Everyone Gets Us What Is Good
In this paper, I will argue on the argument which is about proving that every action that gets us what we want is good and that all good actions are moral. This argument is not a sound argument. This is because the conclusion of the argument on morality is not supported by the premises. The argument fails to define what is good and what is moral, that morality is not all about what is good for us but is good for others, and that there are also actions that get us what we do not want.
The argument is, every action that gets you what you want is good. Stealing, lying, murder, coercion, honesty, manipulation, violence, kindness, etc., are all get us what we want. Thus Stealing, lying, murder, coercion, honesty, manipulation, etc. are all good. All good actions are moral. Therefore, no actions that get us what we want are immoral. However, this argument’s premises are false due to their failure to define morality and what is good, as well as not taking in that there are actions that contradict the premises, which leads to a false conclusion. While this argument is clear, in the first and fourth premise, the argument fails to give a definition of …show more content…
In premise two, the argument brings up several actions such as stealing, lying, and friendship. While these actions do get you something, the argument includes all actions by saying etcetera. This includes all actions, not just those stated. This is because if we added in drowning, starving, and giving up to the list. They would make the premise be less true that every action gets us what we want because neither of the three added do. Also in the argument, premise three adds to premise two by saying that all the stated actions must be good because they get us what we want due to premise one, which says that every action that gets us what we want is good. Since those two premises are unsound, premise three fails to be sound as well. Making the conclusion
The argument is, every action that gets you what you want is good. Stealing, lying, murder, coercion, honesty, manipulation, violence, kindness, etc., are all get us what we want. Thus Stealing, lying, murder, coercion, honesty, manipulation, etc. are all good. All good actions are moral. Therefore, no actions that get us what we want are immoral. However, this argument’s premises are false due to their failure to define morality and what is good, as well as not taking in that there are actions that contradict the premises, which leads to a false conclusion. While this argument is clear, in the first and fourth premise, the argument fails to give a definition of …show more content…
In premise two, the argument brings up several actions such as stealing, lying, and friendship. While these actions do get you something, the argument includes all actions by saying etcetera. This includes all actions, not just those stated. This is because if we added in drowning, starving, and giving up to the list. They would make the premise be less true that every action gets us what we want because neither of the three added do. Also in the argument, premise three adds to premise two by saying that all the stated actions must be good because they get us what we want due to premise one, which says that every action that gets us what we want is good. Since those two premises are unsound, premise three fails to be sound as well. Making the conclusion