Eksamensoppgave i STV2110, Politisk filosofi, v?ren 2011
Besvar enten oppgave I eller oppgave II
Oppgave I
Nedenfor gjengis et utdrag fra J. S. Mills On Liberty og et utdrag fra T Otterholts “The Taste Approach”. Besvar f?lgende tre sp?rsm?l:
- I tekstutdrag 1 diskuterer Mill det vi kan kalle “brotilfellet”. Hvilke kriterier legger han her til grunn for at offentlige myndigheter b?r gripe inn for ? regulere borgernes atferd?
- I tekstutdrag 2 presenteres en tiln?rming til nyttemaksimerende politikk: smakstiln?rmingen (The Taste Approach). Ta igjen utgangspunkt i brotilfellet i tekstutdrag 1 og dr?ft f?lgende sp?rsm?l: Anta at personskader som inntreffer fordi en del mennesker har preferanser for ? ut?ve farefylt sport (basehopping, hanggliding, etc.), gj?r at samfunnets samlede velv?re (nytte/W) blir betydelig lavere enn den ville v?rt hvis de samme menneskene holdt seg unna slik sport. Hvordan kan myndighetene b?te p? dette problemet ved hjelp av smakstiln?rmingen?
- Dr?ft f?lgende p?stand: “Politiske tiltak som tar sikte p? ? redusere innbyggernes smakskostnader, vil n?dvendigvis krenke innbyggernes autonomi, og b?r derfor ikke under noen omstendigheter iverksettes.” Relater gjerne diskusjonen til temaet i oppgave b.
Tekstutdrag 1
”Again, it is a proper office of public authority to guard against accidents. If either a public officer or anyone else saw a person attempting to cross a bridge which had been ascertained to be unsafe, and there were no time to warn him of his danger, they might seize him and turn him back, without any real infringement of his liberty; for liberty consists in doing what one desires, and he does not desire to fall into the river. Nevertheless, when there is not a certainty, but only a danger of mischief, no one but the person himself can judge of the sufficiency of the motive which may prompt him to incur the risk (unless he is a child, or delirious, or in some state of excitement or absorbation incompatible with using the full sense of the reflecting faculty), he ought, I conceive, to be only warned of the danger; not forcibly prevented from exposing himself to it.”
Tekstutdrag 2
“Well-being can be promoted (…) by influencing how people benefit from their goods (the Taste Approach). ( ….) [A] person has low taste costs if and only if he needs less income than others in order to reach some level of well-being. The relationship between Well-being (W), Costs of Tastes (C) and Income (I) can then be expressed by the following equations
(r): W = I / C
From (r) follows that (r*): C = I / W
… By increasing W by means of the Taste Approach, the state reduces C.”
***
Oppgave II
Alle sp?rsm?lene skal besvares.
- Gj?r rede for John Lockes syn p? etikk med utgangspunkt i dette utdraget fra Lockes Second Treatise
The state of Nature has a law of Nature to govern it, which obliges every one, and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty or possessions; for men being all the workmanship of one omnipotent and infinitely wise Maker; all the servants of one sovereign Master, sent into the world by His order and about His business; they are His property, whose workmanship they are made to last during His, not one another's pleasure. And, being furnished with like faculties, sharing all in one community of Nature, there cannot be supposed any such subordination among us that may authorise us to destroy one another, as if we were made for one another's uses, as the inferior ranks of creatures are for ours. Every one as he is bound to preserve himself, and not to quit his station wilfully, so by the like reason, when his own preservation comes not in competition, ought he as much as he can to preserve the rest of mankind, and not unless it be to do justice on an offender, take away or impair the life, or what tends to the preservation of the life, the liberty, health, limb, or goods of another.
- Gj?r rede for David Humes syn p? etikk med utgangspunkt i dette utdraget Humes Enquiry:
The final sentence, it is probable, which pronounces characters and actions amiable or odious, praise-worthy or blameable; that which stamps on them the mark of honour or infamy, approbation or censure; that which renders morality an active principle, and constitutes virtue our happiness, and vice our misery: It is probable, I say, that this final sentence depends on some internal sense or feeling, which nature has made universal in the whole species. … But in order to pave the way for such a sentiment, and give a proper discernment of its object, it is often necessary, we find, that much reasoning should precede, that nice distinctions be made, just conclusions drawn, distant comparisons formed, complicated relations examined, and general facts fixed and ascertained. Some species of beauty, especially the natural kinds, on their first appearance, command our affection and approbation; and where they fail of this effect, it is impossible for any reasoning to redress their influence, or adapt them better to our taste and sentiment. But in many orders of beauty, particularly those of the finer arts, it is requisite to employ much reasoning, in order to feel the proper sentiment; and a false relish may frequently be corrected by argument and reflection. There are just grounds to conclude, that moral beauty partakes much of this latter species, and demands the assistance of our intellectual faculties, in order to give it a suitable influence on the human mind.
- Hamlet hevder: “Tingene er ikke gode eller onde i seg selv; de blir hva v?r tanke gj?r dem til.”
Hva ville henholdsvis Locke og Hume sagt om dette synspunktet?
- En skrudd professor hevder: “Noe er riktig og noe er galt i samme forstand som noe rimer og noe er rundt. Det er et faktum at visse ord rimer, at jorden er rund, at noen handlinger er riktige, noen karaktertrekk dydige, og noen institusjoner rettferdige.”
Hva ville henholdsvis Locke og Hume sagt om dette synspunktet?