ETHICS. Why do we need Ethics? Why Ethics? EuthanasiaWarPunishment Genetic Engineering Business Ethics Human Rights Abortion.

ETHICS

Why do we need Ethics?

WhyEthics

?

Euthanasia

War

Punishment

GeneticEngineeri

ng

BusinessEthics

HumanRights

Abortion

Key Words Ethics = ethos ‘character’ Morality = moralis ‘customs’ or

‘manners’

Two parts of Ethics:– ‘Ethical Theory’ = Methods for making

moral decisions – ‘Applied Ethics’ = Debates about

specific dilemmas

3 Ways of ‘Doing’ Ethics

Normative– Asks whether actions are right or wrong

Descriptive– Describes and compares different

ethical practices Meta-ethics

– Study of meaning of ethical language

Normative Ethics Teleological ethics

– Telos = end. Determine whether an action is right or wrong depending on the consequence or end result. Consequentialist.

Examples: Utilitarianism; Situation Ethics

Deontological ethics– Actions are intrinsically right or wrong

due to an absolute law. Outcome is not important, even if it is good.

Examples: Kantian ethics; Natural Moral Law

To Kill or not to Kill? During the 2nd World

War, a man called Adolf Hitler is going to be the force behind the extermination of 9 million civilians

If it were possible to go back in time, would it be right to kill Adolf Hitler before he committed the atrocities?

G.E. Moore You can give a definition of a horse because a horse

has many different properties and qualities, all of which you can enumerate. But when you have enumerated them all, when you have reduced a horse to its simplest terms, then you can no longer define these terms…

‘Good’, then, if we mean by it that quality which we assert to belong to a thing… is incapable of definition… ‘good’ has no definition because it is simple and has no parts. It is one of those innumerable objects of thought which are themselves incapable of definition, because they are the ultimate terms of reference by which whatever is capable of definition must be defined… There is no intrinsic difficulty in the contention that ‘good’ denotes a simple and indefinable quality

(Principia Ethica, p.7)

Absolutism and Relativism

Absolutism = something that applies to everyone all of the time. – Ethical absolute = moral command that

is true for everyone, all the time in all situations.

– What is right or wrong cannot change. There are no special circumstances.

– Objective point of view, not from a personal viewpoint.

– UN Declaration of Human Rights.

Absolutism and Relativism Relativism = Subjective. There is no

objective truth or if there is, it cannot be found. – What is right in one situation might be

considered wrong in another. – Cultural Relativism = moral rules are

expressions of culture. When in Rome, do as the Romans do!

– Changes in from the past to presentWhat was considered acceptable 100 years

ago is not necessarily acceptable today.

Some Problems Relativism

– Different value systems, so there can’t be one moral truth.

Which do we follow? Can’t condemn practices that are accepted

by society.

Absolutism– Cannot take circumstances into account.

Intolerant of cultural diversity.No room for manoeuvre.

Strengths and Weaknesses of Relativism and Absolutism

RELATIVISM ABSOLUTISM

+

-

Natural Moral Law

Absolute Deontological

Theory

Cicero

Cicero in On the Republic describes natural law as follows: – True law is right reason in agreement

with nature. It is applied universally and is unchanging and everlasting… there will be no different laws in Rome and in Athens, or different laws now and in the future, but one eternal and unchangeable law will be valid for all nations and all times, and there will be one master and ruler, that is God…

Aristotle

Laws may vary from place to place, but natural justice is independent and applies to everyone no matter where they are / where they live– The natural is that which everywhere is equally

valid, and depends not upon being or not being received… that which is natural is unchangeable, and has the same power everywhere, just as fire burns both here and in Persia

Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, Book V, Chapter 7, Natural Justice

Natural law is the moral code which human beings are naturally inclined to

This moral code exists within the purpose of nature, created by God:– ‘Law is nothing else than an ordination

of reason for the common good promulgated by the one who is in charge of the community.’

Aquinas

Natural law exists to help humans act in such a way that they reach their eternal destiny which is with God

The law covers both the outward eternal view of actions and the internal motivation for doing so

Natural Law

Outward view /

Exterior

What you do

Internal motivation /

Interior

Why you do it

Task

Does it mater if I do a good thing for a wrong reason, such as giving to charity for the admiration and praise that I’ll receive?

Why might some say this isn’t the best way to act?

Reason and Human Purpose

Eternal law of divine reason is perceived through revelation, in the form of the Word of God and through the use of human reason

To live in according to and accordance with reason is to live a moral life

To live at odds with reason is to live an immoral life

Do good and avoid evil!

God makes human beings with a certain nature and this nature enables human beings to use their reason and their expertise to understand what is right

Self-preservation – first rule that humans should live by

Primary precepts are required to ensure this goal of self-preservation and this will ultimately lead to fellowship with God

Primary and Secondary Precepts

Do Good and avoid evil

Self-preservation and the

preservation of the innocent

Continuation of the species

through reproduction

Educate children

Live in society

Worship God

Task

Consider the following and decide, with reference to the primary precepts why Aquinas would think them wrong: – The use of contraception– Murder– Homosexual sex– Rape– Adultery

Which, if any are unclear? Why?

