Download Ethical Theories

Value Theory
Ethics:
moral goodness, obligations,
principles, justification; why be moral?
Social-Political Philosophy: justice,
rights, responsibilities, the state, law
Aesthetics: art, beauty
Meaning of life
Ethics
Ethical Absolutism:
one set of moral
values applies to all people and cultures Plato
• Cultural Relativism: Moral values
are relative to one’s culture; there are
Sextus no universally held values
Montaigne
Empiricus
Moral Skepticism: there are no known
absolute moral values: we endorse moral
values simply because they are ours
J L Mackie
Ethics and Objectivity
• Cultural Relativism: moral values are
relative to one’s culture; there are no
universally held values
• Ethical Absolutism: one set of moral values
applies to all people and cultures
Relative vs. absolute
Subjective vs. objective
Cultural Relativism:
Moral values are relative to one’s culture
There
are no universally held values
– Objection: this is simply false; universal
values are interpreted differently
Ethical Absolutism: one set of moral
values applies to all people and cultures
Relative vs. absolute
Subjective vs. objective
Objections to Ethical Relativism (the belief
that no values ought to be applied to all)
James
Rachels
(Naturalistic Fallacy)
• The existence of moral differences does not
justify them (“is does not imply ought”)
• We would have to tolerate cruel cultures [but]
• Relativism allows for no moral progress
• In fact, there are universal moral values that
are simply interpreted differently in cultures
Ethical relativism:
no set of values ought to be applied to all
Objections:
(Naturalistic Fallacy)
• The existence of moral differences does not
justify them (“is does not imply ought”)
• If a culture’s values were always “right,” there
could be no moral development or progress
• We would have to tolerate even cruel cultures
• It is difficult to define the boundaries of which
culture or subculture a person’s acts reflect
Objections to ethical relativism (the belief
that no set of values ought to be applied to all)
• We need not respect all aspects of a culture
• The boundaries of a culture are difficult to set
• The existence of moral differences does not
justify them: “is does not imply ought” (the
naturalistic fallacy)
• Universal moral values are simply interpreted
differently in different cultures
Isn’t ethics different from science because
ethics lacks agreement, has no way to
resolve disputes, and is not objective? No:
• There are wide areas of ethical agreement
• Ethical disputes are resolved through reason
• In contrast to science, ethical values are
“objective” not because they are based on an
independent reality but because they are
based on reliable methods of reasoning that
consider how practices benefit or harm people
Teleological Ethics: Morality is
determined by the consequences of actions
Morality is a means to an end: to know what we
ought to do, we must first know what is valuable
Hedonism:
value (good) is pleasure/happiness
 Egoism: my happiness is the greatest good
 Utilitarianism: the good is the greatest
amount of happiness for the greatest number
of people (or perhaps sentient beings)
Consequentialist Ethical Theories
Egoism:
the good is whatever promotes
my long-term interests
Epicurus
341-270 BC
Hedonism: the good is pleasure
Pursue pleasures not mixed with pain (beauty,
prudence, honor, justice, courage, knowledge);
satisfy natural desires (food, sleep), avoid vain
desires (fame, fashion)
Self-realization:
develop harmoniously all
our capacities (Plato, Aristotle, Bradley)
Objections to Egoism
Egoism
cannot resolve conflicts of interest
(which moral theories should do)
Egoism allows for no “moral point of view” of
an ideal observer who is impartial, informed,
and imaginatively identifies with those in the
situation
Egoist
response: no one is completely impartial,
nor should moral decisions be dispassionate
J. Bentham
(1748-1843)
Utilitarianism: the good is the
greatest amount of happiness for
the greatest number
J. S. Mill
(1808-73)
 Bentham: the hedonic calculus is based on the
intensity, duration, certainty, immediacy,
fecundity, purity, & number of people
 J. S. Mill: the quality of pleasures needs to be
considered, determined by competent judges
 Objection: this is elitist; why not use the criterion
for evaluating pleasures to judge morality itself?
Variations of Utilitarianism
 Act utilitarianism: we are obligated to do the
specific act that produces the greatest amount
of happiness (regardless of rules or justice)
Objections:
• consequence calculation is difficult
• the end justifies the means
 Rule utilitarianism: we should follow moral
rules that, when acted upon, generally produce
the greatest amount of happiness
Objections:
• what about when rules conflict?
