Week 2 ethical theories ppt

Ethical Theory

The Trolley Problem

2

The Trolley Problem: take 2

3

The Transplant Surgeon

4

Consequentialism & Deontology

Consequentialism – rightness depends on consequences

Deontology – rightness depends at least in part on a formal moral rule or principle

5

6

$180 billion government bailout

A few months later... $165 million in bonuses to 400 executives

Relativism7

“What I feel is right is right. What I feel is wrong is wrong.” – Jean Jacques Rousseau

Ethical Subjectivism - There are no objective moral truths – only an individual’s feelings or preferences.

Some Criticism:

No arbitration between views possible, other than the exercise of power.

Anyone can harm others if it feels right to them

And we do tend to think that arbitration is possible – we do it all the time. And that it’s wrong to harm others for such a reason.

Relativism8

Cultural Relativism - All (not some) moral values are nothing more than cultural customs and laws.

Some Criticism:

Guilty of deriving ought from is (the Naturalist Fallacy).

Offers no criteria for distinguishing between reformers and criminals

Can’t explain moral progress

Encourages blind conformity to cultural norms, rather than rational analysis of moral issues (which we think is important)

Doesn’t work in pluralistic cultures (like ours)

Can lead to suspicion and mistrust of other cultures

Following the law is not the same thing as acting morally

Laws can be immoral

Laws can provide insufficient direction

Laws can be ambiguous

Doing the moral minimum is doing what you are morally obligated to do (not doing bad)

Doing good: going beyond your obligations

9

Moral Development & Maturity 10

Kohlberg’s stages of moral development

The more you think about your choices, the more you think about your reasons and the reasons of others, the more you open your mind and widen your horizons, the more your moral reasoning is likely to mature!

Postconventional thinking does not need to reject cultural norms, but rather to evaluate them. If it accepts them, it’s because they are the right norms to have – not because they are the norms we do have,

Some Criticism:

Justifies any self-interested action – no matter how it effects others.

Selfishness is usually associated with immorality, altruism with morality

11

“The achievement of his own happiness is man’s highest moral purpose”

– Ayn Rand, The Virtue of Selfishness (1964)

Ethical Egoism - everyone ought to do what is in his or her own rational self-interest

Utilitarianism

“The greatest good for the greatest number”

The morally right act for an agent A at a time t is that act available to A at t, that will maximize the total amount of good in the world (that will have the best consequences).

Jeremy Bentham (1748 – 1831)

12

Hedonistic Utilitarianism

What is good?

Pleasure and the absence of pain are good

Pleasure is any sensation you would rather have than no sensation at all; and pain is any sensation you’d rather not have than no sensation at all.

.

13

What Bentham thinks are the advantages of Utilitarianism

Determinate in principle – in principle, you can use the hedonic calculus to get an actual answer to the question of “what should I do in this case?”.

Neutralistic – treats everyone in the same way

Realistic – it’s based on real psychology. It works with people as it finds them and organizes society so that they being that way actually has good consequences for everyone.

Non-metaphysical – it doesn't make goodness/badness right/wrongness some sort of weird qualities. What in the world is “a natural right?”

Non-elitist – it counts all sentient creatures. And all types of pleasures equally

14

The Hedonic Calculus

Perform the action-alternative with the highest total

Determine Intensity x duration

Determine Probability

Calculate Total = (intensity x duration) x Probability

15

For each action-alternative:

How do we regard different types of pleasures?

What counts as pleasure?

Are there higher and lower pleasures?

Bentham: the source of pleasure doesn’t matter

J.S. Mill: There is an objective quality to different pleasures that should also be factor into our calculations

Quality comes from what people would choose if they had access to all possible pleasures

Bentham: It’s a subjective criterion – “Pushpin is as good as poetry”

What about sadistic and masochistic pleasures?

16

Are all goods commensurable?

Can all pleasures be roughly compared? Can they be reduced to some sort of homogenous value?

17

Utilitarianism & business

18

Market view – Free and unregulated markets would maximize the overall good by most efficiently connecting supply with demand. Administrative view – Policy experts manipulate the economy to attempt to improve the outcome beyond the capacities of a purely free market.

