Philosophy- what do you mean by 'wrong'?

essay by cheryl yow


Humanity 1: Philosophy


Question:
Read the following dialogue and then answer the questions.

1.Diana: Suppose you work in a library, checking people’s
              books as they leave, and a friend asks you to let him
              smuggle out a hard-to-find reference book that he
              wants to own. Would you do it?


2.Rita: I don’t think I would, although I would also be
            reluctant to refuse help to a friend. But what he
            proposes is wrong.


3.Diana: What do you mean by ‘wrong’, and what makes it true?


4.Rita: Something is wrong when it is against the rules
           related to it. Letting myfriend smuggle out a reference book
          is wrong because it is against the library rules.


5. Catherine: I don’t agree with your definition of ‘wrong’.
                    To say it’s wrong is not just to say it is against
                    the rules. There can be bad rules, which prohibit
                   what isn’t wrong- like law against criticizing the
                   government.  A rule can also be wrong because it
                   requires something that is wrong –like the law that
                   requires racial segregation in hotels  and restaurants.
                  Thus the ideas of right and wrong are different
                  from the ideas of what is and is not against the rules.
                  Otherwise they couldn’t be used in the evaluation of
                  rules as well as of actions.


6.Diana: Then what exactly constitutes what we call ‘wrong?’
            Where does the desire not to do it come from?
             What is its motive? What is the reason behind it?


7. Rita: I think it is the feeling of discomfort associated
            with the action. To let my friend steal a book, I will
            feel uncomfortable; in some way I won’t want to
            do it. It may be because it is unfair to other users
            of the library. It also means betraying my employer
            who is paying me precisely to keep
             this sort of thing from happening.


8. Catherine: That means the thought that something is
                     wrong depends on its impact not just on the
                     person who does it but also on other people.
                    They would not like it, and they’d object  if
                    they found out. But the thought that something
                    is wrong is supposed to give a reason not to do
                    it. If the reason is that   it affects other people,
                    we often come across people who do  not care
                    so much about others. Thus, for people who
                    simply do not care about other people,
                     something which is generally
                     thought to be wrong if they can get away with it.


9. Diana: I think this might be going a bit too far.
              Suppose your argument were true and the things
              usually thought to be wrong, like stealing and so
              on, are not wrong if the person doing them does
              not care about people getting affected by the action.
             Then it is not wrong to, say, kill innocent people,
             set fire to your neighbour’s house or rape
            7-8 year-old children, as long as the person doing
              it does  not care about others.
              This is not acceptable.



Question 1:
Fill in the missing premise and conclusion
in Rita’s argument in 4.



Answers:
Rita’s missing premise and conclusion:

Premise i: An action is wrong when it is against the rules
related to it.

Premise ii: Letting a friend smuggle out a hard-to-find
reference book is against the library rules.

Conclusion: Therefore, letting a friend smuggle out a
hard-to-find reference book is wrong.


Form of argument: This is a valid and deductive argument.






Question 2. Name the form of argument Diana uses in 9
                   What is the purpose of that argument?


Answers:
Diana’s argument goes like this:

Implicit assumption: Killing innocent people is wrong
(things usually thought to be wrong)

Premise i: if the person doing an action does not care
about people getting affected by his/her action,
then it is not wrong.


Premise ii: So if he/she kill innocent people and he/she
does not care about people affected by his/her action,
then it is not wrong.

Conclusion: Therefore, killing innocent people is not wrong.

The form of argument Diana uses in 9 is reduction ad absurdum
(literally a reduction to absurdity). The purpose is to show a contradiction so
that she is able to conclude that the argument
is wrong and is an invalid argument. Taking the argument to
its extremes reveal its innate absurdity hence its weakness.






Question 3:
What do you mean by the word ‘wrong’
and on what basis do you determine
that an action is wrong?


We grow up as children with our parents telling
us ‘Don’t do that, that is wrong’. What do we mean
by wrong? Right or wrong stems from the culture of
good or bad. Our ideas of right or wrong therefore are
closely associated with what is good or what is bad.
We accept that something is wrong when it is bad in
the sense that our actions will affect our environment
negatively.


Our society strives on rules to function effectively as
a harmonious entity. Humans have long built a culture around
rules. We are brought up by rules telling us what is right to
do or wrong to do. So most people think that wrong means
going against related rules. We have taken for granted that
rules are always right and not meant to be broken. However,
some rules may be bad rules – like a law that requires racial
segregation in hotels and restaurants. So we are left with
what exactly is ‘wrong’?


The word ‘wrong’ means an action that has a negative impact.
However, there are some actions that may have some negative
impact but it is done so to produce a greater positive value.
In this case, the action is not wrong. Even if there is a
positive value in the action but if the negative impact
outweighs the positive value then it is a wrong action.
If you kill someone, you are causing great harm to that
person and his/her family and I do not see any positive
value out of that. That is wrong. If you cut down trees to
make furniture, creating a positive value that is not wrong.
However if you cut down too many trees and cause disorder in
the environment, that is wrong if the negative impact is
greater than the positive value it generates. Killing an
animal for food, is that a wrong action? It depends on what
are the positive values or negative impact created by that
action. That would be an entirely different argument. For
now we are just concerned with what determined a wrong
action.


Therefore, an action is wrong if it causes harm,
disorder or has a negative impact on people,
animals and our environment without creating
any positive value or which the negative impact
of the action is greater than the positive value
created.