Introduction to Ethical Philosophies
description
Transcript of Introduction to Ethical Philosophies
![Page 1: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Bell Ringer
• Why is it important that a ethical philosophy be reasonable?
• What is the Social Contract Theory?
• Should a part of ethics be that everyone get along with one another?
![Page 2: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Bell Ringer
• What is the problem with Subjective Relativism?
• What is an example of cultural relativism?
• What is Divine Command Theory?
![Page 3: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Introduction to Ethical Philosophies
![Page 4: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Ethical Theories
• Subjective Relativism• Cultural Relativism• Divine Command Theory• Kantianism• Act Utilitarianism• Rule Utilitarianism• Social Contract Theory• Nietzsche
![Page 5: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Subjective Relativism
• There are no universal moral norms of right and wrong
• All persons decide right and wrong for themselves
• Pros:– Well meaning people can
have opposite opinions– Opposing views do not
need to be reconciled– Unpleasant debates are
avoided
![Page 6: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Cons of Subjective Relativism
• Can be used to rationalize bad behavior
• Morality becomes meaningless– Anything can be called
moral• Tolerance becomes
meaningless– Anything can be tolerated
even intolerance• Ethical decisions don’t
have to be based on reason
![Page 7: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Cultural Relativism
• The ethical theory that what’s right or wrong depends on place and/or time
• Pros:– Different social contexts
determine different moral guidelines
– One society should not judge another by its own standards
– The actual behavior of a society reflects its values better than what it says
![Page 8: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Cons of Cultural
Relativism
• Different views of right and wrong are not always acceptable– Just because they exist
doesn’t make them okay• Cultural relativism can be
vague and subject to different interpretations
• There are no guidelines for reconciliation between cultures in conflict
• Cultures have to share many “core values”
![Page 9: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Divine Command
Theory
• Good actions are aligned with the will of God
• Bad actions are contrary to the will of God
• The holy book helps make the decisions
• Pros:– We owe obedience to God,
our creator– God is all good and all
knowing– God is the ultimate authority
![Page 10: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Cons of Divine Command
Theory
• There are many holy books that disagree with each other
• In a multicultural society it’s unrealistic to adopt a religion based morality
• Some moral problems are not mentioned in the holy books
• Equating “good” with “God” is the “equivalence fallacy” (trying to equate two things that are similar)
• Divine Command Theory is not based on reason
![Page 11: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Kantianism • Immanuel Kant (1724 –
1804) a German philosopher • People’s wills should be
based on moral rules• Therefore it’s important that
our actions are based on appropriate moral rules.
• To determine when a moral rule is appropriate Kant proposed two Categorical Imperatives
![Page 12: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
First Formulation of the Categorical Imperative
• Act only from moral rules that you can at the same time universalize.– If you act on a moral
rule that would cause problems if everyone followed it, then your actions are not moral
![Page 13: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Second Formulation of the Categorical Imperative
• Act so that you always treat both yourself and other people as ends in themselves, and never only as a means to an end.– If you use people for
your own benefit that is not moral
![Page 14: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Pros of Kantianism • It’s rational, i.e. people
can use logic to determine if the reason for their actions meet one of the Categorical Imperatives
• It produces universal moral guidelines
• All people are moral equals and deserve to be treated similarly
![Page 15: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Cons of Kantianism • Sometimes a single rule
is not enough• There is no way to
resolve a conflict between rules
• It allows no exceptions to moral rules
• But, is it a workable theory in spite of its weaknesses?
![Page 16: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Criteria for a Workable Ethical Theory
• Moral decisions and rules: • Based on logical reasoning • Come from facts and
commonly held values• Culturally neutral• Treat everyone equally• These criteria are from the
author and his colleagues
![Page 17: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Act Utilitarianism
• Principle of Utility (Also known as Greatest Happiness Principle)– An action is right to the extent
that it increases the total happiness of the affected parties
– An action is wrong to the extent that it decreases the total happiness of the affected parties.
