I remember taking this at university, but I Kant remember any of it.

Moral of the story: The burglar was bad at being a burglar.

So I'm Mormon.... the more and more I dig into ethics, morals and philosophy the more I start to doubt religion. Not just mine alone but religion as a whole... idk, I feel bad about it but then again this seems so logical in my quest to understand what life is and how we operate.

I like Fiorello La Guardia's take on the question of stealing to feed your family. After being legally obligated to fine a woman ten dollars for doing just that during the Depression, he paid her fine out of his own pocket, then fined every person in the courtroom twenty-five cents "for the crime of living in a city where a woman has no choice but to steal or watch her grandson starve."

0:22 slight typo. misspelled "morality" as "mortality"

i watched the good place and now i'm obsessed with philosophy

I really appreciate that this episode closed on a notion that one should always be self-examining and trying to understand why they feel a certain way. Thank you CC!

I'm really loving how objective and balanced you're being about all of these topics. I appreciate it a lot.

For the burglar story, could you separate moral intentions from moral outcomes? His moral intentions were wrong, but his moral outcome was right. That would leave us with four different categories.

I've gotten more and more interested in Philosophy lately, and I decided to join my high school ethics bowl team. Whenever I'm interested in any topics, I've found your videos extremely helpful, and recently the philosophy crash course videos have been very useful!

I did my philosophy dissertation on the Divine command Theory and the effects evolution has on morality. I can't wait to see more of this series

slight existential crisis

to quote every INTP ever "it depends..."

Moral questions horrofies me, because they has a deep pratical impact on life AND are not verificable, like science questions.

Fantastic rebuttal to cultural relativism at 5:30 onwards.

Thought it said "Mathematics"

I'm getting good grade in moral ethics course in college all because of your channel. Great content, precise and exclusive. and great animations too. I don't know how to thank you.

"Ethics are spooks tho" - Max Stirner (probably)

I have to say, I used to not even think I would watch this in my spare time but now I'm always looking forward to theses videos!

Thank you for starting a unit on ethics! I'm really looking forward to this unit, and I'm confident that you will do a great job.

A very thorough and balanced video, good job Hank and Crash Course team

Really good breakdown of a very complex topic. Very impressive! Who's the consultant on this unit?

I like how polite you are to your thought bubble and thank it every time :D

This is what the human geography crash course SHOULD HAVE been. Informative, and as unbiased as possible. I would still love to see a series on the subject as I finished an ap course in my high school last year, and your videos almost always interest me, even with things I an well versed in.Based on your second channel I don't really agree with many of your political beliefs, so I am very grateful that you try so hard to keep everything so unbiased (and considering how biased people are these days, I respect you more for it as well). Thanks for being awesome!

I must say, I like the well-balanced explanations that Hank and team are giving.

I adore your approach to presenting, Hank, and have seen other videos of yours. You have a light touch that makes even difficult and serious topics digestible. PBS Digital Studios is lucky to have you working with them. Is there a KZfaq playlist of all the videos you have published, so I can see more? Thanks!

I can't wait until I finish watching all these episodes. I'm going to have so many great -isms with which to label myself!

Thank you so much, your videos on philosophy and ethics are getting me through my A levels

Thank you for the very interesting content. This is super benifical and has greatly increasd my understanding!

It seems like the most fundamental question which all ethical frameworks would need to answer is if it's actions, intentions, or results by which someone should be judged. An ethical framework can usually only be built on one of those, but most people would agree that all three matter. So we already have a place where moral intuition can't be easily translated into ethical theory.

I'm glad I've already given this topic some thought-- this series has given me enough existential crises already

BEST EDUCATIONAL CHANNEL ON KZfaq!!!!!!!!! LOVE YOU GUYS!!!!!!

I love this series so much! It has opened up my mind to other people's opinions and thoughts, and it has made me question and challenge my own opinions and thoughts. At times I have changed my views of the world because this course introduced me to new and different ways of thinking. I feel that this openness and questioning--this philosophical way of thinking--has bettered me as a person and that it can better other people, too. Thank you Crash Course Team and ThoughtCafe for making an awesome series with so many open-ended, convoluted questions that people around the world can contemplate and enjoy!

Yet another great episode. Thanks CrashCourse :) Although do take some more time to check the errors, here referring to spellings - 'Morality' and 'Cultural' spelled as 'Mortality' and 'Cultiral'. Just pointing it out :) We all make mistakes!

Another great video guys, love the show. I have substituted it for my actual study material a few times now haha

It's always a joy to see these guys pop up into my sub box.

