Transcript Philosophical Ethics - Bucknell University

Philosophical Ethics
Johnson Ch 2 and Baase Ch 1.4
Overall Goal
Decide which actions are “acceptable” and
which are not
Based upon two tenents:
People are rational
People make free choices
Why is this not a trivial task?
Categories of Situations
It is dangerous to view ethical situations
merely as right and wrong, rather:
Ethically Obligatory
Ethically Prohibited
Ethically Acceptable (neither of above)
Notion of Harm
Relatively simple:
If someone is harmed, action is ethically
prohibited
What are limitations with this notion?
Dialectic Process
Put forth a claim of rightness/wrongness to
see how well it holds up
Suppose you claim that human life has value
and should never be intentionally ended
Conscious and suffering?
Unconscious and brain damaged?
Terminally ill?
Young vs. old?
Capital punishment?
Descriptive vs. Normative Claims
What are each?
What are the limits of each?
Negative vs. Positive Rights
What are they?
What different requirements are imposed?
Consider one’s “right to life”
What does each right mean in this context?
Can we have both? At the same time?
Ethical Relativism
What is the basic idea being expressed here?
Fairly well supported:
Cultures vary in what is considered right/wrong
Same culture varies over time
Upbringing: parents, schools, peers, work
What are problems with this perspective?
Closer analysis…
Moral beliefs are shaped by society
Says nothing of their right/wrongness
Self contradictory:
By stating that there is no universal
right/wrong, you are asserting one…
Case: Selling computer to Hitler
What is the value of Relativism?
Divine Command Theory
“Good” actions are those aligned with the
will of God,
“Bad” actions are contrary to will of God
Catching Up
Where have we been and were are we going?
Notion of Harm
Descriptive Claims
Normative Claims
Ethical Relativism
Utilitarianism (Bentham, Mill)
Focus on outcomes, not on motivations
What is the metric or goal here?
Need an important distinction!
Instrumental vs. Intrinsic goods
Many laws are utilitarian based…
Act-Utilitarianism
Emphasis on act and its net impact
No concern for “rules”
Example: State wants to replace a curvy
stretch of highway along the outskirts of
town with a new, more straight roadway
Is building the highway a good action?
Benefit (happiness) Costs (unhappiness)
Highway Analysis
Costs: $31M
Eminent Domain on 150 homes $20M
Construction Costs $10M
Loss of Habitat $1M
Benefits: $39M
15,000 cars save 1 mile ($0.40/mile) $6,000 daily
Highway expected to last 25 years
Rule-Utilitarianism
Still focused on consequences:
Adopt moral rules that when followed by
everyone, lead to greatest happiness
Certain actions (murder, theft) decrease
happiness, so we devise rules against them
More strict than act-util
An example
Worm Virus Example
Blaster Worm: Aug 2003
Infected millions of PCs worldwide
Reboot every few minutes
Nachi Worm: spread the same way
Located and destroyed Blaster
Automatically downloaded MS patch
Continued to spread
Worm Analysis
If I can create a helpful worm that destroys
harmful worm, will people be happier?
Benefits?
Drawbacks?
Conclusions:
For the virus situation?
For Rule-Utilitarianism?
Utilitarianism Summary
What are some overall problems?
What are some overall benefits?
Deontological Theories (Kant)
Actions are guided by moral laws
Morality must be based upon reason
Can explain why an action is right or wrong
Places emphasis on duty and rules that
should be followed, ignores consequences
Kantian Origins
What is always good without qualification?
How about “intelligence” or “courage” ?
In what ways might these be “not good” ?
Only answer to “what is always good” is good
will
Even if good will leads to unintended outcomes…
Dutifulness
Familiar struggle between what we want to
do and what we ought to do
What we want is irrelevant
A dutiful person is compelled to act out of
respect for some moral rule
What then, is a moral rule?
Kant’s Moral Rules
Universality, duty (not relativism)
Actions are intrinsically good because they
follow from logic
Categorical Imperative
Kantian Example: Carla, unmarried
working mother, completing college degree
Kantian Example
Full time job, taking 2 evening courses
Upon graduation, she will have more time
for her child and a better job
One course require 4 long reports
Carla earns A’s on the first 3
But now has overtime at work, no time to
complete last report
Purchases a report on WWW and turns it in
Kantian Summary
Advantages:
It is rational
Produces universal moral guidelines: rules
Everyone is to be treated as morally equal
Disadvantages:
No single rule characterizes all actions
No way to resolve conflicts among rules
No exceptions to moral laws
Social Contract Theory
(Hobbes, Rawls)
2003 coalition forces removed the
government of Saddam Hussein
Police disappeared
Residents looted
Store merchants sold AK-47s to citizens
Is this reaction typical or atypical?
Why or why not?
Social Contract Theory
It is right for me to act according to a moral
rule if rational people would collectively
accept it as binding because of its benefit to
the community.
Need to establish a set of moral rules
Need a government capable of enforcing rules
Social Contract Solves Anarchy
People agree to cooperation
We all agree to follow guidelines
Moral Rules: rules that are necessary if we
are to gain the benefit of social living
Revolves around a set of Moral Rights:
Life, liberty, property (lately, privacy)
Do these sound familiar to anyone??
Social Contract Example
DVD rental chain uses computers to track
rentals by each customer.
Customer that rents large number of Disney
titles is likely to have children
Sells cust profiles to mail order companies
Customers receive unsolicited catalogs
Some customers happy, other unhappy
Social Contract Benefits
Framed in the language of individual rights
Explains why people act out of self-interest
in absence of common agreement.
Do I ride the bus or drive my car in a gas
shortage?
Provides a clear ethical analysis of issues
regarding relationships between people and
government (crime and punishment)
Social Contract Drawbacks
No one has signed the contract
Actions can be characterized multiple ways
(shared with Deontological)
No guidance when analysis reveals
conflicting rights (abortion)
Unjust to those who cannot maintain their
part of the contract
Overall Ethics Summary
We have several workable theories:
Share concept that moral good is objective
Derived through logical reasoning based on fact
Important issues and distinctions
What is the motivation for a particular action?
What criteria do we use to determine ethicality?
Do we focus on the individual or the group?
Comparison of Workable Theories
Theory
Motivation
Criteria
Focus
Kantianism
Dutifulness
Rules
Individual
Act-Utility
Consequences Actions
Group
Rule-Utility
Conseq/Duty Rules
Group
Soc Contract Rights
Rules
Individual
Looking Forward
We have four workable ethical theories
We discover morality through rational process
None is perfect, each has flaws
We need to decide when to apply each as
we attempt to fill policy vacuums
Technology is the single greatest force
behind creating policy vacuums today!