Download PHL-220-and-Beyond

PHL 220: Ethics—An Overview
As described in the UP Bulletin, PHL 220 is:
An introduction to some of the major theories in classical and/or contemporary moral philosophy.
Particular emphasis is placed on understanding and concretely applying normative theories of
moral obligation including Utilitarianism, Deontology, Social Contract Theory, Ethics of Care,
Natural Law, and Virtue Theory . The course will also explore the limits of relativism and
absolutism.
In what follows, we offer some elaboration on the above and remark on some of the distinctive topics
covered by those teaching the course that may be of interest to and/or may be extended by those
teaching in other parts of the university.
In PHL 220, our focus is on examining some of the normative ethical theories that have exerted and
continue to exert tremendous influence in our cultural tradition. A “normative” theory is simply a theory
about why something ought (or ought not) to be done or pursued (or avoided). Thus a normative ethical
theory is one concerning the basis for saying that something is morally right/wrong or morally good/bad
(vs. a normative legal or political theory). Some theories discussed in the course—e.g., a Divine
Command Theory or Aquinas’ Natural Law Theory—presuppose a connection to religious belief—
whereas others—e.g., Utilitarianism, Kantian Ethics, Social Contract Theory, Ethics of Care and Virtue
Theory—do not (though they could be combined with religious belief).
The above normative theories give competing explanations of the type of reasons that lie behind our
moral judgments. For example, a classical utilitarian like Jeremy Bentham thinks that the morally right
course of action is determined by comparing the consequences likely to be produced for each possible
action and selecting the one that produces the best overall outcome for all concerned. (Note the parallel
with “cost/benefit” reasoning in Economics). So, for example, if one is a Utilitarian and trying to decide
whether to keep a promise made yesterday, one calculates the good and bad consequences that would
be produced by keeping vs. not keeping the promise and chooses the course of action with the best
consequences for all concerned. This, of course, allows for a great deal of flexibility in relation to
circumstances—some would say too much flexibility. Other theorists—e.g., Kant—hold that our
obligations are not determined via a calculation of consequences but by attending to the respect due to
others, given their shared nature as rational and free beings. On Kant’s view, respect for the dignity of
persons imposes absolute restrictions on what is permissible in relation to one another. This very brief
contrast between these two theories illustrates another theme of the course—namely, whether or not
moral obligations should be understood as “absolutist” in character—i.e., admitting of no exceptions.
In recent decades, there has been a resurgence of interest in the sort of Virtue Ethics associated with
Plato and Aristotle. One reason that this is of interest is that it helps capture the importance of character
in our moral lives, where “character” is understood to mean more than simply performing a morally correct
action. For example, being a virtuous person, or person of good moral character, involves cultivating and
fine-tuning one’s emotional responses. The role of emotions and their connection to our rationality is an
important theme as well in recent feminist theories highlighting concern that “reason”—as construed in
many traditional ethical theories—may reflect some degree of masculine bias.
Normative ethical theory has typically presupposed that there is such a thing as objective moral truth and
that at least some fundamental moral truths are universal—that is, the same for all people, regardless of
background or social setting. However, these claims about moral truth have been increasingly
challenged in the past century by moral skeptics of varying sorts. Persistent moral disagreement has led
some to conclude that moral judgments are simply expressive of feelings, personal preferences, or are
merely disguised attempts to exert power. Others are willing to continue talking about moral truth but
discard claims to universality, maintaining instead that moral truth is determined by and thus relative to
one’s cultural or social group. We’ve noticed that many of our students begin class speaking as if they
are skeptics of one sort or another, but we’ve found that this is often in reaction to their assumption that to
believe in moral truths is to be dogmatic and intolerant. One of our general goals is to point out that this
need not be so, and that supporting tolerance and diverse views in the midst of inquiry is often better
grounded in a theoretical framework that recognizes the intrinsic value of persons and their well-being.
This attitude is reflected nicely in Pope Francis’ first encyclical:
One who believes may not be presumptuous; on the contrary, truth leads to humility, since
believers know that, rather than ourselves possessing truth, it is truth which embraces and
possesses us. Far from making us inflexible, the security of faith sets us on a journey; it enables
witness and dialogue with all. (Encyclical Letter Lumen Fidei - The Light of Faith, June 29, 2013,
§34).
Though PHL 220 is primarily a moral theory course which focuses on some of the classic texts of our
tradition, we aim also to convey that this tradition of theorizing continues to be reinterpreted and applied
anew in our evolving social context. We each use contemporary issues to illustrate how the theoretical
orientations have been and may be applied. Topics covered vary by instructor, but the following are
pretty commonly covered in at least some sections:







Abortion
Euthanasia
Wealth, Poverty and Consumption
Capital Punishment
Civil Disobedience
Treatment of Non-human Animals
War and Peace
This semester, these additional topics are being addressed in some sections as well:



The role and importance of consent in sexual ethics
Cloning
Obligations to Aging Parents
Finally, some instructors make interdisciplinary connections to work in other fields. This semester, topical
connections of this sort include:





Psychology/Social Psychology: Psychoanalysis, Evolutionary Psychology,
Conditioning/Behaviorism, Theories of Moral Development, The Attribution Error
Feminism/Women’s Studies: concerns about masculine bias in theory and method
Theology/Religion: Conceptions of God, or Ultimate Reality in Western and Non-Western
religious philosophies
Political Theory: the nature of social justice
Economics: the moral limitations of capitalism