Download KINDS OF THEORIES I. In ethics, you can hold to, at any

Ethical Theories
 Act-Based Ethics:
Character-based/
Self-Realization Ethics
 Consequentialist
• Egoism
• Hedonism
• Utilitarianism (Act and
Rule)
 Deontologicalist
•
•
•
•
Kantianism
Relativism
Intuitionism
Theologism
• Virtue Ethics
• Developmental
Care Ethics
Meta-Ethics
• Ethical Nihilism
• Ethical Skepticism
• Emotivism/Positivism
© 2002, Karey Perkins
Three major kinds of moral theories
Consequentialism: Outcomes
• Helping others brings the best results
• …promotes the best consequences
Deontologicalism: Duties and Rules
• Helping others is a duty
• …accords with the correct moral principle
Virtue Ethics: Virtues or Character
• Helping others is the virtue of charity or beneficence
• …what a virtuous agent would do
© 2002, Karey Perkins
Traditional moral theories
Tell us what to DO instead of BE
Consider what we ought to do and be
separately rather than together
Do not give proper respect to the value we
place on friendship and relationships
Separate beliefs from desires
(intellectual desires)
Elevate the “right action criterion”
© 2002, Karey Perkins
Virtue Ethics
Second half of 20th century
Eudaimonia (Aristotle)
• Happiness, flourishing, well-being
• TRUE or REAL happiness, the sort of happiness
worth having
Virtue:
• A character trait
© 2002, Karey Perkins
A virtue is…
 A character trait; people with the character trait of [any
virtue, such as honesty] tend to:
• ACT in a certain way [be honest]
• KNOW what they are doing
• For certain REASONS (They don’t want to be dishonest;
inarticulacy; because it was needed; other-oriented)
• With a certain ATTITUDE [disapprove of, deplore dishonesty;
approve, like, praise, defend honesty]
• With certain EMOTIONS [distress at dishonesty]
• With RELIABILITY, trait strongly entrenched, all the way down
(with maturity, reason; not whim, passion or desire like
children)
• Have PRACTICAL WISDOM
• GET THINGS RIGHT (not too honest, not too generous…)
© 2002, Karey Perkins
• Function as a GUIDE; shame us for our lack of virtues
VIRTUE ETHICS
Nothing is right or wrong, but we should act virtuously.
(Aristotle)
• Virtue is a “mean” (middle) between two extremes (“vices”)
Feeling/Action Excess
Confidence
Shame
Giving Amusement
Truth Telling
Mean
Rashness
Courage
Bashfulness Modesty
Buffonery
Wittiness
Boastfulness Truthfulness
© 2002, Karey Perkins
Deficit
Cowardice
Shamelessness
Boorishness
Self Deprecation
STRONG CODIFIABILITY THESIS
 An acceptable moral theory will provide universal
principles that do two things:
• Amount to a decision procedure for determining right action
• Be such that any non-virtuous person could understand and apply
them
 Hursthouse rejects this for all moral theories
• Naïve
• Practical wisdom needed (not codifiable, something
experiential and lived)
• Virtue Ethics can be a guide, but not a codifiable rule
© 2002, Karey Perkins
Objection One
 Can Virtue Ethics be a guide? HH says yes:
 1) Ask what virtuous agent would do
• But would you know a virtuous agent if you were non-virtuous?
• HH says yes: imperfectly known.
 2) Each virtue/vice generates a moral rule
• Not just evaluative, but the way we teach children –
“mother’s knees rules”
• Sufficient for moral education and moral guidance
• V-rules like deontology with different foundations
• Deontology: not lying is rule, prohibited; virtue ethics:
dishonesty is a vice, honesty a virtue
© 2002, Karey Perkins
Objection Two
The Conflict Problem
• Should doctor’s lie or tell the truth about a patient’s
condition? (Kindness vs. honesty)
• Should professors lie or tell the truth about a
student’s capabilities for grad school?
• Should you let a friend down or help a friend in
need?
