Download So what would you do? - theoryofknowledge.net

Would you have done the same as
Detective Dormer?
•
http://www.practicopedia.com/files/Insomnia.jpg
YES.
• The ends (imprisoning a criminal who has
committed a heinous crime) fully justifies the
means (planting false evidence on him and
lying to the court).
• You have based your judgement on a moral
assessment of this action’s outcome.
NO.
• You can never justify breaking the law (either
ethical laws, or the laws of the nation in which
you live), especially when you are meant to
protect and uphold it.
• You have based your judgement on a moral
assessment of the action in itself.
If you have answered YES:
• You are, at least in this
case, a
consequentialist
• See: John Stuart Mill
and the principle of
utilitarianism
If you have answered NO:
• You are, at least in this
case, a deontologist
• See: Immanuel Kant
and his ‘categorical
imperative’
Have you based your answer on a set of
ethical principles that would not change
under any circumstances?
YES. So…
• Would your unshakeable set
of ethical principles have
seen justice done in this
case?
• Would they work if others
don’t share them?
• Or are they just a personal
set of ethical principles that
just work for you?
• In which case, do they have
a point?
NO. So…
• How do you arrive at your
ethical answers?
• Do you make up your
ethical answers ‘as you go
along’?
• In which case, isn’t there a
danger of being ethically
inconsistent?
Welcome to the
world of ethics!
Ethics
Is the study of morals, or
how to live correctly.
But this is fraught with
problems. Why?
Ethics is everywhere, for example:
Weighing this case up:
On the one hand:
On the other:
• Many people are being
killed in Syria – probably at
the behest of Bashar alAssad
• In order to stop this, any
means should be used
• Utilitarian principles would
say that the long term
happiness of the people
outweighs short term
suffering
• Innocent people will be
killed by intervention
• It’s always questionable
what the motives of
Western governments are
when they intervene
• Deontological principles
would say that intervention
and the killing of more
people is wrong
Two further questions to consider:
1. How should we make ethical judgements?
2. Is it possible to escape the trap of
relativism?