Are You Rational? #2 Are You Moral? | Philosophy Tube

TL;DR

This episode focuses on the clash between Reasons Internalism and Moral Absolutism, discussing whether morality applies to everyone, and exploring potential solutions to the Central Problem.

Transcript

Welcome back. In Episode 1 we talked about what reasons are. I recommend watching episode 1 before watching this otherwise it might not make much sense. In this episode 2, we're gonna be talking about "moral" reasons. Part 1: "I don't care! I love it!" So you'll remember from last time the distinction between "Reasons Internalism" and "Reasons Exte... Read More

Key Insights

• 🫵 Reasons Internalism and Reasons Externalism present contrasting views on the relationship between rationality and motivation.
• 💄 Moral Absolutism clashes with Reasons Internalism, creating the Central Problem of making morality universally applicable.
• 🤨 Denying morality's application to those without the right motivations raises questions about defining moral rules.
• 🤳 Rephrasing moral statements to link them to self-interest is a potential solution, but it may weaken the altruistic aspect of morality.
• 💨 Kant's and Critchley's perspectives offer ways to reconcile Moral Absolutism and Reasons Internalism by proposing that moral motivations are inherent in every human being.
• 🙈 Avoiding evil can be seen as a fundamental motivation tied to the construction of the self.
• ❓ Contrastive reasons suggest that rationality is always relative to specific alternatives and contexts.

Questions & Answers

Q: What is the difference between Reasons Internalism and Reasons Externalism?

Reasons Internalism suggests that if it is rational for someone to do something, they must be motivated to do it, while Reasons Externalism posits that rational actions can be done without being motivated to do them.

Q: How does Moral Absolutism clash with Reasons Internalism?

Moral Absolutism holds that certain actions are always bad, regardless of personal motivations. This clashes with Reasons Internalism, which suggests that rationality is tied to motivation, potentially allowing morally bad actions if one is not motivated against them.

Q: Can morality apply to everyone, even if they don't want it to?

This is known as the Central Problem. One potential solution is to deny morality's application to those without the right motivations, but this raises questions about defining moral rules for those who do not recognize them.

Q: How do depression and lack of motivation fit into Reasons Internalism?

Reasons Internalism implies that actions without motivation can be rational, even if they are detrimental to the person's well-being. This raises issues in cases where individuals are not motivated to do things that are necessary for their own functioning.

Summary & Key Takeaways

• The episode discusses the distinction between Reasons Internalism and Reasons Externalism, highlighting the clash between these ideas and Moral Absolutism.

• It explores the Central Problem of how to make morality apply to everyone, even those who are not motivated to follow moral rules.

• The episode presents three potential solutions: denying morality's application to those without the right motivations, rephrasing moral statements to link them to self-interest, or arguing that moral reasons are inherent in every human being.