Lecture 1 Introduction Relativism and Egoism (1).pptx

Introduction to Applied Ethics PHIL2075 Petrenko Anton, PhD Office Hours: By appointment [email protected]  Lecture Objectives Session Summary: This class will introduce students to such moral theories as Ethical Egoism and Utili...

Introduction to Applied Ethics PHIL2075 Petrenko Anton, PhD Office Hours: By appointment [email protected]  Lecture Objectives Session Summary: This class will introduce students to such moral theories as Ethical Egoism and Utilitarianism. Students will learn about the historical roots of these theories as well as arguments for and objections to these theories. The theories will be illustrated with ethical analysis of cases based on their respective moral standards. Structure of Moral Theories Egoism: Should Lawyer tell the Truth? Relativism Arguments and Objections Psychological and Ethical Egoism Libertarianism: (Nozick, Rand) Defence and Objections  Definitions What is Ethics? Ethics is the study of morality. Morality refers to the standards that an individual or group has about what is right or wrong.  Law? But how do we know what is right or wrong? Individual? What determines to be right or wrong? Society? God?  Important Distinctions: Ethics vs. Ethos The word “ethics” is derived from the Greek ethos, meaning “customary” or “conventional.” Ethos: To conform to what is typically done, to obey the conventions and rules of one’s society and religion. Ethics: To reject simple conformity and to seek reasoned analysis of custom and reasoned defense of how we ought to live. Socrates c. 469 BC–399 BC The difference between what is valued and what ought to be valued is the difference between ethos and ethics. Argument for Moral Relativism and Objections  Moral Relativism Darius (c. 550–486 BC), the King of Persia, was impressed by the diversity of morally held beliefs. According to Herodotus, a Greek historian, Darius asked the Greeks (who cremated their dead), if they would eat the bodies of their dead. Then he asked the Indians (Callatiae tribe, who did eat their dead) if they would burn their dead instead. Both Indians and the Greeks were horrified at the prospects and found the idea offensive. Does this mean that rightness of moral beliefs are relative to culture or individuals who hold them?  Moral Relativism Moral relativism is a normative ethical theory which maintains that truth or falsity of ethical norms depends on what the society, or individual, has decided. 1) Diversity Thesis: People disagree on moral But is this a good beliefs argument? 2) Relativism Thesis: The rightness or wrongness of beliefs can be determined only relatively to the culture or moral tradition of a group 3) Tolerance Thesis: People should adopt tolerant attitude towards other groups or individuals who hold different beliefs  Moral Relativism Is Diversity Thesis true? People do disagree on moral beliefs, but perhaps most of their beliefs can be traced to differences in factual beliefs and circumstances (e.g. scarcity or beliefs about afterlife), not to moral differences. Is Relativism Thesis true? Even if diversity thesis were true, the fact that moral beliefs differ does not imply that they are equally true (e.g. disagreement about shape of the earth does not imply that either claim is true); it can only show that some (or all) of them are false. Is Tolerance Thesis true? Tolerance thesis can only follow from relativism if our social conventions include it; if our norms include ethical imperialism, then tolerance would be morally wrong.  Moral Relativism Darius (c. 550–486 BC), the King of Persia, was impressed by the diversity of morally held beliefs. According to Herodotus, a Greek historian, Darius asked the Greeks (who cremated their dead), if they would eat the bodies of their dead. Then he asked the Indians (Callatiae tribe, who did eat their dead) if they would burn their dead instead. Both Indians and the Greeks were horrified at the prospects and found the idea offensive. Does this mean that rightness of moral beliefs are relative to culture or individuals who hold them?  Moral Relativism Moral relativism is a normative ethical theory which maintains that truth or falsity of ethical norms depends on what the society, or individual, has decided. 1) Diversity Thesis: People disagree on moral beliefs 2) Relativism Thesis: The rightness or wrongness of beliefs can be determined only relatively to the culture or moral tradition of a group 3) Tolerance Thesis: People should adopt tolerant attitude towards other groups or individuals who hold different beliefs  Moral Relativism Is Diversity Thesis true? People do disagree on moral beliefs, but perhaps most of their beliefs can be traced to differences in factual beliefs and circumstances (e.g. scarcity or beliefs about afterlife), not to moral differences. Is Relativism Thesis true? Even if diversity thesis were true, the fact that moral beliefs differ does not imply that they are equally true (e.g. disagreement about shape of the earth does not imply that either claim is true); it can only show that some (or all) of them are false. Is Tolerance Thesis true? Tolerance thesis can only follow from relativism if our social conventions include it; if our norms include ethical imperialism, then tolerance would be morally wrong. Structure of Moral Theories  General Subdivisions within the Study of Ethics y a r ll Applied Ethics ir m e wi p This area of ethical study is concerned primarily with of ethical principles and o ur e. W te s is urs ly cre theories to the solving of concrete moral issues. It often relies on normative i o p p n theories, which serve as a foundation for the arguments in specific controversies. ly, th his c to a to co ate in t w es us rtain For example, arguing for animal rights based on theory of utilitarianism tim rn ho ori rio ce Ul nce both the w va it in co rn tive ho did lea rma and ers no ses oph ca ilos ts ph ntex co s ss orie Normative Ethics c u e e This area of normative ethics deals with a more philosophical search for the d dis e th in th mit v i y an mati hem will l correct moral theory that would serve as a general guide to moral decision- r t tud no for e making. It is often concerned with system building—a theory that would li l s the nts es. W nal to have overall coherence and generally fit with our moral sense (intuitions). e w of e ur tio w W me rgum lect radi ho For example: utilitarian theory, virtue ethics, social contract theory, Kantian so d a ree to