The argument from marginal cases i.e name the trait doesn't work.

Discuss morality and ethics in this message board.
Featured Article: Philosophical Analysis of Abortion, The Right to Life, and Murder
Post Reply
User avatar
analyticsupremacy
New Trial Member
Posts: 2
Joined: May 30th, 2022, 7:43 am

The argument from marginal cases i.e name the trait doesn't work.

Post by analyticsupremacy »

I'll summarize my argument shortly here. Argument from the marginal case provides no known morally relevant characteristic that differentiates human animals from non-human animals. Furthermore, even if you find a morally relevant characteristic like rationality, there are marginal case humans - people in a coma, mentally disabled - who don't satisfy the criterion. The argument's conclusion is that human and non-human animals require equal moral consideration.

To be clear, I'm not arguing against veganism, just this specific argument. Here's why -

When we make moral axioms (which can be intuitions if you believe in moral intuitionism), we usually refer to the nature/norm of the community in question. In most cases, this community is humankind. For instance, when we say "Man is a rational being", we don't believe that all humans are rational. There is clearly knowledge of the fact that there are marginal case human beings who don't satisfy this criterion. Yet we don't take away the truth value of this proposition. That's because when statements of moral value are considered we refer to the norm of the community in question

Take the major schools of morality for example.

Teleology - Makes moral decisions based on purpose (induced by cultural norms)

Utilitarianism - Aggregate pleasure over pain (based on norm again)

Deontology - That's where such axioms come from (based on norm)

I would appreciate feedback on this argument. It would also help if somebody clarified whether this can be a potential research paper.

Thank you for reading. Have a nice day.
AverageBozo
Posts: 502
Joined: May 11th, 2021, 11:20 am

Re: The argument from marginal cases i.e name the trait doesn't work.

Post by AverageBozo »

You seem to be saying that because there are marginal humans, human and non-human animals should be given equal moral consideration.

Are you saying this because there are non-human animals with intelligence or other traits on a par with those humans who are marginal?

In any event, haven’t you got a non-sequitor here?
snt
Posts: 110
Joined: June 2nd, 2022, 4:43 am

Re: The argument from marginal cases i.e name the trait doesn't work.

Post by snt »

In veganism, the ground for moral consideration is the trait sentience. I believe this to be questionable since it seems to be intended to exclude plants.

In my opinion, morality is not bound to concepts relative to humanity. When it concerns morality, it concerns an aspect that precedes human nature (a priori to be expressed in the form of reason).

Emmanuel Kant argued that empirical concepts cannot provide a basis for morality. That would imply that traits cannot provide a basis for morality however in the same time Kant argued that the trait rational being is required for morality, which I find to be a contradiction.
Emmanuel Kant wrote:Everything in nature works according to laws. Only a rational being has a will - which is the ability to act according to the thought of laws, i.e. to act on principle.

To derive actions from laws you need reason, so that's what will is - practical reason.
Kant argued that the source of volition, which seems to equal will, is law as such. In the same time, reason is to be given by nature as a practical faculty to produce a will that is good in itself. This seems to be a contradiction. For example, when it concerns the trait rational being, can there be a will that is not good in itself before reason was 'given' by nature? How can that which is the source of will be in the same time a guiding principle of the will by which the will is to achieve the quality or state 'absolutely good without qualification'?

If the origin of will is the origin of the will's added moral quality 'absolutely good without qualification' (namely law in itself, the thought of which produces a good will) then that would imply that the origin of will must be good in itself ad infinitum and at question would be why it would need reason as a 'given' faculty by nature (something external to the human as it appears, and also something a posteriori of nature itself for it to be possible to be 'given') to produce an absolutely good will.
Emmanuel Kant wrote:What can get respect and can thus serve as a command is something that isn't a consequence of my volition but only a source for it, and isn't in the service of my preferences but rather overpowers them or at least prevents them from being considered in the choice I make; this something is, in a word, law itself.

... so what is there left that can lead him to act as he does?

If the question means 'What is there objectively, i.e. distinct from himself, that determines his will in this case?' the only possible answer is law.

And if the question concerns what there is in the person that influences his will - i.e. what subjectively influences it - the answer has to be his respect for this practical law, and thus his acceptance of the maxim I am to follow this law even if it thwarts all my desires. (A maxim is a subjective principle of volition. The objective principle is the practical law itself; it would also be the subjective principle for all rational beings if reason fully controlled the formation of preferences.)

...

So we have a law the thought of which can settle the will without reference to any expected result, and must do so if the will is to be called absolutely good without qualification; what kind of law can this be? Since I have robbed the will of any impulses that could come to it from obeying any law, nothing remains to serve as a guiding principle of the will except conduct's universally conforming to law as such. That is, I ought never to act in such a way that I couldn't also will that the maxim on which I act should be a universal law.

In this context the guiding principle of the will is conformity to law as such, not bringing in any particular law governing some class of actions.

plato -dot- stanford -dot- edu on Kant's reason (that is to be 'given' by nature to produce a good will) mentions the following:

we might note that Kant rarely discusses reason as such. This leaves a difficult interpretative task: just what is Kant’s general and positive account of reason?

The first thing to note is Kant’s bold claim that reason is the arbiter of truth in all judgments—empirical as well as metaphysical. Unfortunately, he barely develops this thought, and the issue has attracted surprisingly little attention in the literature.

If this is the case from an academic Kant scholar perspective then what should be made of the idea that reason is 'given' by nature to serve a purpose?

Kant: Nevertheless, reason is given to us as a practical faculty, that is, one that is meant to have an influence on the will.

Kant also argued that the will to preserve one's self (the will to survive) isn't moral in nature.
Emmanuel Kant wrote:It is a duty to preserve one's life, and moreover everyone directly wants to do so. But because of the power of that want, the often anxious care that most men have for their survival has no intrinsic worth, and the maxim Preserve yourself has no moral content.

Men preserve their lives according to duty, but not from duty.
The trait rational being is as ground for morality is therefore questionable in my opinion.

What is left is the concept morality itself, so I believe that your argument is right and that morality in principle might be applicable to everything (the infinite cosmos).
Post Reply

Return to “Ethics and Morality”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021