The end of all actions: Philosophy Forums

The end of all actions
Is there a goal at which human action should aim?

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6

The end of all actions

blueocean066
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jul 10, 2008
Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 4

Posted 07/12/08 - 08:42 PM:	#51
emanswen wrote: Hello, Do you think there is some end, which I ought to try to bring about by my actions; some goal at which all of my actions ought to aim? Should I try to bring about maximum personal happiness (egoism), maximum total human happiness (utilitarianism), or something else. . . ? Do you think there is such an end/goal? Why/why not? I am also interested in hearing the famous answers to this question and what you think of them. Thanks We are all inherently "selfish" meaning that we want to make ourselves happy. We will never do anything that has absolutely no benefit to ourselves-the benefit could be something as small as simply knowing we did something good for someone else (in this case even mother Teresa is selfish, if she didn't get any satisfaction from her work at all, she wouldn't do it). I say the best way to make yourself happy is by making others happy along the way, the more people you can include in your own endeavors for happiness the better. This way your actions impact the world in a bigger and better way, that their benefits don't just cut off after you.

dimitri
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jan 23, 2008
Total Topics: 3
Total Posts: 158

Posted 07/12/08 - 10:56 PM:	#52
Cooperation is the word that is missing here. Remember Smith: baker thinks of his profit but... We need each other to satisfy our needs and we cooperate with mutual benefit. The social laws we observe (including the moral ones) help us in regulating this cooperation. Without thinking much of other's good, just observing these social rules (or avoiding actions which are prohibited by them) we meet this requirement: do good to others. An invisible hand! (metaphor).

emanswen
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Oct 01, 2007
Total Topics: 24
Total Posts: 149

Posted 07/29/08 - 11:37 PM:	#53
emanswen wrote: It strikes me that if there were some state of affairs, which I ought to try to realise through all of my actions, irrespective of my desires, then I cannot see why I would care whether it were realised or not. If it is true that all of my actions ought to aim at achieving x, but I do not care about achieving or do not want to achieve x, but rather want to achieve y, and if I can achieve y without achieving x, then why should I bother trying to achieve x instead of y? I think I have changed my mind about this. If I discover that there are certain moral facts - true propositions of the type: "Every person ought to strive to realise x, irrespective of their desires, etc." - categorical imperatives - then that would answer my question, "What state of affairs ought I to try to realise?" The fact that I do not want to realise x does not change the fact that I should strive to realise x, and therefore should not not-strive to realise x (even if that is what my desires are telling me to do).

emanswen
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Oct 01, 2007
Total Topics: 24
Total Posts: 149

Posted 11/13/08 - 05:05 PM:	#54
I have been reading a bit of Sartre's Being and Nothingness and came across this bit which seems to be relevant to this thread: Sartre wrote: It follows that my freedom is the unique foundation of values and that nothing, absolutely nothing, justifies me in adopting this or that particular value, this or that particular scale of values. As a being by whom values exist, I am unjustifiable. My freedom is anguished at being the foundation of values while being itself without foundation. It is anguished in addition because values, due to the fact that they are essentially revealed to a freedom, cannot disclose themselves without being at the same time "put into question," for the possibility of overturning the scale of values appears complementarily as my possibility. It is anguish before values which is the recognition of the ideality of values. In the absence of some objectively binding moral code, my values must come from me, and when I reflect on this, I can see that there is no way for me to justify my values, and that overturning a particular scale of values is just as much a possibility for me as adopting it. Reflecting on this produces anguish, although in my immediate, unreflective everyday life, values spring up in a pretty unproblematic way.

ManiacJack
aka W

Usergroup: Members
Joined: May 29, 2008
Location: San Mucus, TX
Total Topics: 41
Total Posts: 588

Posted 11/19/08 - 12:12 PM:	#55
Suppose I say: "One ought to be smart" How does one disagree?
Future Tense Passed Relief the Escapist wrote: Bullshit, self-deception, self-aggrandizement. Explains everything, really...

emanswen
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Oct 01, 2007
Total Topics: 24
Total Posts: 149

Posted 11/22/08 - 04:22 AM:	#56
One would disagree by saying, "One ought not to be smart," or, more likely, something like, "One ought to be smart only if one wants to be smart," or something like that.

timw

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Nov 14, 2008
Total Topics: 3
Total Posts: 99

Posted 11/22/08 - 10:19 PM:	#57
"Do you think there is some end, which I ought to try to bring about by my actions? Sure, there are lots of things I think you ought to do. Perhaps it's more useful to reframe the question and to ask oneself, thus: "Is there anything I ought to do?" "Ought" and it's brother "should" are simply too treacherous to deal with in less than a few thousand words. (Imo outside their correct grammatical usages they're both nothing but trouble.) So let's refine the question further: "Is there anything I must do?" I say no. There is no specific action I must do. All roads beyond this point lead back to Kant and his three expressions of his categorical imperative (quickly, easily, and profitably accessed online—find them, memorize them, act in accordance with them). And for me it boils down to this: I must always do the right thing. Of course, to borrow a phrase, that could be etched on a Queen Anne's farthing and worn around the neck. What it requires is a lifetime's work, attention, and tuning in learning how to do it.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6

You don't have permission to post.