• in some cases, why not exceptions?
Reply: then why have any theory at all?
How Actions Can Be Morally Evaluated
Motive/Intention
(Character)
Teleological Ethics
Consequences
ACT
Deontological Ethics


Teleological Ethics: morality is the means to
achieve what is identified as good or valuable
Deontological Ethics: the good or valuable is
doing our duty (the morally right, obligatory)

Divine Command $Natural Law $Kant $Buddhism
Why Should I Be Moral?
The Ring of Gyges
This question is not about what is moral (an
issue of “normative” ethics) but about why I
should do what I acknowledge is moral when
it is not in my self-interest to do so (a
“metaethical issue).
Answers to “Why Be Moral?”
Rational:
my justification for acting morally
is precisely because I see it as moral
– Objection: why be rational?
Religious:
God links sanctions (punishments
and rewards) to immoral/moral behavior
– Objection: not persuasive to non-believers
Social:
adherence to moral rules promotes
the rational self-interest of everyone
– Objection: not persuasive to free riders
Divine Command Theory
The good is whatever God commands (as
identified in the Scriptures) because it is
God’s command
Objections:
 What God wills can be arbitrary
 Scriptures conflict and need interpretation
 If God’s will is not arbitrary, then moral
principles are justified non-religiously
Social Contract Theory
Following
moral rules is the best way for us
to promote our rational self-interests
To discourage free riders, we need to make it
difficult to get away with breaking rules
– Objection: this does not explain why
everyone has an obligation to be moral
Contemporary Liberalism:
John Rawls: Justice as Fairness
 All citizens should share in a society’s wealth
and be given equal economic opportunities
 In a just society, rational individuals under a
veil of ignorance about their original position
in the society should endorse a theory that:
gives everyone as much liberty as possible
 allows for the unequal distribution of wealth only
when the existence of such inequalities benefits
everyone and is accessible to everyone

Critiques of Social Contract Theories
 Communitarianism: the State’s authority does
not depend on the consent of individuals;
rather, individuals depend on the State for
their fulfillment and identity (Aristotle, Hegel)
 Feminism: because women typically are
expected to focus on private (family)
matters, they are excluded from full
Susan Okin
participation in the social contract
Karl Marx
(1818-85)
 Human beings are naturally inclined
to work and be sociable. Capitalism alienates
us from the products of our labor and thus
alienates us from ourselves and others
 Only communal ownership of property can
counteract social alienation
Natural Law Theory
Epictetus
Thomas
Aquinas
 Natural Law: we should follow reason and our
God-instilled inclinations (Stoics, Aquinas)
Objections: inclinations sometimes conflict
Reply: principle of double effect: our
intention should always be to do the good
Counter-replies: $natural is not always good
$people differ on what is natural
$even double effects are intended
Kant’s Ethics (Formalism)
 The essential feature of morality is obligation;
you are obligated only if everyone else is too;
the form of moral obligation is its universality
 Moral obligation does not vary from person to
person. It is not a hypothetical imperative (if
you want Y, you ought to do X); rather, the
imperative is categorical (you must do X)
 Your intention must be to do your duty, to act
for the sake of doing your duty
Kant: Objections to Consequentialism,
Divine Command & Natural Law Theories
 If we are naturally oriented to seek happiness,
we are not free and thus cannot be morally
obligated to seek happiness: ought implies can
 Because opinions differ about what happiness
is, we could never agree on moral principles
 Consequences are often out of our control, so
we cannot be held responsible for our actions
 We can hold ourselves responsible only if the
moral law is self-imposed (“autonomous”)
Kant: The Categorical Imperative
 Always act only on maxims (rules) that you could
will everyone universally to adopt
 Two tests for universalizability:
 Consistency: a maxim must be universalizable
without contradiction
 Acceptability: a universalized maxim must be
acceptable
 Objection: W. D. Ross: duties sometimes conflict; this
shows how they are valid only prima facie
 T. Regan: duties to animals are not indirect
Kant’s Categorical Imperative
(continued)
 Because human beings can act rationally, they can
act for the sake of doing their duty; that is, they can
act on the basis of a “good will”
 Rational beings are capable of self-obligating
