Transcript Chapter Three - Nipissing University Word

Chapter Three
Ethical Theories:
Deontology and Teleology
Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan
3- 1
Deontology
From the Greek word “Deos,” meaning duty.
Deontological theories focus on duties and
principles.
Emphasis is placed on doing what is right,
based on ethical principles, regardless of the
outcome.
Best known is Emmanuel Kant’s “categorical
imperative.”
Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan
3- 2
Kantian Ethics
Emmanuel Kant
Kant’s four propositions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
It is our intentions, or will, that makes us morally
good.
Our will must be motivated by duty.
Duty means respecting moral law.
The basis of moral law is the categorical
imperative:
“Act only according to that maxim which you
can at the same time will that it should be a
universal moral law.”
Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan
3- 3
Determining Whether an Action
Conforms to the Categorical Imperative
Four questions to answer:
1. What is my motive for doing this?
2. What is the general principle
involved?
3. What is the universal form of this
principle?
4. Can this universal principle be made a
moral law without defeating its intent?
Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan
3- 4
Applying Kantian Ethics
Should you lie to a parent or partner about where you
are going so they will not worry?
1.
2.
3.
4.
I do not want him/her to be worried.
I will lie in order to save those who care about me
from worrying.
Everyone should always lie if the truth would
cause their loved ones to worry.
No. If this were a universal principle, people
would know they would not be told the truth and
therefore would always worry, whether there was
a reason to or not.
(Continued)
Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan
3- 5
Applying Kantian Ethics
Think of a behaviour you consider morally
questionable. Apply Kant’s four questions
to it.
1.
2.
3.
4.
What is my motive?
What is the general principle?
What is the universal principle?
Can the universal principle be made a moral
law?
What is your conclusion?
(Continued)
Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan
3- 6
Applying Kantian Ethics
Another way of considering the categorical
imperative is:
“Act so that you treat humanity always as an
end and never as a means only.”
What are some ways we treat others as a means
to something we want?
How should we treat them in order to show
respect for them as an end in themselves?
Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan
3- 7
Proponents’ and Critics’ View of
Kantian Ethics
What are some arguments that someone who
believed in Kantian ethics would give to
support this ethical framework?
What are some arguments that someone who
did not agree with Kantian ethics would
make to criticize this ethical framework?
Do you think Kantian ethics is closer to
Kohlberg’s theory of moral development or
Gilligan’s? Why?
Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan
3- 8
Teleology
From the Greek word “Telos,” meaning end or
goal.
Teleological theories focus on the possible
outcomes of an action.
Emphasis is placed on doing what will
maximize benefits and minimize harm to
individuals and to society as a whole.
Best known is John Stuart Mill’s utilitarianism.
Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan
3- 9
Utilitarian Ethics
Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill
“The greatest good (happiness) for the greatest
number.”
Happiness: the presence of pleasure and well-being
and the absence of pain or deprivation.
Higher order pleasures (i.e. intellectual and aesthetic
pleasures, concern for others) are preferable to
lower order pleasures (i.e. the gratification of
physical appetites).
Long-term consequences are more important than
short-term consequences.
The good of society as a whole is more important
than the pleasure of one or a few individuals.
Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan
3- 10
Analyzing Consequences
Predicting the outcome of an action for those
involved and society as a whole requires research
and sensitivity. The following must be
considered:
1. The immediate consequences for everyone
involved.
2. The amount and comparative value of the
pleasure or harm for everyone involved.
3. The indirect and far-reaching results for society
as a whole.
Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan
3- 11
Act-Utilitarianism
Considers the immediate, foreseeable
consequences to the individuals involved.
Assigns a numbering system to measure the
quantity and quality of pleasure/pain for each
person.
Whichever action has the higher total outcome
of happiness is the right choice.
(Continued)
Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan
3- 12
Act-Utilitarianism
Example: You want to go to a movie with a friend instead of
preparing your contribution for your study group
Course of
action
Go to
movie
You
Your
Friend
+8
enjoy show
Prepare for
−5
study
(Won’t feel
group
guilty)
Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan
Study
Group
(3 people)
+5
likes you
−5 (×3)
(more work
for them)
−5
(go with
someone
else)
+5 (×3)
(less work
for them)
Total
13 −15
= −2
−10 +15
= +5
3- 13
Rule-Utilitarianism
Formulates rules based on long-range
consequences to society, rather than to
individuals.
Example: People must honour their
agreed-upon obligations (i.e., to study
group) because otherwise people could
not trust each other and they could not
work together.
Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan
3- 14
Proponents’ and Critics’ View
of Utilitarian Ethics
What are some arguments that someone who
believed in utilitarian ethics would give to
support this ethical framework?
What are some arguments that someone who
did not agree with utilitarian ethics would
make to criticize this ethical framework?
Do you think this theory is closer to Kohlberg’s
theory of moral development or Gilligan’s?
Why?
Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan
3- 15
Combining Ethical Approaches
• Ethics of Purpose
• Ethics of Principles
• Ethics of Consequences
These can be combined in the following ways,
to make ethical decisions:
1. We should pursue our purpose unless it treats
persons only as means or unless the consequences
cause more harm than good.
(Continued)
Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan
3- 16
Combining Ethical Approaches
2. We should act on principle unless it will cause
more harm than good or unless it contradicts our
purpose.
3. We should do what causes the most good and
least harm for all concerned unless it means
treating some persons only as means and
committing acts which cannot be universalized or
unless it destroys our potential to achieve our
purpose.
Copyright  2010 Pearson Education Canada / J A McLachlan
3- 17