t earn theory, natural law theory. an st th lves nd l fir rse s a ou eorie them th ply ap n b it i le Meta- Ethics a litt tely, in a If the application of ethics to concrete cases often draws on moral standards this ltim cern d U n and principles grounded in normative ethics, normative ethics are either sse ion. r co u t u grounded or make assumptions about the nature of moral reality and d isc duc ot o e ro n judgement. Meta-ethics is concerned with the exploration of such W e int are e. foundational questions as: Is there objective moral right/wrong? Can we know th ese urs it? Do right and wrong supervene on natural properties? th s co thi  What is a Moral Theory? (Three Levels of Moral Theory) “Is it right to install full-body scanners at European airports?” First Level: Moral Judgements (MJ) Moral judgements give moral evaluations of specific actions or individuals: e. g. “Installing full-body scanners is judgements morally wrong (or right).” This is a moral judgement. Second Level: Moral Principles (MP) rules Moral principles, or rules, make evaluations of types or classes of actions or individuals: e. g. “Violation of personal privacy is wrong.” They justify your moral judgements. standard Third Level: Moral Standards (MS) Morals standards give the ultimate criteria that make any action or person morally right or wrong: e.g. “Those actions are right that treat human beings, whether you or another person, as an end and not simply as a means.” Moral standards ground your moral principles.  Argument for Ethical Egoism and Objections  Psychological Egoism Psychological egoism is the view that all individuals ultimately act only for selfish reasons and are not capable of other motivations. Although this view of human nature could be found in the writings of ancient philosophers, it is characteristic of Modern philosophy (17th-20th century). An English social and political philosopher Thomas Hobbes (1588 –1679) has made one of the most considerable contributions to the development of philosophical egoism and ethics of egoism. Hobbes had a mechanistic view of human beings as constantly striving (endeavour) to achieve the objects of their desires (felicity). Since power is the means of achieving felicity, human beings constantly strive to gain power. Thomas Hobbes (1588 –1679) Hobbes argued that moral terms (good, bad) derive from the psychological terms (pleasant, unpleasant)  The Paradox of Ethical Egoism: Self-Limitation One of the paradoxes of egoism is that unrestrained pursuit of self-interest can come into conflict with others and lead to the state of affairs that are contrary to the selfish interests of the egoist. “In such condition, there is no place for Industry …. no Arts; no Letters; no Society; and which is worst of all, continuall feare, and danger of violent death; And the life of man, solitary, poore, nasty, brutish, and short.” (Hobbes) It is rational, therefore, to restrain one’s self-interest so that others do so in return. Thus, egoist can justify rules like “Do not steal,” “Do not harm,” which make orderly society possible. But if I can cheat or rob (or murder) while others don’t, I still should!  Egoism and Libertarianism According to theory of egoism, morally justified state would allow for maximum opportunity to pursue one’s interests —it would be a minimalist state. Such state would ensure security (against crime), but it would not enforce: a) benevolence (helping others through welfare, universal So, what kind of education, health care) or Ayn Rand society would be 1905 – 1982 justified by this b) paternalism (forcing people to theory? do things for the their own good: regulation of safety, health, drugs, narcotics, employment, homosexuality etc…) Benevolence and paternalism would constitute unjustifiable infringements on individual liberty. This view is compatible with laissez-faire Robert Nozick capitalism. 1938 – 2002  The Ethics of Egoism: Moral Standard The ethical theory of egoism maintains that the moral rightness or wrongness of action/rule depends on whether it serves the interests of the person or promotes their own well-being. The only moral obligations one has is to oneself. So, what is the moral standard of Egoist Moral Standard: this moral theory? Those actions (or rules) are right for a person if and only if they promote the person’s self- interest at least as much as any alternative action (or rule) or if they harm their interests the least. !  Case: The Ethics of Egoism Should Lawyer tell the Truth? David Spaulding got into an accident and got injured; he sued the driver responsible. David’s physician reported that David might have permanent injury from cerebral concussions. The drivers defense lawyer, John Zimmerman, also had a physician examine David. The physician’s report contained this phrase: “The aneurism could dilate further and it might rapture with further dilation and this would cause death.” Zimmerman knows that if David’s lawyer finds out about the aneurism, he will ask for higher settlement. He also knows that he is not required, according to attorney-client relationship, to reveal the information. Should the lawyer tell the Truth?  Argument for Ethical Egoism The foundation of ethical egoism is the view of human nature as being motivated solely by self-interest. One of the most common arguments in its support is the appeal to psychological egoism: So, 1. One cannot be morally obligated to do What Argument what one simply is incapable of doing. Could be made for (ought implies can) Ethical Egoism? 2. Human beings are incapable of acting for motivations other than self-interest Conclusion: Therefore, our moral obligations can only be to act in our self-interest.  Objections to Ethical Egoism (Objections: Are we incapable of selfless acts?) But, what about many examples of unselfish acts: loyalty, friendship, self- sacrifice, charity? Egoists respond: one acts this way to get satisfaction; hence, acts Mother Teresa (1910 – ? Bernie Madoff, Madoff 1997)--Blessed Teresa Investment Securities are still selfish. of Calcutta. Objection 1: the response confuses side-effect with motivation. Egoist says we value these things because we get pleasure form them (pleasure prior to moral value). Objection 2: If one can act in the same “selfish” way as But why would we get pleasure from Mother Teresa, then one can helping others if we did not value it in be morally obligated towards the first place? Moral value must be others (ethics are possible). prior to pleasure.