Introduction to Ethics

• The chapter explores the concept of man's humanization of himself through ethics
• The chapter defines ethics, enumerates its branches, identifies its objects, differentiates it from religious morality, and reasons why one should lead a moral life

Introduction to Ethics

• It's common to hear remarks like "acts of immorality" or "unethical demeanor" when actions clash with social norms
• Understanding the roots of morality and ethics helps clarify their meaning
• According to Abel (1994), "ethics" comes from the Greek word ethos meaning "custom" in singular and "character" in plural (ethe)
• "Morality" has a parallel origin from the Latin word mos
• Mos, like Greek ethos, means "custom" in the singular
• It also represents "character" in the plural (mores)
• Ethics and morality can be used interchangeably.
• Interchangeability between ethics and morality depends on the context
• You shouldn't replace ethical with moral in phrases like "government officials ought to be moral in spending people's money"
• You also shouldn't replace moral with ethical in phrases like "it is quite unethical for health practitioners to ask patients for personal information"
• The difference between ethics and morality varies with the severity of the offense against social standards
• Ethics, as a philosophy branch, studies the morality of human action
• Abel (1994) defines ethics (morality) as being concerned with what we do (custom) and the kind of person we are
• Ethics justifies what makes an action good or evil. Ethics also prescribes what one should pursue

The Nature of Ethics

• Conventional knowledge, such as skills learned in grammar or physical education, can be acquired by students
• Students studying mathematics develop logical knowledge
• Students in natural sciences and history classes gain factual information
• In ethics, the knowledge acquired relates to moral reasoning
• A question like "Vote buying is bad!" is something that means that the objection relies on social agreement rather than fact
• Saying that vote buying is bad becomes conventional, a result of social consensus
• Conventionality is a basic nature of ethics
• It means something's morally or ethically objectionable simply because society dictates it
• Sociology reveals that groups rarely have identical moral codes, which is why societies fall under ethical and moral conventionality
• Logical reasoning is another feature in Ethics as a discipline
• Socrates surmised that a person who knows the good lives a virtuous life, equating virtuous life as the manifestation of knowledge
• Saying that someone knows the good is equivalent to saying that one leads an ethical life
• Ethics prescribes what actions are good or bad, using terms like "must," "ought to," and "should"
• Logic backs up it's prescribed actions
• Ethics aims to appeal to rationality rather than emotion when prescribing actions
• Moral philosophy involves moral verdict based on careful consideration
• Philosophers like Plato, Aristotle, Kant, Bentham, and Singer have contributed moral thoughts.
• Their moral thoughts became recognized and respected in various fields like politics, medicine, and the environment
• Ethics is also normative, it sets the standard

Branches of Ethics

• Ethics has different specializations with different focuses
• Ethics, as a philosophy branch, divides into normative and meta-ethics
• Normative ethics divides into ethical theory and applied ethics
• Virtue, utilitarian, duty, and natural law ethics are common ethical theories
• These theories give moral justification for the goodness or evilness of actions
• Figures such as Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Kant, and Bentham are authoritative in their moral insights
• Their moral exhortations set standards for actions' worth which is why they are referred to as normative ethics
• Another type of ethics under the normative category is applied ethics
• Applied ethics applies to issues like the death penalty, animal rights, the environment, global justice, child brides, homosexuality, and abortion.
• Environment, business, and medicine are fields where ethics are applied
• Arne Naess’s philosophy applies to environmental issues
• Singer and Rawls's philosophy are applied on animals and global justice
• Meta-ethics are taken by students studying moral philosophy in depth
• Meta-ethics include moral epistemology, semantics, and metaphysics
• Mabloc (2010) describes Meta-ethics as the study of the meaning and epistemological foundations of moral statements
• A.J. Ayer argues that moral judgment belongs to meta-ethics
• Ayer also views moral judgments as mere expression of emotion (according to Abel, 1994)

Material and Formal Object of Ethics

• The material object of ethics is the object it deals with
• Ethics takes human act as its material object
• Not all human actions qualify as material objects of ethics
• Agapay (1991) states that actions considered as human acts must have the essential elements of knowledge, freedom, and free will
• Actions like heartbeats or stomach motions don't count as human acts, rather termed as simple acts of man
• Ethics is concerned with morality of human acts
• Morality is the state of being good or evil of human actions
• Moral theories help determine whether an issue or act is good or bad
• Ethics provides moral character to issues and requires elements like conventionality, logic, prescription, and normativity to determine issue morality

Ethics and Religion

• Ethics and religion both teach us about morality
• Ethics is a philosophical discipline that relies on reason, logic, and experience to justify beliefs
• Fernandez (2018) says that the beliefs are concerning good or bad
• Abel (1994) says that Theological ethics assumes answers are given by revelation
• When confronted by a moral situation like abortion, ethics relies on reason whereas religion relies on faith, scripture etc
• Ethics uses reason, logic, and experience to make conclusions while religion uses sources like divine will, scripture, and religious authorities

Why Should We Be Moral?

