* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Ethical Theory and Environment - III Lecture #5 Major Ethical
Ethics of eating meat wikipedia , lookup
Cosmopolitanism wikipedia , lookup
Value (ethics) wikipedia , lookup
Sexual ethics wikipedia , lookup
Natural and legal rights wikipedia , lookup
Kantian ethics wikipedia , lookup
Jurisprudence wikipedia , lookup
Sumac Kawsay wikipedia , lookup
Morality and religion wikipedia , lookup
Alasdair MacIntyre wikipedia , lookup
Compliance and ethics program wikipedia , lookup
Virtue ethics wikipedia , lookup
Ethics of technology wikipedia , lookup
Medical ethics wikipedia , lookup
Ethical intuitionism wikipedia , lookup
Secular morality wikipedia , lookup
Organizational technoethics wikipedia , lookup
Arthur Schafer wikipedia , lookup
Consequentialism wikipedia , lookup
Thomas Hill Green wikipedia , lookup
Aristotelian ethics wikipedia , lookup
Social effects of evolutionary theory wikipedia , lookup
Clare Palmer wikipedia , lookup
School of Salamanca wikipedia , lookup
Jewish ethics wikipedia , lookup
J. Baird Callicott wikipedia , lookup
Ethical Theory and Environment - III Major Ethical Theories Reading Assignment: Lecture #5 Environmental Ethics, Chapter 2, pp. 17-29 Study Outline: Use or modify /expand outline as necessary, based on your approach the reading. Emphasis: I. Highlights of three major ethical theories, natural law, deontological ethics, and utilitarianism are addressed. Natural Law Ethics A. Claims: 1. Nature itself has purpose, or telos, which is discoverable 2. Each part of nature (e.g mineral, biological) has a function and purpose; Agood@ exists when it is allowed to function toward fulfilling its role or purpose B i.e. allowed to be what it was designed (purpose) to accomplish (end) 3. Structure and mechanism is not separable from its (ethically good) purpose or end A. Historical Roots 1. Aristotle (350 BC) B his Science and Ethics were integrated B because his Abiology@ integrated each of the following Acauses@: a. Material cause - the substance or material (e.g. marble; organic molecules) b. Formal cause - the idea existing behind the form (mental blueprint, genome) c. Efficient cause - the agent that brings it to being (sculptor; genetic system) d. Final cause - discernable purpose(telos) or end to which it points; built within it!! Teleology (telos = end, or final purpose (function) for which it was designed) Aristotle’s three fundamental activities of life: ____________________ ____________________ _______________________ Question: How does Aristotle=s teleological approach integrate factual claims about living organisms and ethical values? 2. Thomas Aquinas (1250 AD) B synthesis of Aristotelian philosophy and Christian theology: a. b. c. God=s plan in nature is expressed in the laws discovered by Greek philosophers As science uncovers the telos of created things we can discover God=s purpose Laws of nature reveal basis for descriptive and normative ethical behavior, which we ought to follow B fulfillment of our natural potential (or Agood@) in harmony with the natural world. 5.2 II. Utilitarianism A. Claims: 1. An act is right if it=s consequences cause the greater good; or greatest good for greatest number 2. All acts judged by their usefulness (utility) in producing good consequences 3. Two elements: a) establish intrinsic value (e.g. happiness) or instrumental value, then b) judge value of all acts or things by how well they serve to achieve that value 4. Two versions: Good is either Apleasure over pain@ or Ahappiness by satisfaction of desires@ B. Objections 1. Cannot define the Agood@ in an objective sense (indep. of human interests) or universal sense (for all people at all times). How do we measure Agood@ or intrinsic value? 2. It follows that if Agood@ cannot be measured, to substitute other measures B e.g. mortality rate, per capita costs, Acost-benefit analysis@ (tends toward utilitarian) 3. What is the Ascope@ of the Agood?