00:00:00
this video is sponsored by imprint learn
00:00:02
about Big Ideas in Psychology philosophy
00:00:05
self-help and much more through
00:00:07
beautiful Visual and interactive content
00:00:09
the first 200 people to use the link in
00:00:10
the description will receive 20 off
00:00:12
their annual membership
00:00:14
you've just woken up you're not sure who
00:00:17
you are where you are or where you've
00:00:19
come from you look down and see only a
00:00:21
hazy outline of a mostly translucent
00:00:24
indiscernible body around you is a vast
00:00:27
seemingly unending white space
00:00:30
in front of you is a large screen on it
00:00:33
an icon reads build your world begin
00:00:36
here you press it and a window appears
00:00:39
revealing a list of what appear to be
00:00:41
features descriptions and rules for how
00:00:43
a world Works how the society you will
00:00:46
be born into will work according to you
00:00:49
each item on the list has a description
00:00:51
and the option to toggle it on or off
00:00:54
for some indeterminate amount of time
00:00:56
you read through the list and select the
00:00:58
conditions of the society you will live
00:01:00
in the laws and regulations the way
00:01:03
people in groups will be treated what
00:01:04
rights people and groups will have the
00:01:06
way people in groups will be aided what
00:01:09
will be allowed and forbade how wealth
00:01:11
goods and labor will be distributed and
00:01:13
redistributed and so on
00:01:16
soon realize a problem
00:01:18
you don't know who you will be you don't
00:01:20
know if you'll be black white asian
00:01:22
Hispanic and so on you don't know if
00:01:24
you'll be male or female disabled or
00:01:26
able-bodied you don't know what you will
00:01:28
enjoy you don't know what your sexuality
00:01:30
will be if you will be born into a high
00:01:32
or low income family you don't know
00:01:35
anything about you
00:01:36
you quickly determine that the best
00:01:38
thing you can do is ensure that the
00:01:40
world you create treats everyone as
00:01:42
fairly and as well as possible so that
00:01:44
no matter who you are born as even if
00:01:47
you're one of the worst off you will
00:01:48
still have a fair shot at a pleasant and
00:01:51
prosperous life
00:01:52
finish you review your work happy with
00:01:55
what you've created then at the bottom
00:01:58
of the final screen you press done
00:02:03
this is a version of the thought
00:02:04
experiment known as the veil of
00:02:06
ignorance or the original position which
00:02:08
was originally formulated by American
00:02:10
philosopher John Rawls in his book a
00:02:12
theory of Justice Rawls used this
00:02:14
thought experiment to illustrate a
00:02:16
neutral point of view that members
00:02:18
Founders and leaders of a society must
00:02:20
strive to adopt in order to evaluate and
00:02:22
determine Fair rules and principles
00:02:24
although this thought experiment does
00:02:26
arguably promote a very useful ideal for
00:02:29
how we ought to consider and strive
00:02:31
toward a fair and just Society a problem
00:02:33
that we quickly discover with it is the
00:02:36
apparent impossibility for anyone to
00:02:38
ever truly reach such a position
00:02:40
Rawls himself understood this to be the
00:02:42
case when he wrote the original position
00:02:45
is a purely hypothetical situation the
00:02:48
conception of the original is not
00:02:49
intended to explain human conduct except
00:02:52
insofar as it tries to account for moral
00:02:54
judgments and helps to explain our
00:02:56
having a sense of justice
00:02:58
when referring to a perspective of
00:03:00
balance and neutrality he continues it
00:03:03
is doubtful whether one can ever reach
00:03:05
the state
00:03:06
and here we arrive at our first
00:03:09
philosophical problem the problem of
00:03:11
fairness how do we Define and Carry Out
00:03:14
fairness in a world where everyone can
00:03:16
only make decisions and determine rules
00:03:18
and principles from bias partial
00:03:21
self-interested and unoriginal positions
00:03:23
is fairness ever really possible
00:03:27
not only does the veil of ignorance
00:03:28
bring up the problem of fairness and
00:03:30
justice but it also brings up the
00:03:32