• This book wants its readers to be good to their environment
• Includes non-human, human, and inner environments
• It is good to be beneficial to the land and fellow human beings
• Being good involves altruism or prioritizing others, even if it reduces our own survival chances
• There is a belief that since man was created by God, man should be good as borne by the Judeo-Christian belief
• An answer is to live in harmony with the Non-Human Environment, the Human Environment, and the self with natural laws
• People must find the reasoning behind why man should be good

Chapter 2: The Non-Human Environment

Introduction

• Man is biologically driven to sustain life, existing in three specific environments: non-human, human, and inner environment.
• The non-human environment encompasses everything external, excluding humans, like trees, rivers and animals.
• These external elements form part of man's resources for survival.
• Man deals with fellow humans, sharing same genetics, creating a challenging landscape.
• The competition for limited resources makes the human environment challenging compared to non-human.
• The inner environment is unique to humans entailing a metaphysical view of the world through interactions with the previous two environments
• This inner world is unique, the author believes, so he advocates for man to be good in all mentioned environments
• Being good with physical & non-human environment and improving the world for future generations are valuable
• To help, the author presents "Deep Ecology," highlighting that while genes mandate survival, reason allows humans to transcend natural tendencies

Animal Ethics

• God entrusted world to mankind based on Genesis which means mankind has dominion over all of creation
• Historical context mentions humans always having an important relationship with animals
• Animals are a chief protein source and machines did most work prior to machine industrialization
• Today, new sources that have been found are monkeys in Thailand trained to pick coconuts and K-9 dogs for detecting explosives in conflict zones etc
• Farms have appeared with advanced tech to meet increasing populations instead of relying on hunting
• The quality of animals or how humane they have been treated is not the primary concern
• The core problem with our treatment of animals in medical and drug laboratories in which we do not know how these animals are suffering
• We should concern ourselves with how we treat animals as we have a moral obligation to provide good treatment

Carving Animal Ethics

• Among world religions, only Buddhism explicitly condemns animal slaughter
• Peter Singer crafted a system of ethical principles regarding treatment of animals
• It was difficult because most ethical principles only talked about how to be good to oneself or others
• Jeremy Bentham instead posed the question that animals should have their right to sensitivity to suffering questioned instead
• This would be more effective instead of asking if they can reason or understand speech
• Singer first debunked speciesism to form animal ethics out of a dominantly anthropocentric ethical climate
• Mappe and Zembaty (1974) describe speciesism as prejudice towards one's own species and bias against members of other species
• Singer also used the relationships between animal and man to understand and debunk speciesism

Speciesism Against Sentientism

• Singer's animal moral status based on sentience arguments was dissented by Carl Cohen in 1990
• Animals lack rights because they lack mental capacity to deliberately have a moral judgment
• Cohen concludes animals do not have moral stature because they lack rational capability, regardless of sentience
• Rationality, in Cohen's understanding, means being capable of both understanding and executing morality
• In conclusion, animals lack such qualifications to be equal to rights of humans

Speciesism Against Sentientism

• Singer argues that speciesism is no different than racism and sexism
• Since sexism and racism are abhorred, speciesism should be too due to it founding inequality between human and animal species
• Cohen argues that the parallelism falls flat.
• He says unlike speciesism, racism has no rational ground and neither does sexism
• After defense of speciesism, Cohen says humans have obligation to enlarge use of animals in research to protect human subjects
• Cohen's speciesism can apply to animals used in all elements of commerce
• This means humans can use animals any way, without rights

Speciesism Against Sentientism

• Singer did not argue for certain human rights such as the right to vote to be extended to animals
• Instead, Singer made a claim for equal consideration
• The claim states that animals needs should be considered in the decision process
• The basic principle of equality does not mean that animals must be treated exactly the same way
• What this signifies is equality of consideration while still considering the differences of what different groups need
• Singer says it might be seen in practice when a dog must mark a territory while a human does not, indicating different treatment that considers the needs

Speciesism Against Sentientism

• Understanding that taking the animal's welfare into account can conflict and clash with human society
• This leads to the question what becomes of humans in the world with what they need with the use of animals versus the suffering of not providing this
• There are various philosophies of ethics in understanding our relationship as provided by Louis P. Pojman (2000)