Criticisms of Utilitarianism

It’s too difficult to apply

People care about more than just pleasure

We can not reduce all human goods into quantifiable units which can be aggregated and compared

There is no non-arbitrary limit to how far into the future we should consider consequences

Intention is important for determining the moral status of actions, but no room for this in utilitarianism

Justifies acts that seem to be plainly wrong like murder and rape

19

Other forms of Utilitarianism

Rule Utilitarianism - Always act according to the rule that would produce the most utility in the world (vs. “act” utilitarianism)

Preference Utilitarianism: Always act so as to maximize satisfaction of people’s preferences (vs. “Hedonistic” Utilitarianism)

20

Rights and duties

One way to think of a right is as a trump against the claims of the general welfare.

Rights hook into correlative duties: if you have a right not to be killed, then I have a duty not to kill you.

Negative rights are rights to non-interference

Positive rights are rights to aid – entitlements to be provided with something

Right to due process of law in the US, to free education, to healthcare coverage, etc.

A right not to be killed, have your property stolen, raped, etc.

21

Kantianism

Moral actions follow from the right moral principles

To find out whether a moral principle is ok to act from, you see if it’s compatible with the Categorical Imperative (CI)

All moral rules must rest on a categorical imperative (CI)

Hypothetical imperatives are conditional, rather than categorical/absolute

How do we know if our moral principles are good ones?

22

The Categorical Imperative

1st formulation of Categorical Imperative:

"Act only according to that maxim that you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.” (a rule that applies to everybody)

2nd formulation of Categorical Imperative:

“Never treat a person merely as a means to an end, but always treat them as an end in themselves”

Step 2: Universalize the maxim to everyone, past, present and future. (everyone, as if by a law of nature, does A in C in order to achieve E)

Step 1: Formulate a sincere and rational maxim (a subjective principle of action that states what you propose to do, and why)

23

Step 3: Imagine the world that would result from conjoining all the laws of physics, psychology, sociology, etc. with the law you made in Step 2

The Categorical Imperative

Step 4: Test the maxim

If a maxim of action fails the CI tests, it is NOT permissible to act on that maxim! AND that means that not to do that thing is a moral duty.

The contradiction in conception test – In the social world of (3) would it be possible to achieve your end by means of the action you proposed in 1?

The Contradiction in the Will test - Could I consistently will that this social world actually exist?

24

Criticisms of Kantianism

Its absolutist and inflexible (What if the negative consequences are too high?)

Some maxims which seem to be ok, fail the CI test. (e.g. Go to the beach on a sunny day)

We have no positive formula for constructing maxims, so it seems we may propose any number of maxims for any action. Which should we follow?

The whole approach of basing morality on rationality, rather than feelings is mistaken.

25

Some major moral principles

The Principle of Nonmaleficence – We ought to act in ways that do not cause needless harm or injury to others

The Principle of Beneficence – We should act in ways that promote the welfare of other people

The Principle of Utility – We should act in such a way as to bring about the greatest benefit and the least harm

26

Virtue Ethics

Those that your “moral exemplars” poses

Virtue ethic focuses on having a good character – tells you what kind of person you ought to be

It is action-guiding in the sense that it recommends that you become the kind of person that will do what is right – perhaps instinctively

How do you become virtuous?

Develop the sort of habits or instincts that a virtuous person has through good upbringing, education, reflection, experience, and effort

What habits or instincts are these?

27

Virtue Ethics – the virtues

Rationality, intelligence, tenacity, capability, patience, prudence, skillfulness, shrewdness, proficiency, etc.

Moral Virtues

Practical/non-moral virtues

Benevolence, compassion, honesty, charity, sincerity, sympathy, respect consideration, kindness, thoughtfulness, loyalty, fairness, etc.

28

Criticisms of Virtue Ethics

(1) Different cultural groups have had different, sometimes conflicting, opinions on what constitutes a virtue. If Virtue Ethics has no universal basis, it leads to an undesirable cultural relativism.

(2) Virtue Ethics may praise certain character traits, but this provides us with no or insufficient practical guidance about which specific actions to perform

29

Using Child labor30