problem of luck of course we in fact do
00:03:36
not know or choose who we are going to
00:03:38
be born as or what Society we will be
00:03:40
born into and so whether we are born
00:03:43
into a particular society as someone who
00:03:45
is favored or Not by said Society is
00:03:47
entirely luck and furthermore all the
00:03:50
uncontrollable events that happen to us
00:03:52
during our lifetime regardless of who we
00:03:54
are and where we are born are also a
00:03:57
product of luck
00:03:58
this brings us to our second
00:04:00
philosophical problem the problem of
00:04:03
moral luck
00:04:04
the term moral luck was first introduced
00:04:06
by English philosopher Bernard Williams
00:04:08
in 1976 and was then further developed
00:04:11
primarily by American philosopher Thomas
00:04:13
Nagel broadly moral luck refers to
00:04:16
situations in which a moral agent is
00:04:18
given a certain amount of moral blame or
00:04:20
praise for an action but the individual
00:04:22
did not have any control over the action
00:04:24
the action's consequences or their own
00:04:27
personal circumstances that influence
00:04:29
the degree of moral blame or praise that
00:04:31
they received
00:04:33
to be clear a moral agent here refers to
00:04:35
an individual who has the ability to
00:04:37
think in terms of right and wrong and
00:04:39
can decide to act accordingly in his
00:04:42
essay moral luck Thomas Nagel identifies
00:04:44
the following four kinds of moral luck
00:04:46
resultant or consequential
00:04:48
circumstantial constitutive and causal
00:04:53
situations containing resultant moral
00:04:55
luck are cases in which moral blame is
00:04:57
assigned to an individual or not based
00:05:00
primarily on the consequences of their
00:05:01
action and not merely the action itself
00:05:04
and the consequences were caused or not
00:05:06
largely by chance
00:05:08
for example consider two separate bars
00:05:11
that are down the street from each other
00:05:12
in the first bar there was a man named
00:05:14
Tom and the second there was a man named
00:05:16
Larry both Tom and Larry are reasonably
00:05:19
decent people but tonight both find
00:05:21
themselves in an argument with someone
00:05:23
else at their respective bar in both
00:05:25
cases the argument escalates to a
00:05:27
physical altercation a common bar fight
00:05:29
that happens countless times every day
00:05:31
across the world at some point in the
00:05:34
altercation Tom throws a punch at the
00:05:36
other individual and hits them in the
00:05:38
face the other person then proceeds to
00:05:40
throw a punch or two back at Tom and
00:05:41
then the fight is broken up by the bar
00:05:43
staff both Tom and the other individual
00:05:45
are kicked out of the bar and Tom goes a
00:05:48
separate way home with a couple minor
00:05:49
bruises and a body full of adrenaline at
00:05:52
the same time over in Larry's bar at
00:05:55
some point in his altercation he too
00:05:57
throws a punch at the same speed and
00:05:59
force with the same bar fight level
00:06:00
skill set as Tom and he also hits the
00:06:03
other individual in the face this person
00:06:05
however Falls backwards and hits their
00:06:08
head on the ground later that night the
00:06:11
individual is pronounced dead as a
00:06:13
result of the head trauma they suffered
00:06:15
Larry is arrested charged with
00:06:17
manslaughter and is sentenced to several
00:06:19
years in prison
00:06:21
both Larry and Tom committed the exact
00:06:23
same act but based only on the
00:06:25
consequences which occurred by chance
00:06:27
Larry is assigned significant moral
00:06:30
blame while Tom is assigned essentially
00:06:32
none
00:06:34
circumstantial constitutive and causal
00:06:37
moral luck are all relatively similar to
00:06:39
each other as they each refer to the
00:06:41
luck or Misfortune of an individual's
00:06:43
conditions or circumstances that either
00:06:46
lead them to commit an act that is
00:06:48
deemed moral or immoral or to receive a
00:06:50
different degree of moral blame or
00:06:52
praise compared to someone else who
00:06:54
committed the same act for example
00:06:56
specifically in the case of
00:06:57
circumstantial moral luck consider the
00:06:59
same bar situation but let's go further
00:07:01