What I learned from crash course philosophy is some of my ideas have terms.

These videos are so interesting and educational. Love 'em

What a fun video about mathematics. Truly the queen of sciences.

Helped me understand the foundation of my ethics course a lot clearer - thanks!

I am so confused yet intrigued at the very same time

1:14 the window is open :( he smashes it anyway

Right and wrong were never explained so well. Can't wait for the future videos.

can't wait untill the next episode. great job you guys are doing here :)

I'm surprised to hear Hank say "there's just no right answer" to the plain or peanut M&M question.

Hank, I think Wittgenstein "solved", dissolved, the whole moral/ethics problems. I hope you talk about it but if you don't what you're doing is still amazing. keep going!!.

wow this is super interesting! I like crash course a lot and particularly this philosophy, it is inspiring and interesting, intriguing different thoughts :D Thank you Crash Course and everyone involved to make all these videos possible, I will support you guys!

Thank you for making my second favorite CC series, but I own two telescopes and was looking for astronomy videos when I found CC so it's no surprise that Astronomy was my favorite series. This is good, but I don't jump up and down when a video comes out although I did when I saw that you (Hank) were on GMM!

Change your logo from an apple to a chom chom! That's probably what cc really stands for!

crash course is my favorite channel! keep it up :)

ETHICS! Thanks for starting this branch of Philosophy.

For the relativists out there, what are your moral statements relative to? How do I know whether the moral statement is true or false?

Lest anyone be confused, moral relativism in the descriptive, as opposed to normative, sense is NOT a metaethical theory. Since it's simply a statement about how beliefs differ from culture to culture, it makes no statement one way or another about the status of moral facts (whether they exist or not) and so is neither a form of moral realism or anti-realism on it's own. It is an important thing to discuss here since many people get descriptive moral relativism confused with normative moral relativism (which IS a metaethical theory) and/or use descriptive moral relativism as a justification for some other moral antirealist position. Cheers

Thanks for the Captions for the Deaf :) - found you via Ravi Zacharias (RZIM)

I can't get enough of this course

I'm very grateful that such videos exist! :)

7:20 "Well-ordered" plan, eh? Looks like axiom of choice is right.

Uhhh, Peanut M&M FOR LIFE! Unless, like Hank said... you're allergic to Peanuts. Then uhh, Peanut M&M's for... err, death?

Could you do a course in Statistics? Your videos are always fun and easy to follow.

is it crazy I think I can binge watch this serious in comparison to other subjects on crash course for FUN

Steal food from Old lady for family scenario: (My View) good intentions (to feed family) bad method (taking things without asking the owner.) good result (A life was saved at the cost of a broken window) I find it strange to try to lump these three parts together to label the scenario overall good or overall bad. Perhaps the idea of feeding your family at any cost is in itself a bad and poisonous intention... It keeps evil methods in consideration instead of fully dedicating your resources into looking for a non-pain-inducing method. Interesting... Depending on how you label the thief's intentions, the scenario is either 2/3 good or 2/3 bad. Reply Responsibly ;)

Typo at 0:23. "Morality" was spelled with an extra _t_, spelling "mortality" instead.

so excited for ethics. moral philosophy is so interesting

I knew I chose the right degree program when the first video I got was my favorite tik tok creator and science communicator, Hank Green. I am so thrilled to continue on down this course.

hey john you're great learning a lot

YES! My favorite branch of philosophy! I'd love to hear which ethical theories you guys identify with.

All this is fits nicely into Robert M. Pirsig's ('Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance") Metaphysics of Quality. Totally reorganized reality into a framework that easily explains all these "meta ethical" dilemmas and provides a true moral north.

Really interesting topic. Looking forward to it.

this reminds me I had a philosophy major friend wonder what happened to him

When I was 16 I had a great fascination with ancient reptiles and studied paleontology nonstop. I developed a great deal of respect for the dinosaurs given as they dominated the world for hundreds of millions of years ( whereas humans had only for a couple thousand ) and that they were so successful in adapting and evolving to countless conditions around the world. I sometimes thought that if dinosaurs had taken their success one step further and developed their own complex civilizations what their ethics would be. I asked myself if even basic moral rules would apply to animals other than humans. Like would murder be wrong for these civilized dinos? Or is that just a rule that applies exclusively to some part of the primate, human, brain that these animals wouldn't have. I thought about these a lot and studied biology, philosophy, psychology, and other sciences in search of an answer. I eventually figured stuff out but I still find it funny to think about how much sleep I lost asking myself if civilized birds would be cool with manslaughter.

"as ye harm none do as ye will" That's the phrase I live by and everything else doesn't matter.

