MODULE: PHILOSOPHY AND CRITICAL THINKING
GROUP PRESENTATION
ON THE 5TH FEBRUARY 2025
Topics to be discussed on;
1. Otherness: altruism. Relationship between the Self (Id, Ego), others (you), the
world
2. Question of ethics: discussion between various ethical systems
1. Otherness: altruism. Relationship between the Self (Id, Ego), others (you), the world
Otherness: The recognition of the fundamental difference and separateness of other
individuals. It involves acknowledging the unique perspectives and experiences of those
who are different from ourselves.
Altruism: Unselfish concern for the well-being of others. It involves acting in ways that
benefit others, even if it comes at a cost to oneself.
Relevance to the Question of the Human Being: The concepts of otherness and
altruism highlight the ethical dimension of human existence. They raise questions about
our responsibilities towards others, the nature of empathy and compassion, and the
possibility of transcending our own self-interest.
•1. The Self
The self is the individual's sense of identity, consciousness, and agency. It is the "I" that
experiences the world, makes choices, and takes actions.
The ego is often used to refer to the part of the self that is concerned with self-
preservation and self-interest. It can be seen as the mediator between the self and the
external world.
The ego develops from the id during early childhood and operates based on the reality
principle. It mediates between the impulsive demands of the id, the constraints of reality,
and the moral guidelines imposed by the superego (another component of Freud's model,
which represents internalized societal norms and values). The ego strives to find realistic
ways to satisfy the id's desires while maintaining a sense of order and conformity.
•2. Others
Others are individuals who are distinct from the self, but with whom the self interacts and forms
relationships. They are the "you" that the self encounters in the world.
Recognizing the existence and perspectives of others is crucial for developing empathy,
compassion, and moral responsibility
•3. The World
The world is the broader environment and context in which the self and others exist. It
encompasses the natural world, social structures, cultural norms, and shared meanings.
The world provides both opportunities and constraints for the self. It shapes our experiences,
values, and beliefs.
•Interconnectedness
The self, others, and the world are interconnected and interdependent. Our sense of
self is shaped by our interactions with others and the world around us.
Our actions and choices have an impact on others and the world, and vice versa.
•Philosophical Perspectives
Existentialism: Emphasizes the individual's freedom and responsibility to create their
own meaning and purpose in the world.
Philosophy of Relation: Highlights the interconnectedness and interdependence of
individuals, suggesting that our identities and experiences are shaped by our
relationships with others.
Social Constructivism: Argues that our understanding of the self, others, and the
world is constructed through social interactions and cultural norms.
Buddhism: Emphasizes the impermanence of the self and the interconnectedness of
all things.
QUESTION OF ETHICS: DISCUSSION BETWEEN VARIOUS
ETHICAL SYSTEMS
• Utilitarianism
• Principle: The greatest happiness principle – actions are right if they promote
the greatest happiness for the greatest number.
• Strengths: Clear and practical, focuses on outcomes and overall welfare.
•Criticisms: Can justify actions that are intuitively immoral if they result in
greater overall happiness, such as sacrificing one person to save many.
2. DEONTOLOGY
• Principle: Duty-based ethics – actions are right or wrong based on their adherence to rules or duties.
• Immanuel Kant is one of the most influential figures in the development of deontological ethics, which emphasizes
duty, rules, and moral obligations rather than the consequences of actions. His deontological framework is built
around the concept of the categorical imperative, which is a principle that dictates what is morally required
regardless of personal desires or outcomes.
• The categorical imperative is the central concept in Kant’s moral philosophy. Kant proposed that moral actions
must be governed by a universal principle that applies to everyone, at all times, in all situations, without exception.
•Strengths: Emphasizes the importance of moral principles and respecting individuals as
ends in themselves.
• Criticisms: Can be rigid and inflexible, potentially leading to moral dilemmas where
rules conflict
3. Virtue Ethics
• Principle: Focuses on developing virtuous character traits and living a flourishing life.
· Strengths: Emphasizes moral character and the importance of practical wisdom
(phronesis).
· Criticisms: Lacks clear guidelines for action and can be culturally relative.
Aristotle believed that the ultimate goal of human life is eudaimonia, which is living well
and achieving a state of flourishing. Eudaimonia is not just happiness in the sense of fleeting
pleasure, but a deeper, more meaningful fulfillment that comes from living a life of virtue and
rational activity.
A key aspect of Aristotle's virtue ethics is the concept of phronesis, often translated as
practical wisdom or prudence. Phronesis is the intellectual virtue that allows a person
to make good decisions and act rightly in the complex situations of everyday life. It
involves not only knowing what the virtues are but also how to apply them in concrete
situations.
• Practical wisdom helps the virtuous person determine the appropriate course of action
when faced with a moral dilemma. It involves both intellectual understanding and
emotional maturity.
• Phronesis is acquired through experience and is developed over time, just like moral
virtues.
•4. Ethical Relativism
Principle: Morality is relative to the norms and values of one's culture or society.
Strengths: Promotes tolerance and understanding of different cultural practices.
Criticisms: Can lead to moral relativism, where anything is permissible within a
cultural context, and fails to address universal moral standards.
• Ethical relativism suggests that moral principles are not universally applicable but
are shaped by cultural, social, or personal circumstances. What is "right" depends
on the context, and no single ethical system can be considered universally valid.
• Key Principle: Morality is subjective and culturally dependent. Different societies
or individuals can have different moral standards that are equally valid.
• Example Dilemma: In the trolley problem, an ethical relativist might argue that
the solution depends on the cultural or societal context in which the decision is
made. What’s considered morally acceptable could vary across cultures, and thus,
no universal rule can be applied.
5. Divine Command Theory
Principle: Morality is determined by the commands of a divine being.
Proponents: Various religious traditions
Strengths: Provides a clear and authoritative source of moral guidance.
Criticisms: Depends on the existence and nature of the divine being, and can lead to
issues of interpretation and the Euthyphro dilemma (are actions good because God
commands them, or does God command them because they are good?).
6. Social Contract Theory
Overview: Morality arises from an implicit agreement among individuals to form a
society and abide by its rules.
Social contract theory, as articulated by philosophers like Thomas Hobbes, John Locke,
and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, posits that moral norms and political obligations arise
from an implicit contract or agreement among individuals to form a society. In
essence, people agree to abide by certain rules for the mutual benefit of all.
Key Principle: Moral rules are justified by the agreement of individuals in a society,
typically designed to protect rights and promote social cooperation. The idea is that in
a just society, individuals would rationally agree to follow certain rules because they
would ultimately benefit everyone.
Example Dilemma: In the trolley problem, a social contract theorist might argue
that moral rules against harm (such as not killing) should be respected, and any
deviation from this should only happen under circumstances where it is part of a
rational agreement (e.g., to prevent greater harm to society).