down the street to a third bar where
00:07:03
there is a man named Marcus who has also
00:07:05
found himself in an argument that has
00:07:07
turned into a physical altercation in
00:07:10
Marcus's case however right as he is
00:07:12
about to wind up to punch the other
00:07:13
individual in the face the fire alarms
00:07:16
in the bar go off completely distracting
00:07:18
both Marcus and the other person and
00:07:20
causing the energy of the fight to
00:07:21
dissipate as the two are ushered outside
00:07:23
the bar along with the rest of the
00:07:25
patrons and employees Marcus was going
00:07:28
to punch the other individual in the
00:07:30
face as hard as he could but he didn't
00:07:32
solely because of the luck of his
00:07:34
circumstances
00:07:35
and so he receives no moral blame
00:07:37
whatsoever even though he had the same
00:07:39
intention to commit the very same act as
00:07:42
Larry
00:07:43
now let's travel to One More Bar a few
00:07:46
streets over in this bar we find
00:07:48
Stephanie a woman who is also getting
00:07:50
into a bar fight this night it's an
00:07:52
active night in Stephanie's case at some
00:07:54
point in the altercation she too throws
00:07:56
a punch at the other individual and hits
00:07:58
them in the face causing them to also
00:08:00
fall backwards and hit their head on the
00:08:02
ground later that night this person also
00:08:05
dies because of their head injury
00:08:07
Stephanie however receives no jail time
00:08:10
because while in trial it is discovered
00:08:12
that she was horribly and relentlessly
00:08:14
abused as a child and had recently been
00:08:16
diagnosed with severe borderline
00:08:18
personality disorder directly causing
00:08:20
her to become overly physically
00:08:22
aggressive and have little to no control
00:08:24
over her actions and so instead she is
00:08:27
only temporarily subject to a mental
00:08:29
health facility in this case Stephanie
00:08:32
experiences constitutive moral luck
00:08:34
because although her actions and
00:08:36
consequences are identical to Larry's
00:08:38
the condition of her life that caused
00:08:40
her to be the way she is affected or
00:08:43
reduced the moral blame she received
00:08:46
this case may seem reasonable enough
00:08:48
that Stephanie receives at least less
00:08:50
moral blame but let's go back to Larry
00:08:53
Larry was not abused as a child did not
00:08:55
experience a particularly unusual life
00:08:57
and is not diagnosed with any mental
00:08:59
illness he was just a bit tired this
00:09:01
night and is a bit selfish and
00:09:03
physically aggressive in general at
00:09:06
first glance Larry would seem to be the
00:09:08
more morally blameworthy individual but
00:09:10
did Larry choose to be tired and on edge
00:09:12
that night who would choose this did
00:09:15
Barry choose to be slightly selfish and
00:09:17
physically aggressive in general Larry
00:09:19
is not the original cause of Larry what
00:09:22
caused him to be this way was merely a
00:09:24
series of circumstances outside himself
00:09:26
that he could not control who he was
00:09:28
raised by what he was exposed to what
00:09:30
happened to him and so on as well as the
00:09:33
behavioral Tendencies inside himself
00:09:35
caused by his genetics which he also
00:09:37
never decided or controlled if this is
00:09:39
true how is Larry any more morally
00:09:42
responsible for being someone who got
00:09:44
into a bar fight that night than someone
00:09:46
like Stephanie according to Nagel's
00:09:49
Theory Larry's case includes the final
00:09:51
kind of moral luck or Misfortune causal
00:09:54
moral luck
00:09:55
with this in mind if moral acts by a
00:09:57
moral agent require the ability to
00:09:59
evaluate right and wrong and make
00:10:01
decisions accordingly can anyone truly
00:10:03
be morally responsible for their actions
00:10:05
if their actions are invariably caused
00:10:08
by other actions and events that were
00:10:10
not their own that they never had a
00:10:12
Saiyan or control over
00:10:14
of course none of this means that there
00:10:16
shouldn't be consequences there can and
00:10:18
should be but that does not negate the
00:10:20
prior Point consider a violent dog we
00:10:23
would generally not view a dog as a