behavior; we should therefore treat others as endsin-themselves, freely consenting agents
Objection: humans are not simply rational
Buddhist Ethics
 The craving for individuality (including
life, pleasure, power) produces suffering—
which is ended through virtue and meditation
 Being virtuous requires us to respect ourselves
and others, and to be patient, moderate, and to
maintain a clear and balanced mind
 Personal enlightenment consists not in merely
following rules but in seeing one’s place in the
universe
Challenges to Ethical Theorizing:
Anti-foundationalism
 Morality is not a pursuit of abstract principles;
it is an attempt to give our lives order. This
requires that it assumes changeable values
 Instead of discussing morality in terms of acts
or judgments based on rules or principles, we
should focus on developing a good character
or maintaining personal relationships
Virtue Ethics
(Aristotle)
To
be moral means being sensitive to the
social and personal dimensions of life
“Rational” actions are not based on abstract
principles but on moderation (golden mean)
– Objection: this does not provide the specific
moral guidance needed in difficult situations
Feminist Ethics
Carol
Gilligan
Morality
Nel
Noddings
is not about abstract principles,
rights, or impartial (typically male) theories of
justice, but about caring for persons and
maintaining relationships (Gilligan)
The (feminine) virtue of caring for others in
specific situations is the basis upon which all
ethical thinking is grounded (Noddings)
Challenges to Ethical Theorizing:
Feminist Ethics and Virtue Ethics
Instead of discussing morality in terms of
acts or judgments based on rules or
principles, we should focus on
maintaining personal relationships or
developing a good character
Gender and Morality
Wollstonecraft
Women
Carol Gilligan
can be as rational about morality as
men if they receive a comparable education
Morality is not about abstract principles,
individual rights, equality, or impartial
(typically male) theories of justice, but about
caring for persons in specific situations and
maintaining relationships
Virtue Ethics
Morality
requires developing habits that Aristotle
promote human excellence (and happiness)
To be virtuous means being rational, sensitive
to the social and personal dimensions of life
Rational actions are not based on abstract
principles but on moderation (golden mean)
Virtue is linked to intentions, which are
in turn intelligible only within a unified
personal and communal narrative
MacIntyre
Implications
 Different ethical theories highlight different
features of moral situations. For example:
Abortion: what makes a being morally
significant? whose interests need to be
considered? what impact will the decision
have on the development of one’s character?
Euthanasia: is life always better than death?
should consequences or how we would like
to be treated influence our judgments?
Moral Responsibility
•Excusability: we are not morally responsible if:
•the consequences of actions are unexpected
•actions are constrained by external threats or
uncontrollable internal forces
•consequences of acts are beyond our control
•we do not have the ability or opportunity to
do otherwise
Moral Responsibility (continued)
•Determinism/Libertarianism/Compatibilism
•Determinism: we are not morally responsible
because our actions are not really free
•Libertarianism: we are morally responsible
because our actions are based on reasons (not
causes) over which we have control
•Compatibilism: we are morally responsible
when our actions are caused by our choices; if
caused by other forces, we are not responsible
Principles of a Moral Code
•A set of values becomes a person’s moral
code only as a result of personal reflection
•Ethical behavior is based on wanting to do
the right thing, not simply acting because we
were raised a certain way or people expect it
•Considering the consequences of our actions
helps us determine the moral value of actions
Social Philosophy
•Social philosophy is not ethics, because it is
not concerned with identifying a norm of good
conduct; nor is it politics, because it is not
concerned with describing how power is
expressed in institutions. Instead, it evaluates
institutional power in terms of moral principles
•Issues: how are individuals related to society?
•how is State authority justified?
•what is the role of government and law?
•what are justice, civil rights, freedom?
Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679)
 Fear of others in the state of nature
(apart from society) prompts people
to form governments through a social contract
 State power/authority (the sovereign) is based
on the choice of subjects that there be one will.
