Transcript Chapter 3: How Can I Know What is Right?

Chapter 3: How Can I
Know What is Right?
Introduction





Ethical skeptics – doubt whether there is such
a thing as moral truth
Ethical relativists – deny that there are any
universally valid moral principles
Ethical absolutists – claim there are moral
absolutes
Teleological ethical theories –
consequences determine the rightness of an
action
Deontological ethical theories – advocate
doing what is good regardless of the
consequences
Kant and the Categorical
Imperative


Immanuel Kant (1724 – 1804)
Published The Critique of Pure Reason,
which revolutionized western philosophy
Groundwork of the Metaphysics of
Morals
Immanuel Kant



Good will is the only thing that can be
conceived as good without qualification
Action of duty has moral worth not in the
purpose to be attained, but by the
principle of volition irrespective of desire
Duty is the necessity to act out of
reverence for the law
Groundwork of the Metaphysics of
Morals
Immanuel Kant

The Categorical Imperative

“I ought never to act except in such a way
that I can also will that my maxim should
become a universal law.”
Utilitarianism




Jeremy Bentham (1748 – 1832) proposed
the ethical theory of utilitarianism
Utilitariansim – teleological theory that
what makes an action right are its
consequences
John Stuart Mill (1806 – 1873)- “The
greatest happiness for the greatest
number”
Hedonism – the highest good is pleasure
What Utilitarianism Is
John Stuart Mill



Actions are right in proportion to their
promotion of happiness and wrong as they
tend to produce pain
The ultimate sanction of utility is
subjective– the conscientious feeling of
the mind
Evidence that something is desirable is
that people desire it
Revaluation of Values




Some relate associate morality with religion
Ethical nihilism – idea that there is no answer
to what is right
Ethical emotivism – claim that moral
judgments express the appraiser’s attitudes of
approval or disapproval
Friedrich Nietzsche (1844 – 1900) believed that
religion and human reason had failed to answer
what is right
Beyond Good and Evil
Friedrich Nietzsche


Criticizes past attempts to understand
morality
Criticizes morality as defined by classes in
the social system
On the Genealogy of Morality
Friedrich Nietzsche


“Good” was not originally “unegoistic actions”,
but distinction of the noble class as opposed to
those who are common, vulgar, or “bad”
Slave revolt in morality




Inversion of the aristocratic value equation by the
Jews
Ressentiment – recover losses through imaginary
revenge
The good is those who are powerless, sick, poor, etc.
?????????????????????????
The Ethic of Care


Carol Gilligan proposed that there is a
distinction between male and female
concepts of morality
While men emphasize reciprocity in
relationships, women emphasize response,
such as care, love, and trust, etc.
Caring
Nel Noddings

Natural and ethical caring


Obligation





“I must” and “I want”
Moral imperative
Dependent upon relationship
Right and Wrong
Problem of Justification
Women and Morality: Virtue
Moral Relativism


Is there a balance between a moral
relativism that holds all human actions as
equal in moral worth and a moral
universalism or absolutism that holds to
one set of moral values?
David Wong attempts to find this middle
ground
Relativism
David Wong



Meta-Ethical Relativism – the doctrine of
relativity of moral truth and justifiability
Normative Relativism – one should never pass
judgment on others with different values or try
to conform them to one’s own
Wong proposes a middle ground of


not holding to one single morality without denying
that some moralities might be false or inadequate
Allowing to pass judgment on significantly different
values