00:10:24
moral agent and thus we would not deem a
00:10:27
violent dog as immoral we may determine
00:10:29
it best to put the dog down but at no
00:10:32
point would that equate to or acquire us
00:10:34
to assign moral blame to the dog
00:10:35
likewise consider a tornado certainly a
00:10:39
tornado is exorbitantly dangerous and if
00:10:41
we could contain or perhaps kill
00:10:43
tornadoes we would but again nowhere in
00:10:46
the process would we need to assign
00:10:48
moral blame to a tornado and so why do
00:10:51
we do it with ourselves are we so
00:10:53
conceited to think that somehow we are
00:10:56
the only thing separate from nature
00:10:57
above it the only being that can somehow
00:11:00
Escape what Nature has propelled forth
00:11:01
for us we are conscious but what formed
00:11:05
our consciousness
00:11:06
a human being wrote Albert Einstein is a
00:11:09
part of the whole called by us Universe
00:11:11
a part Limited in time and space he
00:11:14
experiences himself his thoughts and
00:11:16
feelings as something separated from the
00:11:19
rest a kind of optical delusion of his
00:11:21
consciousness
00:11:24
this brings us to our third and final
00:11:26
philosophical problem the problem of
00:11:29
moral knowledge what even is morality on
00:11:33
what are we to base it is there anything
00:11:35
objectively true about morality
00:11:38
this problem Finds Its origins in the
00:11:40
classic philosophical problem the is odd
00:11:42
problem first established by the
00:11:44
Scottish philosopher David Hume in the
00:11:46
18th century the isot problem is what
00:11:48
arises when one tries to make ethical
00:11:50
claims how the world ought to be and how
00:11:52
one ought to behave within it based on
00:11:55
facts about how the world is Hume
00:11:57
suggested that facts need to be combined
00:11:59
with ethical assumptions in order to
00:12:01
arrive at any sort of ethical statement
00:12:03
but we arrive at these ethical
00:12:04
assumptions solely through subjective
00:12:06
interpretations because on what other
00:12:08
basis do we have to ground and form our
00:12:11
interpretations
00:12:13
arguably we only can and do determine
00:12:15
moral principles through the following
00:12:17
methods spiritual or religious doctrines
00:12:20
emotional responses and science and
00:12:22
reason the problem is all of these rely
00:12:25
on assumption subjectivity or both when
00:12:29
deriving moral principles from spiritual
00:12:31
or religious sources the problem is of
00:12:33
course the sources in which these
00:12:35
spiritual or religious sources
00:12:36
themselves came from in order for
00:12:38
religious doctrines to be objectively
00:12:40
true the religion itself needs to be
00:12:42
objectively true and with what proof do
00:12:44
we have to conclude this the problem
00:12:46
with basing morality on emotions is of
00:12:48
course that emotions are inextricably
00:12:50
linked with individual subjective
00:12:52
perception influenced by things like our
00:12:54
cultural background temperament
00:12:56
upbringing and so on and lastly
00:12:59
seemingly the strongest method for
00:13:01
asserting moral principles is through
00:13:02
science and reason in his work the moral
00:13:05
landscape philosopher Sam Harris argues
00:13:07
that morality can be derived from
00:13:09
scientific knowledge about how the world
00:13:10
is because moral values are facts about
00:13:13
the well-being of conscious creatures
00:13:15
and so by understanding what actions or
00:13:18
events maximize the pleasure or
00:13:20
well-being of conscious creatures and
00:13:22
what actions cause harm and suffering
00:13:23
onto conscious creatures we can
00:13:25
determine objective moral truths about
00:13:27
good and bad
00:13:28
but here too Sam along with other
00:13:31
proponents of this Theory seem to
00:13:33
smuggle in an initial ought that we
00:13:35
ought to maximize well-being as a matter
00:13:37
of objective fact but on what basis is
00:13:40
there to ground this claim objective
00:13:42
means something that is independent of
00:13:44
our feelings and Views that would be
00:13:46
true with or without conscious
00:13:48
observation or experience how then could
00:13:50
the flourishment of subjective conscious