No-Status Theory

• The no-status theory states that animals lacked rights and moral status due to lacking a soul
• Rene Descartes, a philosopher, developed the theory
• The soul according to Descartes is necessary for consciousness which meant animals cannot feel pain
• Animals are regarded as sophisticated machines that just act on instinct rather than feelings or consciousness
• In the no-status theory, animals do not have rights and the humans have no obligations, seeing them as resources to dispose of

Indirect-Obligation Theory

• It is viewed in Western philosophy that animals do not have inherent rights, humans must treat them kindly
• Humans having duties to rational beings such as God and its people justifies what's rational with treating an animal in a good manner
• Cruelty is seen as something that can be turned inward as humans cruelly begin to treat other humans which is why good treatment is a pre requisite
• A weakness is rationality being an absolute requirement to being considered morally valuable
• However, hurting others is bad in itself, meaning we should ameliorate and eliminate pain regardless

Equal Stats View and Split-Level Theory

• The Equal-Status View, says animals and humans have no rational for separation
• Seen in the quote "A rat is a pig is a dog is a boy..."
• The foremost proponent Tom Regan says usage of animals should be abolished
• A goal is to also allow grazing however all these uses are seen to be infringe on animal's rights in PETA
• Split-Level Theory is about correcting 4 prior theories
• Martin Benjamin and Domald VanDeVeer aim to correct theories at the rational level for humans and moral consideration and equal status and sentience

Split-Level Theory

• Split acknowledges some animals like chimps can have self awareness and some humans such as people in vegetative states do not
• Emphasizes the moral importance of sentience and rationality in the interspecies morality and the human respect
• The difference that a theory distinguishes between trivial versus important needs
• A need like important sustenance for the human will override trivial needs such as the need for taste
• If animals need health and safety for sustained life, their right is greater than having humans meet their needs if good options are there
• A good thing to do it provide humane shelter so those animals can be set free and have a chance to live unmolested

Split-Level Theory

• This level of theory is better suited towards animals who have a nervous system that enables suffering and consciousness
• Termites should be killed because they threaten our well being

Chapter 3: Man and the Natural World

Introduction

• Morality is meant to be about dealing with others and in order to be moral, you must be aware
• Duty of ethics of Immanuel Kant describes how treating others as mere servants becomes considered immoral
• In the 70's, philosophical views started to extend beyond the need to focus on environment, therefore environmentalism was born in philosophy
• We must be able to access the anthropocentric environmental ethics, by dealing with consumers
• Environmental issues are at the forefront right now and new thinkers are advocating for us to change our perspective and how we deal with others

Anthropocentric Environmental Ethics

• Laws protect the environment, but humans are considered the privileged being
• Laws for plant and animal species that are deemed special can be enacted to ensure the non extinction, etc
• An issue is moral loopholes in law. This relates to humans and their interests in society
• Anthropocentric sees the world to function on behalf of humanity. Ex, we do not harm ground water to keep grounds clean
• An appeal happens for aesthetic value and there happens apprehension for further generations
• It is man based centered with the primary goal for nature to benefit human interest

Anthropocentric Environmental Ethics

• Humans have been dealing with the environment and there are many different perspectives on non-human things
• Human entertainment is more important than animals suffering
• Mountains and the mineral mining are just not equal, causing there to be disparity
• Nonliving and living are not valued equally
• Nature and what does not contribute to man is what we should focus on

Anthropocentric Environmental Ethics

• In defense of the theory, is the concept that things are for humans, like penguins being for entertainment,
• Damage of the environment is irrelevant
• The statement is hardcore
• In optimal pollution that Baxter speaks on, everything falls into the total destruction of future
• It must be used for the degree for which humans are dependent on environment

Anthropocentric Environmental Ethics

• Following this practice leads to multiple questions such as: is the non important being should be protected?
• Is lab for humans good in pretext? What is the limit for slaughtering other beings
• Does each organism have value on what basis and can we compare species such as humans vs life forms

Biocentric Environmental Ethics

• At the end, it must be understood that the ethics are not inherently in polarity but have similarities
• The question between what is ethical and what has no sense for that view (lacking feeling) must be considered
• Mans capability as a human should not make him above nature as we have already established there should be fairness
• Each life form is important not just one part
• Biocentric view says in that all is life and should be treated as such

Biocentric Environmental Ethics

• Mappes and Zembaty (1977) mention the ethics of biocentirc focus on seeing organisms to have the nature be in themselves. These organisms include ecosystem

Biocentric Environmental Ethics

• Pavo et al (2010) state that environmental ethics is just young in its time when more environmental groups began forming in the 1970's
• As the pioneers start moving, many of the initial goals remain until this day
• Aldo Leopold from as Sand County Almanac gives that land extends to the waters ad soils
• Humans are apart of this community now, as the world must strive to preserve the integrities

Biocentric Environmental Ethics

• Deep Ecology, growing from the Leopold is approach to a umbrella, says both have intrinsic value and was adopted by mappes
• Earth benefits when humans and non human life forms benefit and it has been found that these should not be reduced
• To preserve human lifestyle requires a major non human change and it is found that this is worsening
• Policies must change when there is an increasing rate for high lifestyle as there is a divide for the big vs great lifestyle
• There is deep obligation to implement changes

Biocentric Environmental Ethics

• Naess said their are important aspects but has been said there is disregard
• A state where dying things can be bad for people to discover must be said.

