Transcript (Gauthier) – Barreto Cinco Dykimcheng Lumauig

Morals By Agreement
Barretto | Cinco | Dykimching,
Lumauig | Miranda
DAVID GAUTHIER
• Born in Toronto in 1932
• Educated at the University of
Toronto (Bachelor of Arts
with Honors Degree) (1954)
• Became a chairman of the
Philosophy Department of
the University of Toronto
• Also became a member of
the Philosophy Department
of the University of
Pittsburgh
• Became a Senior Research
Fellow at the Center for
Philosophy of Science
DAVID GAUTHIER
•Known for his three books:
-Practical Reasoning
-The Logic of Leviathan
-Morals by Agreement
•Inspiration and influence from
Jean-Jacques Rousseau and
Thomas Hobbes
• Certain interest in political
philosophy, economic
rationality and practical
rationality
• Developed a Contractarian
Moral Theory within the
framework of rational choice
PART ONE
According to Gauthier
• Value is subjective
• Four things to consider: Utility, Morality,
Rationality and Reason
• Morality = distinction between what's good
and bad, right and wrong
• Rationality = based on reason or logic (logical,
practical etc.)
According to David Hume...
• The theory of morals are
only
useful
if
it
recommends duties that
promote the interest of
individuals.
• More often than not, the
morality of an act only
becomes our concern
when the act clashes with
our individual interests.
Reactions of Gauthier...
• Theory of morals shouldn't just recommend
duties that promote the interest of
individuals. Else, theory of morals will be
superfluous.
• If usefulness is to be considered in a theory of
morals, that theory of morals must
recommend duties that reason also endorses.
"If moral appeals are entitled to some practical
effect..., it is not because they whisper
invitingly to our desires, but because they
convince our intellect.”
Assumptions
The following two cases are IMPOSSIBLE:
1. Reason is only a tool for deciding matters of
fact, and that it does not affect the "sphere of
action".
2. Reason is just a "handmaiden“ (or servant) of
interest, and that every moral action that
doesn't promote one's interest also
contradicts reason.
Assumption #2: This diagram is false.
ACTIONS
ACTIONS THAT PROMOTE
INDIVIDUAL INTERESTS
RATIONAL ACTIONS
Assumptions
3. Morals are a part of the theory of rational
choice.
4. The rational principles for decision-making
include some that constraints the actor
pursuing his own interest in an impartial way
(which are moral principles).
5. Decision-making must begin with clear
conceptions of value and rationality, in a form
applicable to choice situations.
RATIONAL ACTIONS
Reason has a practical role related to but
transcending individual interest.
Actions that doesn’t promote individual interests can
still be rationally justified.
Morality is a rational constraint on the pursuit of
individual interest.
ACTIONS THAT PROMOTE
INDIVIDUAL INTERESTS
MORALITY
RATIONAL ACTIONS
ACTIONS THAT PROMOTE
INDIVIDUAL INTERESTS
PART TWO
Objectives
• To provide a justificatory framework for moral
behavior and principles
• To validate the conception of morality as a set
of rational, impartial constraints on the
pursuit of individual interest.
MAIN POINTS
• Reason has a practical role related to but transcending
individual interest, so that principles of action that
prescribe duties overriding advantage may be
rationally justified. In a way, we are to defend the
traditional conception of morality as a rational
constraint on the pursuit of individual interest.
• an individual chooses rationally only in so far as he
constrains his pursuit of his own interest or advantage
to conform to principles expressing the impartiality
characteristic of morality.
STUDY OF CHOICE
• The study of choice begins from the
stipulation of clear conceptions of value and
rationality in a form applicable to choice
situations.
• For each type of structure distinguished, the
conception of rationality may be elaborated
into a set of determinate conditions on the
choice among possible actions.
ECONOMIC THEORY
(classical and neo-classical)
• Examines rational behaviour in those
situations in which the actor knows with
certainty the outcome of each of his possible
actions
• Assumes rationality of the actors
GAUTHIER’S COMMENTS
• Both economics and decision theory are
limited in their analysis of interaction, since
both consider outcomes only in relation to the
choices of a single actor, treating the choices
of others as aspects of that actor's
circumstances.
THEORY OF GAMES
• Overcomes this limitation, analyzing outcomes
in relation to sets of choices, one for each of
the persons involved in bringing about the
outcome
• Considers the choices of an actor who decides
on the basis of expectations about the choices
of others, themselves deciding on the basis of
expectations about his choice
The theory of rational choice is an ongoing
enterprise, extending a basic understanding of
value and rationality to the formulation of
principles of rational behavior in an ever
wider range of situations.
JOHN RAWLS
JOHN HARSANYI
Insisted that the
theory
Explicitly treats
of justice is “the
ethics as
most significant part of the theory
part of the theory
of rational
of rational
behavior.
choice”
DAVID GAUTHIER
Morality can be
generated as a
rational
constraint from
the non-moral
premises of
rational choice.
Morals By Agreement
• Must generate, strictly as rational principles
for choice, and so without introducing prior
moral assumptions (being impartial) satisfy
the traditional understanding of morality.
• Conception of morality is seen as a set of
rational, impartial constraints on the pursuit
of individual interest, not to defend any
particular moral code
Morals By Agreement
• A connection between reason and interest
exist in so far as the interests of others are not
affected.