– Happiness may have many definitions such as: advantage, benefit, good, or pleasure
![Page 18: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Pros of Act Utilitarianism
• It focuses on happiness• It is down-to-earth
– It is practical– Well defined
• It is comprehensive
![Page 19: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Cons of Act Utilitarianism• The boundaries of an evaluation
are not clear• It is not practical
– Too much work can go into every moral decision
• Ignores persons’ innate sense of duty– It is consequence oriented
• It is susceptible to the problem of “moral luck”– The actors are not always in control
of the consequences
![Page 20: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Rule Utilitarianism
• Rules are based on the Principle of Utility– A rule is right to the extent
that it increases the total happiness of the affected parties
– The Greatest Happiness Principle is applied to moral rules
• Similar to Kantianism – both pertain to rules– But Kantianism uses the
Categorical Imperative to decide which rules to follow
![Page 21: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Pros of Rule Utilitarianism
• Calculating the total happiness is easier than in Act Utilitarianism
• Not every moral decision requires the utilitarian calculations
• It’s easier to resolve conflicting rules
• It overrides “moral luck”• It appeals to a large cross
section of society• Considered “workable”
– Treats all persons as equals– Is rational and reasons can be
given to explain why actions are good or bad
![Page 22: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Cons of Utilitarianism
• We are forced to use the same scale or measure for all evaluations even if the consequences are completely different– Usually the consequences are
expressed in dollars– But, many consequences are
difficult to measure in dollars• It ignores the unjust
distribution of good consequences– Not all members of society
may benefit equally
![Page 23: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Social Contract Theory
• Thomas Hobbes (1603-1679) and Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778)
• “Morality consists in the set of rules, governing how people are to treat one another, that rational people will agree to accept, for their mutual benefit, on the condition that others follow those rules as well.”
![Page 24: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Principles of Justice • John Rawls (1921-2001)• Each person may claim an adequate
number of basic rights and liberties as long as everyone else has a claim to the same rights and liberties.
• Any social and economic inequalities must satisfy two conditions:– They are associated with positions in society that
everyone has a fair and equal opportunity to assume
– The difference principle: They are “to be to the greatest benefit of the least-advantaged members of society”
![Page 25: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Pros of the Social Contract Theory • It uses the language of rights• It explains why rational people
act out of self interest in the absence of a common agreement.
• It provides a clear ethical analysis of some important moral issues regarding the relationship between people and their government
• It is a “workable” theory.
![Page 26: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Cons of Social Contract Theory• If we don’t sign the contract why should we be
bound by it?• Some actions can be characterized multiple
ways.• It does not have a way to resolve conflicting
rights• It may be unfair to those who are incapable of
upholding their side of the contract.
![Page 27: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Friedrich Nietzsche• Nietzsche claimed the
exemplary human being must craft his/her own identity through self-realization and do so without relying on anything transcending that life—such as God or a soul
![Page 28: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Nietzsche
• Some interpreters of Nietzsche believe he embraced nihilism, rejected philosophical reasoning, and promoted a literary exploration of the human condition, while not being concerned with gaining truth and knowledge in the traditional sense of those terms.
• However, other interpreters of Nietzsche say that in attempting to counteract the predicted rise of nihilism, he was engaged in a positive program to reaffirm life, and so he called for a radical, naturalistic, rethinking of human existence, knowledge, and morality.
![Page 29: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Nietzsche• On either interpretation, it is agreed that
he suggested a plan for “becoming what one is” through the cultivation of instincts and various cognitive faculties, a plan that requires constant struggle with one’s psychological and intellectual inheritances.
![Page 30: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
The “Workable” Theories • Kantianism• Act Utilitarianism• Rule Utilitarianism• Social Contract Theory• Nietzsche• In spite of weaknesses all of the above pass the
author’s “workable” test:– Ethical decision making is a rational process– Moral principles are found by using logical reasoning
based on facts and commonly held values
![Page 31: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Morality vs. Legal • Are all legal acts also moral?
– Difficult to determine because many immoral acts are not addressed by the law
• Are all illegal acts immoral?– Social Contract Theory: Yes, we are obligated to
follow the law– Kantianism: Yes, by the two Categorical Imperatives– Rule Utilitarianism: Yes, because rules are broken– Act Utilitarianism: Depends on the situation.
Sometimes more good comes from breaking a law.
![Page 32: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Comparing Workable Theories • Kantianism and Social Contract are based on “doing the
right thing”• The Utilitarian theories are oriented towards the
“consequences “ of actions– However, once a rule is established, Rule Utilitarianism requires
strict adherence to it.• Therefore, Kantianism, Social Contract, and Rule
Utilitarianism all use moral rules to determine if an action is moral– Act Utilitarianism adds up the total good achieved
• Kantianism and Social Contract theory focus on the individual decision makers (The Deciders) while the Utilitarian theories focus on all affected parties.
![Page 33: Introduction to Ethical Philosophies](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022081507/56816499550346895dd6710b/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Toolbox of Moral Theories • Whether presented with problems that are easy
or difficult to solve, the four workable theories,– Kantianism– Act Utilitarianism– Rule Utilitarianism– Social Contract Theory
• will provide us with solutions to many of the problems that arise in society.