Transcript Thiroux_PPTs_Chpt3

Ethics: Theory and Practice
Jacques P. Thiroux
Keith W. Krasemann
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Chapter Three
Nonconsequentialist (Deontological)
Theories of Morality
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Nonconsequentialist Theories
• Consequences do not, and should not, enter
into our judging of whether actions or people
are moral or immoral
• What is moral or immoral is decided upon the
basis of some standard or standards of
morality other than consequences
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Act Nonconsequentialist Theories
• Major assumption: There are no general
moral rules or theories, but only particular
actions, situations, and people about which
we cannot generalize
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Act Nonconsequentialist Theories
– One must approach each situation
individually to decide the right action to
take
– Decisions are “intuitionistic,” which means a
person decides on a particular situation
based on his or her intuition about what is
right
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Intuitionism
• Reasons in support of moral intuitionism:
– Any well-meaning person seems to have an
immediate sense of right and wrong
– Human beings had moral ideas and
convictions long before a system of ethics
was created
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Intuitionism
– Our reasoning upon moral matters usually is
used to confirm our intuitions
– Our reasoning can go wrong in relation to
moral issues as well as others, and then we
must fall back on our moral insights and
intuitions
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Intuitionism
• Arguments against Intuitionism
– Intuition lacks scientific or philosophical
respectability
– There is no proof that we have an inborn,
innate sense of morality
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Intuitionism
• Arguments against Intuitionism
– Intuition is immune to objective criticism,
because it applies only to the possessor
– Human beings without moral intuition have
no others or establish them on other
grounds
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Criticism of Act
Nonconsequentialism
• How can we know, with no other guides, that
what we feel will be morally correct?
• How will we know when we have acquired
sufficient facts to make a moral decision?
• With morality so highly individualized, how
can we know we are doing the best thing for
everyone else involved in a particular
situation?
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Criticism of Act Nonconsequentialism
• Can we really rely upon nothing more than
our momentary feelings to help us make our
moral decisions?
• How will we be able to justify our actions
except by saying that it felt like the right thing
to do?
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Rule Nonconsequentialist Theories
• There are or can be rules that are the only
basis for morality and consequences do not
matter
• The following of the rules is, itself, moral
• Morality cannot be applied to consequences
that ensue from following the rules
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Divine Command Theory
• The Divine Command Theory states that
morality is based on something higher that
mundane human events
• Morality is based on the existence of an allgood being or beings who are supernatural
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Divine Command Theory
• They have communicated to human beings
what they should and should not do
morally
• Morality requires humans to follow those
commands
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Criticisms of the Divine Command
Theory
• The theory does not provide a rational
foundation for the existence of a supernatural
being and therefore not for morality either
• Even if we could prove conclusively the
existence of a supernatural being, how could
we prove that this being was morally
trustworthy?
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Criticisms of the Divine Command
Theory
• How are we to interpret these commands
even if we accept the existence of a
supernatural?
• Rules founded upon the Divine Command
Theory may be valid, but they need to be
justified on some other, more rational basis
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Kant’s Duty Ethics
• Kant believed that nothing was good in
itself except as a good will
– Will is the unique human ability to act in
accordance with moral rules, laws, or
principles regardless of interests or
consequences
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Establishing Morality by Reasoning
Alone
• Kant argued that it is possible by reasoning
alone to set up valid absolute moral rules that
have the same force as indisputable
mathematical truths
– Such truths must be logically consistent, not selfcontradictory
– They must also be universalizable
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Imperatives
• The Categorical Imperative: An act is immoral
if the rule that would authorize it cannot be
made into a rule for all human beings to
follow
• The Practical Imperative: No human being
should be thought of or used merely as a
means for someone else’s ends; each human
being is a unique end
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Duty Rather Than Inclination
• Once moral rules have been discovered to
be absolutes, human beings must obey
them out of a sense of duty rather than
follow their inclinations
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Criticism of Kant’s Duty Ethics
• Although Kant showed that some rules would
become inconsistent when universalized, this
does not tell us which rules are morally valid
• Kant never showed us how to resolve conflicts
between equally absolute rules
• Kant did not distinguish between making an
exception to a rule and qualifying a rule
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Criticism of Kant’s Duty Ethics
• Some rules can be universalized without
inconsistency yet still have questionable moral
value
– Kant answered this criticism by means of the
reversibility criterion, that is, the would-youwant-this-done-to-you idea (Golden Rule)
– But the reversibility criterion suggests a reliance
upon consequences, which goes against Kant’s
system
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Criticism of Kant’s Duty Ethics
• Kant seems to have emphasized duties over
inclinations, in stating that we must act from a
sense of duty rather than from our
inclinations
– But he gave us no rule for what we should do
when our inclinations and duties are the same
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Ross’s Prima Facie Duties
• Ross agreed with Kant as to the establishing of
morality on a basis other than consequences
but disagreed with Kant’s overly absolute rules
• He established Prima Facie duties that all
human beings must adhere to, unless there
are serious reasons why they should not
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Ross’s Prima Facie Duties
• Some Prima Facie duties:
– Fidelity
– Reparation
– Gratitude
– Justice
– Beneficence
– Self-improvement
– Nonmaleficence
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Principles to Resolve
Conflicting Duties
• Always act in accord with the stronger
prima facie duty
• Always act in such a way as to achieve the
greatest amount of prima facie rightness
over wrongness
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Criticisms of Ross’s Theory
• How are we to decided which duties are prima
facie?
• On what basis are we to decide which take
precedence over the rest?
• How can we determine when there is
sufficient reason to override one prima facie
duty with another?
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
Difficulty with Consequentialist Theories
in General
• Consequentialist theories demand that we
discover and determine all of the
consequences of our actions or rules
– That is virtually impossible
• Do consequences or ends constitute all of
morality?
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
General Criticisms of
Nonconsequentialist Theories
• Can we avoid consequences when we are
trying to set up a moral system?
• Is it entirely possible to exclude
consequences from an ethical system?
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
General Criticisms of
Nonconsequentialist Theories
• What is the real point of any moral system
if not to do good for oneself, others, or both
and if not to create a moral society in which
people can create and grow peacefully with
a minimum of unnecessary conflict?
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
General Criticisms of
Nonconsequentialist Theories
• How do we resolve conflicts among moral
rules that are equally absolute?
• Any system that operates on a basis of such
rigid absolutes as does rule
nonconsequentialism closes the door on
further discussion of moral quandaries
Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.