend ourselves This law requires that a man be willing to lay down his right to all things to prevent war People will only be willing to give up their rights when others are willing to do the same If everyone else is willing to give up their rights and submit to a sovereign, then you should too.

Contract -

The mutually transferring of a right The giving up of a natural right on the condition that everyone else is giving up that same right Artificial person; actor; speaks as a unified voice for all natural persons (authors) who have joined together in agreement

Covenant -

Two way contract (both giving something) Promising to deliver the thing that you contracted This represents everyone within a contract There is no way to make a valid covenant in the state of nature (because no one to enforce it) You wouldn't covenant with someone who may not comply There is always the threat that someone may not comply Like a contract where at least one of the parties fulfills its end of the deal in the future

Justice/Injustice -

Third Law of Nature We are required to keep all of the contracts we make Because of humans desire for power there is an incentive to break contracts Justice- obey a covenant Injustice- disobey a covenant

Sovereign -

A person or persons endowed with sovereignty by social contract. The sovereign is the head of the Leviathan. He is the maker of laws, the judge of first principles, the foundation of all knowledge, and the defender of civil peace. Must have the right to command (people obligated to obey), the right of nature (right to anything), exclusivity (only he has rights), and unconditionality (can’t lose rights) Absolute power. Monarchy is best Doesn’t make a covenant with the people Can’t violate justice

Institution -

When people voluntarily grant their power to a sovereign out of fear and reason. Ex: We are going to college out of fear and reason.

Acquisition -

When power is used to force men to submit to a sovereign

Right to Command -

Held by the sovereign, if not obeyed, peace is lost

Right of Nature -

Liberty to do what you need to survive Writers call Jus Naturale

-

Liberty every man has to use his own power for the preservation of his own life I believe these other 3 threes are for liberty rights ^^^^, the definition is sovereign is still in a state of nature and so has right to everything Right to all things in the state of nature, even others bodies

Exclusivity -

the right to punish can only be held by one party, the sovereign. The sovereign cannot lose these rights

Author -

Someone who does something A natural person His words are his own Any man who chooses to leave the state of nature via contract

Authority -

When someone tells you to do something on your behalf

Personation -

To act or represent oneself, or act for another

Freedom -

Not being hindered to do one’s will Hobbes argues that you are still free under the leviathan The ability to move freely

True Liberties -

-

means the ability to act according to one's will without being physically hindered from performing that act. Only chains or imprisonment can prevent one from acting, so all subjects have absolute liberty under sovereignty There are limits on what subjects are obligated to obey, ex. Killing oneself, going to war, confess to a crime

Claim Right -

Other people are prohibited from using it.

Liberty Right -

Permission to use

Locke State of Nature -

all men are free "to order their actions, and dispose of their possessions and persons, as they think fit within the bounds of the law of nature

Freedom -

Freedom from absolute power is necessary for man's preservation. We are free to do anything that the law does not dictate. We have a right to our own lives.

Equality -

Everyone is naturally equal in the sense above: no one has any duty to obey anyone else

Law of Nature 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

If X makes Y, then Y is X's property. God made each person. So, we are all God's property. If X is Y's property, then Y has a claim right to decide what happens to X. So, God has a right to decide what happens to all of us. God does not want us to destroy each other. So, we should not destroy ourselves, or others (as much as possible).

Punishment 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

The law of nature would be pointless if no one had the right to punish. God did not intend for the law of nature to be pointless. So, someone must have the right to punish. If everyone is equal, then no one has a right to punish more than anyone else. Everyone is equal. So, everyone has a right to punish.

Property/Labor -

God gave man the Earth to own and use to his advantage. We can only enjoy the earth if we acquire property. The Earth is man's property, and labor is the distinction between personal and common property. (If you grew the apple tree, the apples are yours.) Rule of Property: every man should have as much as he can make use of. If anything you have goes unused, you have violated the law of nature. The state has an obligation to protect life, liberty, and property

Lockean Proviso -

People can own property but they are limited by the amount of resources available and they cannot take more than they can use “Only enough sufficient for their needs”

Tacit Consent -

give consent but we don't do it by a physical gesture; "if anyone accepts the benefits of government, he has tacitly consented to the burdens the government imposes on him" Locke says: Simply by walking along the highways of a country a person gives tacit consent to the government and agrees to obey it while living in its territory. This, Locke thinks, explains why resident aliens have an obligation to obey the laws of the state where they reside, though only while they live there. Inheriting property creates an even stronger bond, since the original owner of the property permanently put the property under the jurisdiction of the commonwealth. Children, when they accept the property of their parents, consent to the jurisdiction of the commonwealth over that property.

Express Consent -

Verbally, real consent, written

Toleration -

The conjunction of two things- you disapprove of something but you dont think it should be suppressed Disapprove of (x) (x) deserves protection Ex: I may disapprove “man buns” but I believe men should have the right to grow “man buns” if they want Ex: Hate speech is free speech. It may be hated, but it is necessary to protect to prevent all speech from becoming “hate” speech.

