Ethics and Ethical Systems
Download
Report
Transcript Ethics and Ethical Systems
COMP 381
What is ethics?
philosophical study of morality
Investigation of the nature, causes, or
principles of reality, knowledge, or
values, based on logical reasoning
rather than empirical methods.
What is ethics?
philosophical study of morality
rules of conduct describing what people
in a society should and should not do
Society
Association of people
organized
under a system of rules
designed to advance the good of its members
over time
Rawls, A Theory of Justice
What is the common good?
James Moor’s core values
Life, happiness, ability to accomplish goals
Declaration of Independence
Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness
John Finnis’s intrinsic goods
Life, knowledge, play, aesthetic experience,
sociability, religion, practical reasonableness
Ethics
What choices that people make are part
of ethics?
Must be voluntary
Must relate to morality
What is the fundamental purpose of any
moral system?
To advance the common good
What rules of conduct did you learn
growing up?
Ethical Dilemma
Apparent conflict between moral
imperatives
New technologies can open up new
social problems and new ethical
dilemmas
Examples?
Can new technologies change morality?
Studying Ethics
Three Approaches
Descriptive ethics: what people believe to be
right and wrong
Normative ethics: what people should
believe is right and wrong
Philosophical ethics (meta-ethics): looks at
the logic behind the decisions
Relationship between normative and
philosophical ethics?
Examples where descriptive and
normative ethics differ?
Theories that we will look at
Ethical relativism – very briefly
Individual (or subjective)
Cultural
Normative ethical theories
Deontological (duty-based)
○ Kantianism
○ Contractualism
Teleological (result-based)
○ Utilitarianism
Hybrid theories
Social justice
Just consequentialism
Criteria for Ethical Systems
balance of justice and mercy
protect individual freedoms and rights
no individual can/should impede or hurt
another individual
recognizes unethical laws
flexibility
dealing with
relativism
societal balance
Ethical Relativism
Is there anything universally right or
wrong?
How is right or wrong decided?
Individual Relativism
Is this the same as tolerance?
For
Well-meaning, intelligent people can
disagree
Against
Does not provide moral distinction.
○ What does morality mean?
Not based on reason
People are good at rationalization
Cultural Relativism
Consider Hampden-Turner & Trompenaars work
For
Different social contexts
Arrogance to judge
Are there examples when we should impose views
on a society?
What if people have the right to leave?
Against
Evolution of practices
Societies do share core values
Normative Ethical Theories
Deontological: based on the sense of
duty
Right because of the act
Teleological: based on the result
Right because of the result
Deontological Theory
What is it?
Based on our duties and responsibilities
Actions are fundamentally right or wrong
Classic Examples
Kantianism (Kant)
1724-1804
Contractualism (Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau)
1588-1679
1632-1704
1712-1788
Kantianism: Ethics of Duty
Duty as freely imposing obligation on
one’s own self
Duty is internal
We impose duty on ourselves
What we SHOULD do, not what we
WANT to do
Kant’s Categorical Imperatives
Universality: “Always act in such a way
that the maxim of your action can be
willed as a universal law of humanity.”
Respect: “Always treat humanity,
whether in yourself or in other people,
as an end in itself and never as a mere
means.”
Are these the same? Which do you
prefer?
Strengths of Kantianism
Rational
Produces universal moral guidelines
Treats all people as moral equals
Criticisms
Practical
Actions may need to be characterized by
multiple rules and there is no way to resolve
a conflict between rules
Allows no exceptions
Philosophical
Moral minimalism: requirements are not
heartfelt
Moral alienation: alienated from feelings
Contractualism
Social Contract Theory
Morality consists in the set of rules,
governing how people are to treat one
another, that rational people will agree to
accept, for their mutual benefit, on the
condition that others follow those rules
as well.
James Rachel, The Elements of Moral Philosophy
Rights and Duties
Duty not to interfere with others rights
Negative and positive rights
Negative right: duty is to not interfere
Positive right: duty is to provide
Absolute and limited rights
Typically, negative rights are absolute and
positive are limited
Strengths of Contractualism
Framed in terms of rights
Explains acting out of self-interest when
there is no common agreement
Provides framework for moral issues
dealing with government (civil
disobedience)
Criticism
Doesn’t address actions that can be
characterized multiple ways
Doesn’t address conflicting rights
Comparing the Two Theories
Both believe that there are universal
moral rules
Basis of those moral rules
Kant
○ can be universalized
○ based on duties
Contract
○ would benefit the community
○ based on rights
Teleological Theory
What is it?
Something is good based on its
consequences
Primary example: Utilitarianism
Jeremy Bentham
1748-1832
John Stuart Mill
1806-1873
Utilitarianism
Greatest Happiness Principle
Compute the costs and benefits
Simple calculation: do positives outweigh
the negatives?
Two forms
Act – judge the consequence of a specific
act
Rule – judge the consequence of the
generalized rule
Strengths
Focus on happiness
Down to earth
Appeals to many people
Comprehensive
Problems of Act that Rule Addresses
Too much work to make a decision on
each act
Susceptible to happenstance
Criticisms
Ignores our sense of duty
Range of effects that one must consider
Calculus requires that we balance very
different aspects
Unjust distribution of good results