HH: no real conflict, only an apparent one
Irresolvable and Tragic Moral Dilemmas
© 2002, Karey Perkins
How do you get virtues
Cultivate it
A continuum; moral motivation a matter of
degree from:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Perfectly virtuous
Exceptionally virtuous
Thoroughly Virtuous
Fairly Virtuous
Basically Virtuous but for X
The Viscious
© 2002, Karey Perkins
Cases
The Nazi; the Mafioso
Those living in times/societies where a
group is oppressed
Blind Spots
© 2002, Karey Perkins
DEVELOPMENTAL ETHICS
Ethics is determined not by the act, but by human character
development. The will of the fully mature (ethical) human
becomes increasingly less self centered and more aligned
with and motivated by larger concerns. (Based on a variety
of psychological development theories.)
STAGE ONE: The Liar, influenced and motivated by power and force, lives for self at the
expense of others.
STAGE TWO: The Conformist, loyal to one’s social group, obedient to authority,
supports values and traditions of own community.
STAGE THREE: The Thinker/Scientist, uses reason and self-discovered principles to make
ethical decisions, independent and thinking.
STAGE FOUR: The Mystic, operates out of compassion and caring for others, willing to
sacrifice self for others, even those quite different from self.
See http://www.kareyperkins.com/classes/445/445stageschart.html
© 2002, Karey Perkins
Domain of Concern
Authority Self, Desires
Rules
Principles
Love
Family, Community
The World, Others not like me
The Entire Universe, seen and unseen
© 2002, Karey Perkins
Ethics of Care
 Caring for the needs of others is central
 Notion of the individual as relational and interdependent
 Previous concept of person was public sphere person:
independent, autonomous, rational, self-sufficient, self
interested
 We are born dependent on others, will at times be so, and
will end our life so: young, old, ill constitute our identity
 We only think we are independent due to a network of
social relations that allow us to think so.
© 2002, Karey Perkins
What is Care?
 ACTIVITY: taking care of someone
 ATTITUDE: close attention to needs, feelings, situation from
other’s point of view
 VIRTUE
• [Michael Slote; Held disagrees as care is “other” oriented, not
self oriented]
 PRACTICE AND VALUE: Responding to [any] needs; valuing a
person and continuing relations
• Not “benevolence” b/c caring is other oriented, a social
relation, not a dispositional trait
© 2002, Karey Perkins
Partiality vs. impartiality
 Emotions and partiality are more important than
rationality, and not to be rejected
 Certain kinds of emotions: sympathy, empathy,
sensitivity, responsiveness
 Rejects abstract impartial reasoning
 Values the private sphere – extends that attitude
to the public
 Interdependence vs. independence
© 2002, Karey Perkins
Care vs. Justice
 JUSTICE: fairness, equality, individual rights, ABSTRACT principles,
public sphere (politics, law, society)
 CARE: attentiveness, trust, responsiveness to need, cultivating caring
relationships, nuance, interests of the cared for and one caring wrapped
together, private sphere (family and friends)
 Combined? Merged? Work together?
 Held: Care is most fundamental value, both are good:
“There has historically been little justice in the family, and care and life have
gone on without it. There can be no justice without care however for without
care, no child would survive and there would be no persons to respect” (549).
© 2002, Karey Perkins
Objections
 Distinct or a kind of virtue ethics?
 Limited in scope or whole world applicability: Bioethics,
law, political society, war, international relations?
 Feminist objection: Women have been subjugated and
held back due to caring roles
 Can care ethics be action guiding?
• Case One: Lifeboat
• Case Two: Robin Hood
• Case Three: Two conflicting promises
© 2002, Karey Perkins
“Meta-Ethics” or “No” Ethics
Ethical Nihilism: There are no right or wrong
acts, only perhaps prudent and imprudent acts.
(Nietzsche)
Ethical Skepticism: There may be right or
wrong acts, but there is no way to know which are
which. (Pyrrho)
Emotivism/Logical Positivism: The
question is meaningless; it merely expresses one's
emotions, or disapproval or approval, but has not
substance in reality. (A. J. Ayer)
© 2002, Karey Perkins
Bibliography
Almeder, Robert. Human Happiness and Morality: A Brief
Introduction to Ethics. New York: Prometheus, 2000.
Held, Virginia. “The Ethics of Care,” pp. 537-566. In the The Oxford
Handbook of Ethical Theory, Ed. David Copp. Oxford: Oxford UP,
2006.
Hursthouse, Rosalind. On Virtue Ethics. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1999.
Thiroux, Jacques P. Ethics: Theory and Practice. 7th Ed. New York:
Prentice-Hall, 2001.
© 2002, Karey Perkins