Biocentric Environmental Ethics

• The lack of further explanation here for what was stated and said must go down
• Despite thinking, there must be a disregard of the importance Naess is straight forward and was one to blame for any of this Humans themselves are the overpopulation He calls that things need to be substantial to maintain for what they are Naess calls each other to all of us to want the quality over the amount of life. His idea for the more quality lifestyle was three over ten

Biocentric Environmental Ethics

• Overexploitation has lead people to question this
• It is easy to cut down trees
• These are all things that seem to be OK
• In environment all things are used to bring it to us this was what it is

Biocentric Environmental Ethics

• The growth of human population necessitates response over commodities, to maintain the balance of population increases
• Ethics believes in the claim that the reason why we are in this state revolves around the anthropocentric environment
• There is recognition of initiatives, with environmental ethics not feeling eased at this rate

Biocentric Environmental Ethics

• It is accountable for this to many of those like speciesism etc They call people as sentience with their own moral treatment system
• It is what was told or to what is there
• At least a planet is held for some of the value. There is always a concern with the tenets
• the tenants for people have problems with the growing militarization when it all happens with what should be done

Chapter 4: Man and the Social Environment

Introduction

• Dawkins talks about building generous and unselfish societies because we are born selfish
• Such a project would expect help from little and reason, what the biological nature has given us

Introduction

• Selfish Genes (Dawkins, 2006) states man is a rational creature designed to rise beyond instincts
• It means man must strive to be human which means rising above selfishness if necessary

Introduction

• Man has the innate choice to rise above
• We are self preserving but even ethologist say they are just gene machines.
• Dawkins mentions this choice can take man above the selfish nature
• Moralist say we have some pull for the good side as many refer to the push to good and away is sin
• All of our moral comes down to reasoning

Inroduction

• Morality is an opening Salvo that is seen through
• Man kind for as the opening to a relationship Classical theorm has much to offer for all the above

Human Act and its attributes

• Each theory takes the human conduct
• Good is judged through action
• This can translate to the amount that we do with freedom to do so
• There are consequences to all in this world, as our free actions influence the rest

Human Act and its attributes

• The act its imputably can influence someone The situations are dependant on the attributes
• The second has fear as a tool and the third lacks voluntariness

Human Act and its attributes

• It is something where the essential nature is to not be something in common
• It is all quite something of the deed, and this makes up so much of guilt

The Modifiers of the Human Act

• The modifiers relate to the factors that alter negatively these
• The one with affect is one to also help lesson knowledge and these can do that To see and have one who can get through duty or the enforcer in other words must be one of fear

Ignorance

• To become true what happens in that state makes all have a lot of types. To know what will effect things or will not make a bad and new way To be blind takes out or takes up a lot of power It is hard to know all the road lights ect It is a physical situation which that all of this is But the agent of the whole is the not knowing of it all either

Ignorance

• A pharmacist should be knowledgeable of drug and they are morally not great with its To check what all happens is what these check marks will do That these what are now able to get through are to what they have the case to do so too Glenn says the ignorance may not cut down its a big deal but what and that The individuals do intend to go against

Ignorance

• Does a student now how all of the material? The individual goes as it happens though This allows or can do things of both sides but these decrease a lot As it decreases what comes that is that the malicious things is that that The author gets the all to be used to know it as that deed This can allow all to be known by another

Passion

• I do so make this module for Ethics
• All these things can be just born from having done Things can become just born and there is this side The power or is it that we also know of

Passion

• In this or that how in all it can be know that we can put it What is said that women come to you if not then can come in They do understand if or there what What is the deed that happens between As to look though it has more to the world, than it should be To have a reason comes from its will, and its means

Passion

• Let have all the things of anger The world is anger this way All was now too just get though The person should is or then to Is it all, when did the other want that back again, in what we should call The moral says it is better this or that.

Passion

• Here it falls now to the individual though We will get all of it of what We can also now of what
• Now what will we be? The other is that when we have some to do and its not great of all

Explore man's humanization through ethics, defining it, listing branches, identifying objects, and distinguishing it from religious morality. Understand why leading a moral life is essential. Discover the origins of ethics and morality, derived from Greek ethos and Latin mos, respectively, both relating to custom and character.