Download Who Ya Gonna Call

Immanuel Kant’s Ethics:
text pp. 277-78
Kant worked out his ethical ideas around the same time
that Bentham was developing “Utilitarianism.” Unlike
Bentham’s “consequentialist” ethics (i.e. the morality of
an action is determined only by its consequences – in
Bentham’s case, the act’s “utility,” or balance of
pleasure over pain), Kant argued that the moral agent’s intention or “good will” is
paramount. One has a “good will” if one is determined to do one’s “duty” – hence, Kant’s
ethical theories are referred to as “deontological” (from the Gr. “deon”, meaning
obligation or duty) – by acting on moral principles justified by reason.
Ultimately, Kant argued for a single moral principle: the categorical imperative. The
best-known statement of this runs: “Act only according to that maxim whereby you can
at the same time will that it should become a universal law of nature.” In other words:
would you be OK with your behaviour becoming a general norm of moral action? If yes,
the act is morally acceptable; if no, then it’s not
Traditional Christian ethics sound a bit similar to this, because of the emphasis on the
reasoned application of moral principle, and because the Categorial Imperative is quite
similar to Jesus’ “Golden Rule”: Treat others as you would wish them to treat you.
Actually, Catholic-Christian ethics offer a reasonable middle ground between the
deontology of Kant and the consequentialism of Bentham. Traditionally, three things
must be considered when judging the morality of an action:
1. The act itself;
2. The intention of the person (“moral agent”) performing the act;
3. The circumstances in which the agent performs the act.
Of these three, the first is perhaps most important: no amount of “good will,” and no
difficulty of circumstance, can make a bad action good; however, these three criteria
force the agent to consider both their own intentions AND the consequences of the action
they’re about to perform (which are an aspect of the act itself).
Possible Moral Issues to Consider:
Addictive Substances
Abortion
Suicide
Animal Rights
Euthanasia
Climate Change
Governmental Corruption
Rehabilitation of Criminals
Age Limits
Population Control
Immigration
Smokers' rights
Gambling
Prostitution
Privacy Rights
AIDS & STD’s
Academic Doping
Grade Inflation
Who Ya Gonna Call?
You’re faced with an ethical dilemma. Which philosopher would be of most help to you
in solving it? Who ya gonna call?
In groups of three:
 Select a moral issue for your group to examine. (See over)
 Each group member is to consider the issue from the viewpoint of a
different school of philosophy, so that three different schools are
represented in your group. (e.g. existentialism, utilitarianism, pragmatism,
etc.)
 One group member must take the viewpoint of Immanuel Kant
(above).
 Make note of the points you think your school of philosophy would bring
up when considering your moral issue.
 Discuss your notes with your group members.
 Create a graphic organizer to post on the classroom walls, showing
 how your group thinks each school of philosophy would likely
respond to your moral issue;
 which school seems to offer the best solution to your issue; and
 what (if anything) Church teaching in the Catechism has to say
about the subject – use the subject index at the back to find
relevant articles.
 Be prepared to explain and defend your graphic organizer to your
classmates when they view it.
 Note: You may use my books for research, but make sure to put them
back when you’re finished!
Category
Understanding
Thinking
Communication
Application
Level One
Level Two
Level Three
Level Four
* limited
identification of
the main ideas in
the various ethical
approaches
* limited
evaluation of the
schools’ ethical
ideas
* limited clarity of
ideas expressed
* limited use of
ethical terms
* some
identification of
the main ideas in
the various ethical
approaches
* some evaluation
of the schools’
ethical ideas
* clear
identification of
the main ideas in
the various ethical
approaches
* clear evaluation
of the schools’
ethical ideas
* some clarity of
ideas expressed
* some use of
ethical terms
* clear ideas
expressed
* accurate use of
ethical terms
* limited responses
to the ethical
questions raised in
the activity
* some responses
to the ethical
questions raised in
the activity
* clear responses
to the ethical
questions raised in
the activity
* ample evidence
of insight into the
main ideas in the
various ethical
approaches
* outstanding
evaluation of the
schools’ ethical
ideas
* clarity & insight
in ideas expressed
* ethical terms
used with accuracy
& insight
* outstanding
responses to the
ethical questions
raised in the
activity
Overall: Level ___