• A person acts rationally if and only if she seeks
her greatest interest or benefit
OPPOSED CONCEPTIONS OF PRACTICAL RATIONALITY
Maximizing Conception
of Rationality
Universalistic Conception
of Rationality
rational person still seeks the greatest
satisfaction of her own interests
Insists that what makes it rational to
satisfy an interest does not depend
on whose interest it is.
Thus the rational person seeks to
satisfy all interests.
it is not interests in the self, that take
oneself as object, but interests of the
self, held by oneself as subject, that
provide the basis for rational choice
and action
it is not interests in anyone, that take
any person as object, but interests of
anyone, held by some person as
subject, that provide the basis for
rational choice and action.
Neither conception of rationality requires that practical
reasons be self-interested.
Note
• On the universalistic conception all persons have in
effect the same basis for rational choice -- the interests
of all -- of the impersonality or impartiality of reason
• The rational requirement that all interests be satisfied
to the fullest extent possible directly constrains each
person in the pursuit of her own interests.
• The main task of our moral theory -- the generation of
moral constraints as rational -- is thus easily
accomplished by proponents of the universalistic
conception of practical reason.
PART THREE
A person is...
...an independent center of activity, endeavoring
to direct his capacities and resources to the
fulfillmment of his interests.
He considers what he can do, but initially draws
no distinction between what he may and may
not do.
Morals by agreement offer a contractarian rationale
for distinguishing what one may or may not do.
Moral principles are introduced as the objects of
fully voluntary ex ante agreement among rational
persons
In so far as individuals would agree to constraints
on their choices, restraining their pursuit of their
own interests, they acknowledge a distinction
between what they may and may not do.
• Thoman Hobbes
• Glaucon
• Kurt Baier: The reason for existence of a
morality is to yield reasons which overrule the
reasons of self-interest in those cases when
everyone's following self-interest would be
harmful to everyone.
• John Rawls: A contractarian views society as “a
cooperative venture for mutual advantage”
among persons “conceived as not taking an
interest in one another's interests”
• Thus the contractarian insists that a society could
not command the willing allegiance of a rational
person if, without appealing to her feelings for
others, it afforded her no expectation of net
benefit.
• Thus the contractarian insists that a society could
not command the willing allegiance of a rational
person if, without appealing to her feelings for
others, it afforded her no expectation of net
benefit.
• Each joins in the hope of benefiting from the
adherence of others, but fails to adhere in the
hope of benefiting from her own defection.
• A necessary condition of such agreement is that
its outcome be mutually advantageous; our task
is to provide a sufficient condition.
Four Core Conception
• The proviso against bettering oneself through
worsening others
• The morally free zone afforded by the
perfectly competitive market
• The principle of minimax relative concession
• The disposition to constrained maximization
• First: Bargaining problem proper: selecting a
specific outcome given a range of mutually
advantageous possibilities, and an initial
bargaining position.
• Second: Determine the initial bargaining
position. Develop own theory of bargaining.
Principle of Minimax Relative
Concession
• Requirement that the least relative benefit,
measured again as a proportion of one's stake,
be as great as possible
• Captures the ideas of fairness and impartiality
in a bargaining situation, and so serves as the
basis of justice
PART FOUR
Contractarian Theory of Morals
•
•
•
•
Strength
Weaknesses
A “Case Study”
Arguments Against
Strength
"Enables people to demonstrate the rationality
of impartial constraints on the pursuit of
individual interest to persons who may take
no interest in others' interest.“
Morality is given a sure grounding.
Weaknesses
Requires a context of mutual benefit.
Does not assume any fundamental concern with
impartiality, but only a concern derivative
from the benefits of agreement.
Weaknesses
Not everyone will receive equal benefits
Coercion among unequals
The Western Society
• Resorted to cooperative ventures, training
individuals to work for his own good to be
able to contribute to society.
• Lead to increased mutual benefit:
– Rise in the quantity of material goods
– Increase in population
– Increase in the average life span
The Western Society
• Individualistic AND cooperative
• Limited constraints
• Freed from coercion: individual progress and
social advance are linked together
• Elements of law, religion, and education
Technology
Allows individuals who do not contribute to
social progress to benefit
Arguments Against
1.) Glaucon: Each person has the secret hope
that they can be successfully unjust.
 Human desires are not touched by
Contractarianism.
Arguments Against
2.) Each person would prefer a natural harmony
in which he/she could fullfill him/herself
without constraint.
 Cooperation is only the second best form
of interaction, next to market.
If human individuality is to bloom, then we must
expect some degree of conflict among the
aims and interests of persons rather than
natural harmony.
Market and morals tame this conflict,
reconciling individuality with mutual benefit.
Can these ideas lead to practical truths?
Are we telling a story about ideas that will
seem as strange to our descendants, as the
Form of the Good and the Unmoved Mover do
to us?
Prisoner’s Dilemma
“According to Gauthier, moral constraint on the
pursuit of individual self-interest is required
because cooperative activities almost inevitably
involve a prisoner's dilemma: a situation in
which the best individual outcomes can be had
by those who cheat on the agreement while the
others keep their part of the bargain.” (Stanford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vcXtbIXNI
g
Tricia’s dilemma
SAO Director
Tricia
Silence
File case
Do favor
TB, DB
TX, DB
Expose
TB, DX
TX, DX
TB = Tricia’s benefit
DB = SAO Director’s benefit
TX = Tricia’s loss
DX = SAO Director’s loss
Personal Reflections
Reference List
http://againstpolitics.com/david-gauthierbiography/