Argument from Authority -

God hasn’t given magistrate the authority to save souls

Argument from Force -

Sovereign can’t force beliefs/compel religion

Argument from Diversity -

there are many false beliefs. Magistrates should not control religion

He took these three arguments ^^^^ off of the study guide on learning suite

Rousseau Inequality -

No inequality in State Of Nature

Division of Labor -

No division of labor in the state of nature Happens in the 3 stage (Family Period) when families begin and there is a division of labor between sexes Important in stage four (leads to inequality) Natural inequality stems from differences in age, health or other physical characteristics. Moral inequality is established by convention or the consent of men. Begins in the fourth stage (complex cooperation) It is not natural

State of Nature (Methodology) -

In the “state of nature” humans are very strong but they do not just go around destroying everything. They are not social. (society makes humans soft and weak) They do not have a language. The needs of the savage humans are easily met. They are fearful- they don't fight. They don't live off of moral love but physical love. They don't have vanity, consideration, esteem, or contempt.

6 Stages (you can't go back stages!) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Pure State of nature (pre-social, no moral concepts) (Noble Savage) Elementary Cooperation (no families; procreation is impulsive) (Stag Hunt) Family Period (rapid progress because of cooperation, technology revolution) Complex Cooperation (agriculture, metallurgy, people own property, inequality begins) State of War (caused by inequality) Political Society (anarchy, national wars)

Noble Savage -

Independent of others because there is no division of labor (Pure State of Nature)

Pity -

Don’t want to cause unnecessary suffering to other animals or people

Self-Love -

Helps preserve the species You don't want to be hurt Only motivations in the state of nature are self-preservation and pity

Stag Hunt (Game) -

-

a situation in which multiple individuals go out on a hunt. - Each can individually choose to hunt a stag or hunt a hare. - Each player must choose an action without knowing the choice of the other. - If an individual hunts a stag, they must have the cooperation of their partner(s) in order to succeed. - An individual can get a hare by himself, but a hare is worth less than a stag. This has been taken to be a useful analogy for social cooperation, such as international agreements on climate change. - Opposite of prisoners dilemma because you want/expect everyone to cooperate - (Elementary Cooperation)

Property -

Starts in stage four (leads to inequality) Leads to comparison (and therefore unhappiness)

Comparison -

Starts in stage four (leads to inequality) Leads to unhappiness

State of War -

Fifth stage Caused by inequality

Kant Will -

that which provides the motives for our actions.

Good Will -

The Good Will freely chooses to do its moral duty (because it is morally right) - An action has moral worth only if it is right, and is done for the reasons that make it right. - Actions that are not right have no moral worth - Right actions done primarily from inclination have no moral worth - Right actions done for the reasons that makes it right do have moral worth - All actions are done either primarily from inclination or else for the reasons that make it right - So, an action has moral worth only if it is right, and is done for the right reasons that make it right.

Permissibility -

Whether an action is morally right or wrong

Moral Worth -

Whether performing the action makes one deserving of moral praise (opposite: blame)

Inclination -

Things we desire

Imperative -

A statement of what one “ought” to do

Maxim -

An action, together with the reasons for that action Your intentions/plan

End -

A person- never a tool A goal - something with value

Hypothetical Imperative -

A conditional “ought.” You ought to take the means to your own ends or goals. If your end goal is to get a mint brownie, you should go to the creamery You can do these as long as it isn't against categorical imperatives

Categorical Imperative -

Requirement that is unconditional, universal moral requirement. A requirement that is ‘imperative’ to follow. If you don't follow it you are always making a rational mistake. It is possible that a categorical is actually an imperative

Formula of Universal Law -

Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law. Your maxim is your reason for acting. The formula of universal law therefore says that you should only act for those reasons which have the following characteristics: you can act for that reason while at the same time willing that it be a universal law that everyone adopt that reason for acting.

Necessary/Perfect Duty -

A duty that applies to you at every single moment (ex. The brethren upholding their priesthood) - Something that is not conceivable for the whole world to do and isnt your rational will - KANT ex. Never killing oneself out of misery

Contingent/Imperfect Duty -

A duty you do selectively (ex. Doing the dishes) - Something that is conceivable but not really a rational will - Ex: helping everyone you meet, its /possible, no one does it

Formal Principle -Govern how we act regardless of our ends -Ex: help others in need (even though we don’t always, we’re compelled to) - Ex. Being a gentleman (formal), regardless of social status.

Material Principle -To act in order to satisfy a desire (think, I have a lust for sugary sweets. I need to get that sugary material to satisfy my sweet tooth) -Ex: If I want a mint brownie, I should go to the creamery. Going to the creamery would be acting on a material principle

Price -

The value something has when it is comparable to other things

Dignity -

The value something has when it is not comparable to other things

Formula of Humanity -

An action is right if it treats humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, always at the same time as an end, never merely as a means - Kant thought, roughly speaking, that the formula of universal law and the formula of humanity were just two ways of stating the same thing; that is, that they are two different ways of expressing a single moral law. - Formula - When I choose an end, i regard that end as having worth - The best explanation for (1) is that my end has a worth that is conditional on my choice - So, I represent myself as having the power to give ends worth in virtue of my choices (...