Real and Apparent Goods

Human nature is essentially good Natural law is innate Humans never knowingly pursue evil ‘ideal’ human nature which we all

have potential to live up to When humans do bad ‘things’ or

‘acts’ they are pursuing apparent goods, falsely believing them to be really good

Hitler = apparent good

Hitler did not seek to do evil

He did what he thought was good

He was mistaken It was an

apparent good rather than a real good

Strengths

Same as strengths of absolutism– Enables people to establish common

rules in order to structure communities Different cultures can be seen to

have same basic principles Judges actions (torture, rape)

irrespective of consequences Not just a set of rules, but a way of

life

Weaknesses

Some philosophers have disputed the presence of a common natural law and whether humans have a single nature

Humans may have different natures Aquinas could be wrong about his

primary precepts Secondary precepts may change in

some aspects

UtilitarianismPrinciple of Utility

Theory of Usefulness

Sophie's Choice

Developed by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill.

Utility = usefulness Teleological theoryConsequentialistVery famous, used very widelyCommon sense approach

Humans motivated by pleasure and pain = Hedonistic

‘Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do, as well as to determine what we shall do.’

As humans, we seek pleasure and seek to avoid pain

Pleasure and pain identifies what we should and shouldn’t do

Pleasure is sole good, and pain the sole evil.

Hedonistic utilitarianism

An action is right if it creates the greatest good for the greatest number.

Good = greatest pleasure or happiness

Least good = pain or sadnessGreatest number = majority of

peopleGood = maximisation of

pleasure, minimisation of pain

Hedonic Calculus1. Its intensity2. Its duration3. Its certainty or uncertainty4. Its propinquity or remoteness5. Its fecundity, or the chance it has of

being followed by sensations of the same kind

6. Its purity, or the chance it has of not being followed by, sensations of the opposite kind

7. Its extent; the number of persons to whom it extends

Imagine you are a doctor driving to one of your patients, a young mother about to give birth. She is in great pain and difficulty and it looks as though she will need a Caesarean section. It is late at night and you come across a car accident down a country road. Two cars are involved and both drivers are injured and unconscious. One of them is the pregnant woman’s husband. The other is an elderly man. Without medical help, them both may die.

Who to help first?

Problems with Bentham

Quantative pleasures– Rather than quality

Predictive value– We don’t actually know what is going to

happen in the future. What counts as pleasure?

John Stuart Mill

Focus on Qualitative pleasuresHigher and lower pleasure Higher = mindLower = body

How can we properly distinguish between higher and lower pleasures?

How do we distinguish one higher pleasure from another?

Cannot rely on one single factor equation: the greatest good for greatest number - Justice

Act Utilitariansim

Jeremy Bentham Principle of utility applied to each

individual situation Flexible = result of individual act Problem:

– can justify almost any act – Impractical to measure every moral

choice we make every time – Can have extreme results

Rule Utilitarianism

John Stuart Mill General principles or rules Rules take priority Problems:

– Does not allow for flexibility– Somewhat absolute

KantDeontological Ethics

The Moral LawCategorical Imperative

Deontological Ethics

Actions not consequences Based on duty ‘Ought’ implies ‘can’ Summum bonum – supreme good Morality leads to God

The Moral Law

Two things fill the mind with ever new and increasing admiration and awe… the starry heavens above me and the moral law within me

A priori – knowledge without reference to experience

A posteriori – knowable through experience

Analytic – statement true by definition Synthetic – true/false through experience Moral statements – a priori synthetic

Good Will and Duty Good will = highest form of good To have good will is to do your duty We don’t do duty for consequences,

but for the duty itself Moral for duty, not love Moral person = rational being Act out of duty alone How do we know which actions are

obligatory and which actions are forbidden?

Categorical Imperative

Categorical Imperative– You should do Y– Absolute– Non-conditional

Categorical or Hypothetical?

I ought not to murder I ought not to lie because it’s wrong I ought to help my parents I ought to give to charity because

there are people starving in the world I ought to help the man cross the

road I ought to study as it will get me into

a better university

The Universal Law

Do not act on any principle that cannot be universalised

Something that is right for me has to be right for everyone

If it’s wrong for one person, it’s wrong for everyone

I should only do something if I am prepared for everyone else to act in the same way

Treat Humans as Ends in Themselves

So act that you treat humanity, both in your own person and in the person of every other human being, never merely as a means, but always at the same time as an end

Cannot use humans as means to ends

We are rational – highest point of creation. Demand unique treatment

Cannot use individual for sake of many

Promote happiness of others if it allows freedom of others

Act as if you Live in a Kingdom of Ends

So act as if you were through your maxim a law-making member of a kingdom of ends

Kant argues that to preserve the moral integrity of each individual, every individual should behave as though every other individual was an “end”

You don’t do what everyone else does. You do what you think is morally right

Freedom

Humans free to make rational choices

Ability to rationalise sets us apart from animals, who lack this ability

Have to be free to do our duty Duty is to follow categorical

imperative Every moral action must be possible If we’re not free, possibility of making

choices would be denied

Right or wrong action? You are pushing a car up a hill with three other

people and you think ‘I could just pretend to be pushing, only three people are needed for this job’, and so you stop pushing.

You go to the supermarket to buy some washing powder and buy the own-brand budget powder, because it’s slightly cheaper than the environmentally-friendly powder

You avoid paying fares on the train, because you know you can get away without paying them

You want to listen to some good music, so you borrow a CD from a friend and tape it

Criticisms

Cannot sacrifice few for many. War? No exceptions – restrictions on

behaviour Many people carry out good acts out

of love, not duty Conflict in duties: Abortion No flexibility

Question

‘An act is morally good if it’s done entirely from motives if duty.’–What does Kant mean by duty? –Consider the strengths and

weaknesses of the claim