Why Does Prichard Think Moral Philosophy Rest on a Mistake?

Prichard Moral Philosophy

Why does Prichard think moral philosophy rest on a mistake?

Prichard believes that moral philosophy rests on mistake for a variety of reasons. Moral theory in essence attempts to define whether people can distinguish right from wrong. When a person performs any action, the action must logically result from a motivating factor or thought process. Moral worth and philosophy is determined by the motive of a person, and consequently rests on mistake, because the concept of good and evil or right vs. wrong according to Prichard should not rest on motive.

Prichard questions what as a people, are "we really going to learn by Moral Philosophy" and states that the "aim of the subject" of moral philosophy is obscure (Prichard, 1912). Prichard believes that the subject of moral philosophy as typically defined and understood by society rests on a mistake that is parallel to a subject called "theory of knowledge" (Prichard, 1912).

Prichard points out that most people feel obligated to carry out their moral obligations, feel compelled, yet as he points out, like Glaucon, most people will at some point ask for "proof" that their feelings are justified (Prichard, 1912). He points out that most people live under the frame of mind that they recognize that it is their duty to do things a certain way, yet people also recognizes that duty sometimes interferes with ones personal satisfaction and inclinations, which he associates with a theory called the Theory of Knowledge (Prichard, 1912). Prichard argues that recognizing that duty sometimes interferes with free will and the desire to simply have a good time often leads people to wonder whether they should do what they are feeling obliged to as duty or wondering whether or not they should just do what personally satisfies them (Prichard, 1912).

The Utilitarian view points out that unless people "recognized that something which an act will originate is good, we should not recognize that we ought to do the action" (Prichard, 1912). In other words, according to Utilitarian thought unless people recognize that something they do is good and are thus urged to do it, they may not do it as they have no special reason to. Recognition of good and bad implies a reasoning to act in one manner or another. Prichard uses the example that "Ought I to pay my bills" as meaning "Ought I to bring about my tradesmen's possession of what by my previous acts I explicitly or implicitly promised them" (Prichard, 1912). This statement suggests that there is no question that debts should be paid because people naturally and inevitably are moved to do so out of recognition or a sense of obligation which motivates.