Since the sovereign determines what is right,
rebellion against the sovereign is unjustified
 As brutal as a State may be, it is always better
than having no State or government
John Locke (1632-1704)
 We have God-given rights to our
lives, liberty, property (e.g., bodies)
 We establish governments to clarify & protect
our natural rights. State authority is thus based
on the consent of the people, who can rebel
against the State if it fails to respect our rights
 Tacit consent is given by anyone who lives in
a country and is protected by its laws
Jean-Jacques Rousseau
(1712-78)
 I am obligated to obey the law only if
it is self-imposed. Externally-imposed laws are
based on force and are not morally legitimate
 The social contract is our tacit agreement to
abide by the general will, which is what we all
will for ourselves as members of a community
 Objection: consent is often uninformed and
unavoidable (Hume)
Contemporary Liberalism:
John Rawls: Justice as Fairness
 All citizens should share in a society’s wealth
and be given equal economic opportunities
 In a just society, rational individuals under a
veil of ignorance about their original position
in the society should endorse a theory that:
gives everyone as much liberty as possible
 allows for the unequal distribution of wealth only
when the existence of such inequalities benefits
everyone and is accessible to everyone

Critiques of Social Contract Theories
 Communitarianism: the State’s authority does
not depend on the consent of individuals;
rather, individuals depend on the State for
their fulfillment and identity (Aristotle, Hegel)
 Feminism: because women typically are
expected to focus on private (family)
matters, they are excluded from full
Susan Okin
participation in the social contract
Types of Justice
 Retributive justice: punishment/reward given to
someone for something he/she has done
 Distributive justice: the distribution of goods,
services, or responsibilities based on:
 productivity and merit (Plato)
 social utility, public interest (J. S. Mill)
 need and ability (socialism: Marx)
 equal opportunity (welfare liberalism: Rawls)
 ownership of property, entitlement, free choices
(classical liberalism: Nozick)
Karl Marx
(1818-85)
 Human beings are naturally inclined
to work and be sociable. Capitalism alienates
us from the products of our labor and thus
alienates us from ourselves and others
 Only communal ownership of property can
counteract social alienation
Types of Justice
 Retributive justice: punishment/reward given to
someone for something he/she has done
 Distributive justice: the distribution of goods,
services, or responsibilities based on:
 productivity and merit (Plato)
 social utility, public interest (J. S. Mill)
 need and ability (socialism: Marx)
 equal opportunity (welfare liberalism: Rawls)
 ownership of property, entitlement, free choices
(classical liberalism: Nozick)
Minimal State (Entitlement) Theory:
Robert Nozick
 We are entitled to use our property as we see
fit. The State’s legitimate power is limited to
preventing harm and protecting property rights
 Taxation for anything other than protection
(e.g, to impose a pattern to redistribute wealth)
is unjust because it ignores how goods are
acquired fairly through trade, labor, gifts, etc.
Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900):
Beyond Good and Evil
• Ethics itself is an expression of the impulse to
create value, the will to life, the will to power
• The creation of value is good because it
promotes advancement beyond the “human,
all too human.” By contrast, the failure to
create value, to “overcome man,” is bad
because it fails to “transvaluate values”
Master Morality
• The ethical impulse is perverted by those who
think that the good is determined by God or is
an intrinsic characteristic of actions instead of
a value for which we take responsibility
• The “good” man arouses fear because, in
acting passionately, he challenges others. The
“bad” man is despicable because he does not
make any difference in the creation of values
Slave Morality
• The slave resents those who determine
values and calls all who are morally creative
evil: “good” means what is equally beneficial
to even those who are timid and insignificant
• Slave (herd) values: pity, tolerance, modesty,
sympathy, humility, respect for others,
freedom, happiness—anything that avoids
the burden of real existence and having to
take responsibility for creating value
The Question of Selfless Conduct
HsunHuman Nature: we are either
tzu
inherently good (Mencius) or
inherently evil (Hsun-tzu); environmental
Mencius
influences divert us from our true natures
Psychological egoism: all actions are aimed
at promoting one’s own self-interest
– even in pity and charity, we think
of ourselves in another’s situation Hobbes
Altruism and Self-Interest
Concern
for others (benevolence) is not Joseph
incompatible with self-love, because we Butler
can be happy in achieving our aims (which
might include helping others)
To
Edward O.
Wilson
avoid concluding that egoism is not
falsifiable, sociobiology argues that
altruism can be seen in how it promotes
group survival
Reason and Moral Judgments
A factual
inclination toward self-interest Hume
does not imply that we ought to promote it
– Judgments of moral approval/disapproval
are based on feeling or sentiment, not reason
– Searle’s Reply: obligations are institutional
Emotivism/Prescriptivism: moral
claims are not true/false; they merely
express feelings or recommendations
A. J. Ayer
Kurt Baier: morality is not based on emotions
but on determining the best reasons for acting