PHL 101 Notes on Ethics PDF

PHL 101- Introduction to the problems of Philosophy 1 Topic- Normative ethics Normative ethics is one of the major traditional sub-divisions of ethics. It addresses some fundamental questions about human existence which includes: How should we live? How ought I to live? How can we be good? How can w...

PHL 101- Introduction to the problems of Philosophy 1 Topic- Normative ethics Normative ethics is one of the major traditional sub-divisions of ethics. It addresses some fundamental questions about human existence which includes: How should we live? How ought I to live? How can we be good? How can we be happy? What are our rights? What duties do we have either towards fellow human beings or societies in general? Normative ethics provides answers to these questions by formulating specific theories or principles, specifying how we ought to live or ought not to live, setting the standard of right and wrong. The normative question of how human beings ought to live have its root in the ancient period in Greek ethics. The question was first posed by Socrates in the ancient period. It is one of the themes of his dialogues, The Protagoras. Socrates’ answer to the question, as reported by Plato is that man has to live a life in pursuit of arête, where arête in this regard means virtue. According to Shelly Kegan, normative ethics involves substantive proposals concerning how to act, how to live, or what kind of person to be. In particular, it attempts to state and defend the most basic principles governing these matters. …Normative ethics, then, is concerned with stating and defending the most basic moral principles. Also, according to Michael Boylan, normative ethics concerns itself with creating norms or standards of human conduct. Normative ethics is action-guiding. In an attempt to provide answers to substantive questions regarding how we ought to live, principles or theories are formulated theorists. These principles or theories are known as normative ethical theories. Normative ethical theories attempt to provide answers to the questions raised above. They are also known as normative moral theories. They are theories about what individuals or institutional agents ought to do. Normative ethical theories are theories about how we should act from the standpoint of morality. According to Garrett Cullity, a normative moral theory is a theory that spells out which ways of living are morally right and wrong, good and bad. Normative ethical theories are usually divided into two kinds: Consequentialist and non- consequentialist theories. In the older terminology, they are divided into teleological and non- teleological moral theories. Consequentialist and non-consequentialist stands for teleological and non-teleological theories respectively. What are consequentialist theories? Historically, the word “Consequentialism” was first coined by G.E.M. Ascombe in her Modern Moral Philosophy in 1958 where she described what she saw as the central error of certain moral theories such as those propounded by Jeremy Bentham, J.S. Mill, Henry Sidgwick, among others. Consequentialism is the view that whatever values an individual or institutional agent adopts, the proper response to those values is to promote them. The agent should honour the values only so far as honouring them is part of promoting them, or is necessary in order to promote them. According to Samuel Scheffler, consequentialism in its purest and simplest form is a moral doctrine which says that the right act in any given situation is the one that will produce the best overall outcome, as judged from an impersonal standpoint which gives equal weight to the interests of everyone. Consequentialist theories judge actions to be right or wrong based on the consequences produced by such actions. Consequentialism holds that right and wrong are purely a function of the consequences of actions or behavior. Ultimately, a consequentialist theory says whether an action is right or wrong based on the consequences or outcomes produced by the action. The defining feature of consequentialist moral theory is the weight given to consequences in evaluating the rightness and wrongness of actions. Consequentialism in general is the view that an act is right if and if it leads to the best consequences, otherwise wrong. Consequences are the whole of the results of an action, both the ones that are negative and those that are positive. Consequences are the overall outcome of each alternative action that we are to assess and compare which include the positive or negative value of its subsequent effects. Consequentialist theories have two main features: (i) it gives some principles for ranking overall consequences produced by an action; (ii) it pronounces a right or wrong action by comparing these consequences ranking them from best to worst. Examples of normative consequentialist theories include; ethical utilitarianism, ethical egoism, ethical altruism, among others. Non-consequentialist theories are moral theories that define fundamental principles of right and justice other than taking the most effective means to promote maximum good. To non- consequentialists, there are certain sorts of acts that are wrong in themselves even if they produce good and admirable consequences. Give example of such act. Non-consequentialist moral theories judge actions to be right or wrong by referring to other factors other than consequences. It could be the nature of the action. It could be the will of God or a supreme being. It could be human intuition. It could be basic principles of justice, right, and equality, among others. Examples of non-consequentialist theories include; Kantian deontologism, Divine command theory, Golden rule, Intuitionism, Rawls’ contractarianism, among others. We will be looking at ethical utilitarianism as a classic example of normative consequentialist theory in the next class. Ethical utilitarianism