Gratz on 5M Crash Course!

Slow down please. Thank you for all of it

Add 8:07, isn't viewing *unjustified* killing as amoral begging the question?

Wonderfully structured for introductory reasons.

I really hope you guys cover modern virtue ethics. and go into the weeds a bit on utilitarianism, especially negative utilitarianism

At 0:23, the blurb says 'What is [Mortality]?', where Hank says 'What is Morality?'

watching this so i dont have to read 20 pages of reading

good timing on this video, before this video I was considering moral antirealism

another great episode. Thank you.

I personally just follow the flow of the universe. It's based on progression, actual progression by result. Which trickles down into being nice, making hard choices that might seem to give a better outcome, and stuff that support logical progression for the human race. Just like with how the flow of nature already has allowed for intelligent life to become 'real'. We can only wonder what level of intricacy is going to surface next. I want to find out!

I'd love to use this video for my students. However, moral theory is generally not introduced as realism vs. antirealism, and relativism is generally not presented as a realist option. Relativism as realism is not just a minority position, but is largely untenable in philosophical ethics at large. Please consider revising this video with realism vs. relativism or universalism vs. relativism. Few philosophers, if any, find relativism plausible, and identify its metaethical shortcomings both in individual and cultural form. Please review any number of introductory textbooks such as Vaughn, Rachels, Boss, and Ellin (not in print but excellent). Thank you.

mistake at 00:22, he said what is "Morality" but the purple text says "Mortality" lol I love this channel :)

This is great. I find that ethics and philosophy can be dense and a little too focused on logic and language. I look forward to the follow-up videos. I hope that you do some eastern ethics as well. Western ethics is great, but quite emphasized already.

6:58 absolutely right

nobody pointing out it says mortality and not morality

I wonder if Hank will talk about moral calculus. One of the metaethical questions asked earlier in this episode was "Is it right to steal in order to feed your family?". Moral calculus gets an input of objective positive and negative consequences regarding a certain ethical decision and outputs the decision that should be made. So back to that question. Let's say you have 2 children, you are very poor, and your children are starving. You then see a pie that was put to cool on a open window that was left by the baker. You overhear from the baker that a wealthy individual will come by later to pick up and buy this pie. Let's look at the positives and negatives if you steal the pie. +You and your children can keep living and won't die from starvation +This wealthy individual can buy another pie quite easily with no financial concerns -The baker loses time and money spent making the pie -The baker has to spend time and money to make another one -Wealthy individual must wait more time to buy the pie When weighing these pros and cons against each other, we can see that the baker and individual losing some cash and time weighs far less than children dying. There are still many different variable to consider. Would it be more ethical to ask the baker if he can give you the pie for your starving children? What if the baker is also extremely poor? I'm not saying this is the absolute solution to the problems and questions philosophers ask regarding metaethics but it is very interesting.

After hearing the thought bubble, Is a judgement of the burglar the most constructive use of our time? For example couldn't we do more "good" by using the info to design a system that helps prevent people from dying of carbon monoxide poisoning in their homes? Is there a name for contemplating just how often we should be deciding if something is even ethical (be it in a fundamental or subjective way)?

Is it unethical to screw up myself? Does it in the end hurt those that care about me, making it unethical? Who the hell knows.

0:24 "mortality"

I think Richard Joyce deserves to be in clash course philosophy playlist :(( he contributed a lot in contemporary morality

Hey Hank, just wondering if you've ever heard of the Universal Moral Grammar Theory? :) Offers some pretty good arguments for the grounding problem. Loved this course, excellent job!!

Ach, ja! Cultural relativism! Zis sounds gut!

Oooooh! So I'm NOT a "Moral Relativist" like those Christians keep calling me! I'm a Moral Anti-Realist! Thank's CrashCourse! I really need to know this! I'm going to enjoy this next few episodes!

I love this channel so much

6:00 - 6:10 _ nailed it perfectly!

OBJECTIVISM for the win

There had better be discussion of the Evil Baby Orphanage in this series.

While it somewhat branches from consequentialism, I follow an ethical theory with major elements that don't seem to come up with other theories, and I'm curious about how correct that perception is. Its three major elements are Consequential Intention: What you believe will be the results of your action(s) of choice; Action Effort: How much effort you put directly into achieving what would be a good set of results; & Logical Effort: How much effort you put into determining what action(s) would achieve the best results. In a way, it's kind of the result of repeatedly applying utilitarianism to itself.

I was like, why won't the next episode play? I HAVE TO WAIT FOR IT! Never had that happen before hahah