@ e.g. for what vicinity? for how many generations 4. Is it right to ethically separate the act from consequences? e.g. just because extracting a resource from a formerly natural area brings prosperity doesn=t excuse potential moral wrongness of eliminating a species (e.g. spotted owl) C. Applications or Expressions in Environmental Ethics: 1. Environmental debates (and public policy decisions) are often framed by this ethic 2. Market-based policy decisions are based on maximizing overall happines (Ch. 3) 3. Suffering of animals (if have moral standing) must be included in judging consequences III. RuleBBased Ethics (Deontological) versus Virtue Ethics A. Claims: 1. An act is right if it fulfills duty and respects rights in situations that we can control or in which we have freely reasoned and chosen (intended) our actions to occur 2. One is not held responsible for consequences he/she can=t control (unlike utilitarian) 3. Immanuel Kant=s categorical imperative B act is right if all rational beings everywhere would find it acceptable B i.e. a Auniversal maxim@ 4. Treat people as rational, autonomous beings who have their own purposes and rights B. Objections 1. Tension between utilitarian (right depends on consequences and may involve choice in which rights of individual must be set aside in favor of the greater good. > Example: Right of property owner may have to be secondary to flood control for a city or for habitat for an endangered species 2. No account of what is good, valuable, or worthy B > Example: A hermit could live autonomously and be very unethical without bad consequences to others 3. ARights seekers@ can take advantage of this ethic and simply legitimize Awants@ 4. What about the nonrational beings which, by definition, would seem to viewed simply as Aends@ w/o moral standing 5.3 C. Applications or Expressions in Environmental Ethics: Deontological ethics and utilitarian ethics are seen as potential balancers in our contemporary society in which democratic rule of the majority reflects utilitarian and must be balanced with constitutional provision for the rights of the individual. D. Virtue Ethics 1. Emphasis: Doing (actions) versus Virtues (being; character) 2. Virtues include courage, moderation, modesty, faithfulness, hopefulness, agape love 3. Question: Suppose you have the option of either driving or bicycling to work. Explain the motivation(s) of each ethic and the benefits of right doing that are realized in each. IV. Contemporary Perspectives on Teleology Questions to Consider: A. How does natural law ethics fare in the midst of contemporary thought? B. 1. Supports environmental and ecological claims that the "natural order" of ecosystems is good, has purpose, and functions well if it is not disturbed by humans ' "Preservationists" 2. Species level - every living thing has value in itself 3. Objections to Natural Law: a. From Philosophers - "How can we know the telos of a human or an owl?" b. From Science (naturalistic) B moral (normative) claims cannot be inferred from scientific Claim: There "is<>ought" or "fact<>value" gap - derived from David Hume c. From Evolution - random mutations + selection produces change over time Undirected natural processes do not function with an end (purpose) in view. Instead, science should look backward to see Acause@ What applications of natural law ethics fit your approach to science and ethics? 1. Allows for design and purpose in nature; consistent with Creation and His revelation through Scripture (Thomas Aquinas) 2 If "evolution" mindset rejects "Natural Law" ethic, then how does it replace this ethic with one that justifies caring for a natural world with its supposed purposeless? 5.4 III. Application Exercise: Efforts to extend legal protection from humans alone to plant and animal species led to legislation in the 1970's to protect the air, water, and endangered species. Below are listed summaries of the typical arguments for extending this protection, each based upon one of the three major ethical theories. Assign each argument to the ethical theory upon which it rests and then explain how the claim(s) of each ethical theory are expressed in the rhetoric. Argument #1: We need to conserve other species because they will be necessary for food, fiber, medicinal benefits in the future Argument #2: The consequences of species loss (e.g. in the Gulf via hypoxia) may have to be borne in order that economic conditions of the Mississippi River communities continue to support the residents via farming, etc. Argument #3: According to Genesis, it is part of human responsibility to care for the Earth and the creatures and therefore we must not destroy their habitats which provide the life support for them. Argument #4: Living organisms may be viewed as part of an ordered system, or biotic community, and the predictable interdependence within the community demands that we value and manage them in such a way that the organisms and the whole can function as it was intended to function. Argument #5: Biotic communities should be the focus of conservation efforts because it is within these communities that each species has evolved and will continue to evolve by random mutation and natural selection.