Ethical Theory Overview

The belief that there are no objective moral truths, or that we cannot know them.

The view that moral truths are relative to individual opinions and beliefs.

The belief that morality is determined by a culture's norms and values.

The view that some moral rules are objectively true and apply universally, independent of opinions or cultures.

Societies may value individuals who are considered 'abnormal' or dysfunctional in other cultures, giving them a respected place in their social structure.

Cultures may have practices that are considered 'abnormal' in other societies but form the core of their social structure.

Some moral rules are essential for the survival and functioning of any society, regardless of cultural differences.

We should obey laws that are just and fair, but disobey laws that are unjust or violate moral principles.

A branch of ethics that focuses on the nature of actions themselves, emphasizing duty, rules, and rights, rather than consequences.

A deontological theory claiming that moral rules are based on the commands of a divine being, often communicated through sacred texts or revelation.

A deontological theory that suggests moral knowledge is derived from immediate, instinctive feelings or inner knowing, often referred to as 'gut feelings'.

A deontological theory that asserts moral rules are derived from rational thought and principles accessible to all, without reliance on external authority or intuition.

A reason-based deontological theory emphasizing the categorical imperative: act only according to maxims that you could rationally will to become universal laws.

An individual capable of reason, moral judgment, and self-awareness, able to comprehend and act upon moral principles.

According to Kant, moral laws must be justified through pure reason, not based on human nature or particular circumstances.

Moral laws apply to all rational beings, not just humans, because they are based on reason, not on specific characteristics.

Kant believed that moral laws must apply universally to all rational beings, regardless of culture or location.

Cultural relativism suggests that different cultures have different moral standards, while Kant argues that moral laws should be the same for all.

Motives, or the reasons behind an action, play a crucial role in determining its ethical value.

Moral motives are driven by principles of right and wrong, while nonmoral motives are based on personal desires or interests.

Inclinations are desires or impulses that arise from our human nature, including needs and vulnerabilities.

Kant believed that inclinations are unreliable guides for making ethical decisions because they are driven by self-interest.

Kant argued that inclinations often operate beneath our conscious awareness, making it difficult to discern true motives.

For Kant, a truly moral action would be driven by pure reason and the universal moral law, free from inclinations.

Using someone to achieve your own goals without respecting their autonomy or dignity.

Recognizing and respecting the inherent worth and value of a person, considering their goals and consent.

A moral principle stating that we should treat humanity, both in ourselves and others, always as an end and never merely as a means.

Things that are valuable in themselves, regardless of their consequences or usefulness.

Things that are valuable both in themselves and for their effects.

Things that are valuable only because of their results or what they lead to.

Kant's Formula of Humanity would deem robbing a bank morally wrong because it treats the bank employees and customers as mere means to the robber's goal of acquiring money.

Kant's Formula of Humanity might allow withdrawing money from a bank, as long as it's done with respect for the bank's autonomy and without coercion or manipulation.

Aristotle believed that becoming virtuous is difficult and requires consistent effort. It's not just about knowing what's right, but also cultivating the right habits, resisting temptations, and acting in accordance with reason.

Aristotle believed that virtue lies in finding the 'golden mean' - a balance between two extremes. For example, courage is the mean between cowardice and rashness.

Everyone has different strengths, weaknesses, and circumstances. Achieving virtue requires personal growth and continuous effort over time, making it a difficult and lifelong process.

Modifying genes in sperm, egg cells, or early embryos. These changes are passed down to future generations.

Modifying genes in body cells, excluding sperm and egg cells. Changes only affect the individual being treated.

Germline editing is more ethically controversial than somatic editing because consent cannot be obtained from future generations, and the changes are permanent.

Using gene editing to improve traits beyond medical necessity, such as increasing muscle mass or enhancing physical or mental abilities.

Gene editing can lead to inequality if it is only accessible to the wealthy, creating a divide between those who can afford enhancements and those who cannot.

This is one of Kant's formulations of the categorical imperative. It states that an action is morally permissible if and only if the maxim behind that action can be universalized without contradiction. In other words, it should be possible to make the maxim behind your action a universal law that everyone can follow without causing a logical contradiction.

Feldman argues that Kant's Formula of Universal Law fails to capture all moral truths, specifically by prohibiting some actions that are morally permissible, or even necessary, in certain situations.

This is an example Feldman uses to demonstrate the flaw in the universal law principle. Kant argues that lying is morally wrong because it cannot be universalized without contradiction (if everyone lied, trust would break down). However, Feldman asserts that lying to save a life can be morally justified in certain situations.

This is Kant's fundamental moral law. It is a command that applies to all rational beings and has no exceptions. Kant provides two formulations of the categorical imperative: the formula of universal law and the formula of humanity.

The Formula of Humanity is another formulation of Kant's categorical imperative. It states that all rational beings should be treated as ends in themselves, and never merely as means to an end. This means we must respect the inherent worth and dignity of all people, recognizing their capacity for reason and moral agency.

According to Kant, it is permissible to treat someone as a means to an end if their consent is given and their autonomy is respected. However, it is morally wrong to treat someone merely as a means, meaning not respecting their rational nature and treating them as a mere instrument for one's own purposes. This is disrespectful and violates their inherent worth as rational beings.

When Kant refers to 'humanity,' he is emphasizing the rational nature of human beings, especially their capacity for autonomous decision-making, moral reasoning, and self-governance. He believes this intrinsic worth is what gives humans dignity and makes them ends in themselves instead of merely tools for others.