00:13:52
experience be a metric used in providing
00:13:55
objective Truth for what purpose or to
00:13:57
what end outside of ourselves could we
00:14:00
attach this metric to
00:14:01
ultimately there appears to be no clear
00:14:04
way out of the loop of is and ought
00:14:06
without smuggling in an odd assumption
00:14:09
first a claim about how reality should
00:14:11
be not how it is
00:14:15
in the end perhaps the only solution to
00:14:18
the problems of fairness of luck of
00:14:20
morality is somewhat less about finding
00:14:22
Perfect fairness or objective right and
00:14:24
wrong and more about moving forth with
00:14:27
an effort of understanding forgiveness
00:14:29
and compassion for the absurdity of it
00:14:31
all a sort of compassion for everyone
00:14:33
and everything for those who appear to
00:14:36
us to be good for those who appear to us
00:14:38
to be bad throughout history throughout
00:14:41
the globe and into the future
00:14:43
again this does not mean complacency and
00:14:46
total tolerance one can punish fight or
00:14:49
resist someone or something that they
00:14:51
believe is wrong while still having
00:14:52
compassion for the other situation in
00:14:56
truth none of us chose that we would be
00:14:57
born into this world as what and who we
00:15:00
are none of us set up the rules none of
00:15:03
us ever really had a say
00:15:05
but we are all here now and compassion
00:15:07
appears to be one of if not the only
00:15:09
through line that has saved us
00:15:11
throughout history that bolsters
00:15:13
positive change that accepts and
00:15:15
forgives the mistakes we have and will
00:15:17
undoubtedly continue to make into the
00:15:19
future
00:15:20
in the words of the German pessimist
00:15:22
philosopher Arthur schopenhauer
00:15:24
boundless compassion for all living
00:15:26
beings is the surest and most certain
00:15:28
guarantee of pure moral conduct and
00:15:31
needs no casuous tree whoever is filled
00:15:33
with it will assuredly injure no one do
00:15:36
harm to No One encroach on no man's
00:15:38
rights he will rather have regard for
00:15:40
everyone forgive everyone help everyone
00:15:43
as far as he can and all his actions
00:15:46
will bear the stamp of justice and
00:15:48
loving kindness
00:15:55
this video was sponsored by imprint for
00:15:58
many of us understandably our attention
00:16:00
spans have been at least some amount
00:16:02
eroded if not fully because of the
00:16:05
constant influx of stimulation in
00:16:06
today's world as a result staying
00:16:09
focused engaged and motivated toward
00:16:11
educational media that is actual
00:16:13
nutritional value can be fairly
00:16:15
difficult imprint is a completely new
00:16:17
way to learn that provides beautiful
00:16:19
Visual and interactive lessons courses
00:16:22
and summaries that keep you engaged in
00:16:24
high quality educational content in
00:16:26
subjects like philosophy psychology
00:16:28
science self-help business and more it's
00:16:32
perfect for those who can really benefit
00:16:33
from additional layers of visualization
00:16:35
and interactivity when learning one
00:16:38
really great course in particular is
00:16:40
essential philosophy theories and
00:16:42
thinkers which is an expansive course
00:16:43
that covers Big Ideas throughout the
00:16:45
history of philosophy from Socrates to
00:16:48
Sartre imprints expansive Content
00:16:50
Library includes courses and articles
00:16:52
from Harvard professors and best-selling
00:16:54
authors that can take as little is two
00:16:55
minutes to complete meaning you can pack
00:16:57
in your day during otherwise wasted
00:16:59
moments of mindless scrolling and
00:17:00
downtime with tons of information on Big
00:17:03
essential ideas and your favorite
00:17:05
subjects imprint is an easy way to feel
00:17:07
good about your screen time and to
00:17:09
constantly be learning in a way that's
00:17:11
fun and effective use the link in the
00:17:13
description below to sign up and receive
00:17:15
a seven day free trial the first 200
00:17:17
people who do will receive 20 off their
00:17:19
annual membership and of course as
00:17:21
always thank you so much for watching in
00:17:23
general and see you next video
00:17:26
[Music]
00:17:31
[Music]
