PART A “Virtue and Vice”, located at http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-moral/#VirV…
“Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God” Please respond to the following: 1. Compare Jonathan Edwards’ presentation, which claims that divine judgment will be brought down on a person who yields to vice, to Plutarch’s argument that there “is no pleasure in vice”. Discuss the issue, and provide examples of possible alternative incentives to avoid vice. 2. Explain how, in your view, a belief in “original sin” might influence a person’s approach to moral education. Provide reasons and examples to support your view.
PLEASE RESPOND TO CLASSMATE DISCUSSION WHETHER YOU AGREE OR NOT & A DETAILED WHY: In Johnathan Edwards presentation, he mentioned that divine judgment will be brought down on a person who yields to vice. In other words, for those who fall into the temptation of sin will have to suffer a severe punishment. Edwards focused a lot more on the aspect of sin and what would happen to a person who decided to partake in evil wrongdoings. Plutarch on the other hand spoke on there being no pleasure in vice. Plutarch based his argument solely around the fact that a person cannot find amusement or enjoyment in vice. He wanted to make points about people of good character and morals versus people with bad intentions and behaviors. In addition to this, Edwards wanted his audience to understand the severity of punishment and consequences for a person who found enjoyment in vice, while Plutarch wanted to show there was nothing good that came out of vice. Nonetheless, both Edwards and Plutarch could agree that nothing positive or of good nature came from participating in anything that involved vice.
As humans it is impossible to avoid vice all the time but I do believe that we can do our best to avoid most. Some vices may happen unintentionally and some may happen intentionally. However it may happen, as long as we take the proper steps to avoid them, we will be well on our way. Another good way to avoid vices is to recognize what our personal vices may be. Once we understand our own vices and are able to recognize the signs, we will have more self-control within those situations.
A belief in “original sin” might influence a person’s approach to moral education because of what they have been taught. We all have been raised and taught different beliefs, some in which we have in common but these views may also deter or help us in moral education. For those who believe in “original sin”, their approach toward moral education will be a lot different from someone who does not believe in original sin. However, this approach is based off of what an individual was taught to believe or what they have educated themselves to believe as well.
PART B: “Jealousy, Envy, and Grudge” Please respond to the following: 1. From the e-Activity and Kant’s essay, debate whether it is possible to envy others without begrudging their happiness. Describe how Kant views this issue. Provide reasons and examples to support your view. 2. Kant’s claim: “Until one achieves a permanent change in the will’s orientation . . . a revolution in which moral righteousness is the nonnegotiable condition of any of one’s pursuits, all of one’s actions that are in accordance with duty are nevertheless morally worthless.”
PLEASE RESPOND TO CLASSMATE DISCUSSION WHETHER YOU AGREE OR NOT & A DETAILED WHY: Kant had a belief that any kind of envy only causes destruction and it the pain that an individual experience when learning of someone’s success. Kant does make a valid point but to a certain extent. I think envy has two sides to it and it is up to the person on which side they want to focus on, the negative or positive. The negative outlook is that envy hurts, and it can devolve into hatred and even violence. An example here would be lottery winners. Some people get so jealous of the winners, and they seek them out and harm or kill because they did not win which is why I do not agree with some state policies about not keeping identity hidden. Some people are just flat out mean, and the “green-eyed monster” brings out the worst in some. But from a positive view, it can also encourage people and become an inspiration. Most times I try to look at envy from the positive side. For example, my friend has lost weight and looks good, and I am the envy of my friend. My envy does not stem from hatred, but I am envious because I want to get into shape like my friend, so I am inspired and have a common cause with my friend. I asked my friend what the routine consist of so I can be fit and in shape. So, for me, my envy is like a form of motivation and progressive thinking on my part. So, yes to answer the discussion question a person can be envious of others without begrudging others happiness, it depends on what side a person chooses to focus on.
Will orientation
I object to what Kant says in the statement. From my understanding, he is saying that what makes a good person is the possession of a will that is in a particular way is determined by moral duty. The idea of goodwill is supposed to be the idea of an individual that is committed only to make decisions that they hold to be morally worthy and who takes moral considerations in themselves to be certain reasons for guiding their conduct. Kant believes this outlook is something we all highly value and believes people value it without limitation or qualification. But I do not think individuals do things just out of moral duty and because it is not done from duty, our actions are not morally worthless. It is like he is saying that people who are good-hearted and well-meaning, their actions do not count as having a value, but they do have value. In my eyes, people who do things coming from the heart outweigh moral duty because it shows that a person is truly a caring and kind person, one that I would want in my corner.
