Ethics Midterm Reviewer PDF

ETHICS MIDTERM REVIEWER Subjectivism in Ethics 2nd Stage: Emotivism Morality as grounded on feelings Moral statements are neither empirical “ X is good “ means “ I like X...

ETHICS MIDTERM REVIEWER Subjectivism in Ethics 2nd Stage: Emotivism Morality as grounded on feelings Moral statements are neither empirical “ X is good “ means “ I like X “ (testable by experience ) nor analytic (true by Moral judgments describe how we feel. definition). Therefore, these statements are not To call something “good” is to say we have genuine truth claims and are meaningless. positive feelings towards it. According to this theory, moral language is not Main Claims: fact-stating; they are expression of “what we feel.” There are no universal truths, just individual Emotivism emphasizes that disagreement feelings “to each their own”. comes in different forms. No objective truth to right and wrong in a moral 1. Disagreement in belief (Stevenson) – we believe sense. different things, both of which cannot be true Moral opinions differ from person to person 2. Disagreement in attitude (Stevenson) – we want based on feelings. different outcomes, both of which cannot occur. Ethical Subjectivism The idea that our moral opinions are based on Comparison our feelings and nothing more. Simple Subjectivism - Moral language is about stating No such thing as “objective” right or wrong facts about what they feel, ethical statements report to the speaker’s attitudes of approval or disapproval. Social or collective approval is not important, what matters is their feelings. (Personal Emotivism - Moral language is not fact-stating; it is not used to convey information. Rather, moral statements approval) are used as a means to influence people’s behavior and The Evolution of the Theory express attitudes or feelings. Problems: 1st Stage: Simple Subjectivism Both theories imply that our moral judgments When a person says something is morally good, are beyond reproach (perfect, no criticism can she approves of it. When a person says be made). something is morally bad, she disapproves of it, Simple Subjectivism, our judgments cannot be and nothing more. criticized because they’ll always be true. Problem: Emotivism, our judgments cannot be criticized cannot account for moral disagreement (rooted because they aren’t judgment at all. on feelings, nothing is resolved) Emotivism cannot explain the role reason plays implies that we are always right in ethics. ETHICS MIDTERM REVIEWER Role of Reason in Ethics Critical Thinking – choosing the best from all possibilities. Exploring the thinking process to clarify Moral judgment must be supported by good understanding and make more intelligent decisions. It reasons. looks closely at ideas and sorts our which are worth Ethical Egoism keeping. And it brings rationality and reasoning to the Normative ethical theory that asserts process so that what is created will work. individuals should act in their own self-interest. An individual’s moral duty is to maximize their Conflicting General Moral Principles own well-being regardless of the impact on 1. Consequences VS Non-Consequences others. For Thiroux, we must consider the consequences of our Argues that any action should be done solely to decisions, acts, and rules, but at the same time be aware achieve individual benefits. of and avoid the “end-justifies-the-means” problem that Arguments against: may diminish the intrinsic value of certain actions. 1. No sense of community and shared values Consequentialism (Teleological Ethics) 2. Cannot resolve conflicts Telos means end /purpose 3. Advice ( Lets people decide whatever) An act is right or wrong depending on the result Building a Moral System – Thiroux’s of that action. Humanitarian Ethics Follows that the worth of an action and its result PAIRS Framework for Analysis relies on what good it produces, and if it maximizes the general happiness of those P – people involved affected by that action. A – actions Non-Consequentialism (Deontology) I – intention Deonto means duty R – result It considers an act as right or wrong based on the S – situation intrinsic value and intention behind the action (often understood as duties or obligations) and Creative and Critical Thinking not the results that are deemed to provide Creative Thinking – having all possibilities. Using our benefits. thinking process to develop ideas that are unique, Actions are morally right/wrong regardless of the useful, and worthy of further elaboration. Looks for outcome. novelty, possibility, wonder, and profundity. ETHICS MIDTERM REVIEWER 2. Self VS. Others (as a basis for morality) 1. The Value of Life Principle (most important) There are problems associated with an Inherent value of life which should be protected, entirely self-interested basis for morality. respected, and preserved Therefore, it is agreeable to adopt a States that human beings should revere life and utilitarian approach of doing what is in the accept its mortality best interest of everyone (common Morality should ensure growth, flourishing, and interest) preserved in meaningful coexistence 3. Act VS. Rule 2. The Principle of Goodness and Rightness In a moral system, we require freedom (act) and Requires human beings to attempt to do 3 things: yet also stability and order (rule). 4. Emotion VS. Reason Cause/ Do no harm (Principle of non- maleficence, “Primum non nocere”) A moral system should be based upon reason Promote goodness (Principle of Beneficence) without excluding emotion. Prevent harm/ badness Problem between objectivity and subjectivity 3. Principle of Justice and Fairness Impartiality contra partiality (bias) Distributive Justice – addresses equality Resolving dilemmas that require decision- making Human beings should treat other human beings Long-term (often based on reason/ rational) vs. justly and fairly. short-term (often based on feelings) pursuits Fairness implies that everyone has an equal Character development (able to control opportunity to access resources and benefits. emotions) Equity (allocating advantage based on different circumstances of each) rather than equality What constitutes a workable and livable moral system? Restorative Justice - “An eye for an eye, a tooth for a Rational, yet not devoid of emotion tooth” Logically consistent but not rigid/inflexible Must have universality or general application to No one can move forward, promotes violence. all humanity, yet applicable in a practical way to Focuses on restoring relationships and repairing particular inidividuals and situations harms towards reconciliation rather than Be able to be taught and promulgated retribution. Have the ability to resolve conflicts among Impartiality and Non-discriminatory – human beings considering relevant factors without prejudice Due process – transparency of the process Social Justice – addresses systematic injustices to Basic Principles of Morality ensure human dignity and respect ETHICS MIDTERM REVIEWER 4. Principle of Truth-telling or Honesty Actions are morally good if they promote the greatest happiness for the greatest number of Fundamental to ethical behavior and is essential for people (Aggregate of Happiness) fostering trust, integrity, and positive relationships in personal, professional, and societal contexts. What is Utilitarianism? Provide meaningful communication and human Classical Utilitarianism relations. Argues that we ought always to do whatever Building trust in relations, avoiding deceit brings about the greatest balance of pleasure Strengthening commitment and accountability over pain for everyone affected by our actions to obligation (extends respect to autonomy) Integrity/ building a reputation of dependability Grounding Morals on Pleasure and Happiness 5. Principle of Individual Freedom Adheres to the principle of utility which argues People, being individuals with differences and that an action is morally good if it promotes features of uniqueness, must have autonomy to happiness, and immoral if it tends to produce seek their pursuits and means of being moral pain. (Good = whatever provides within the framework of the 4 previous happiness/pleasure) principles. The Principle of Utility Highlights the importance of autonomy (self- determination) against the forces of heteronomy Utilitarianism is derived from the word “utility” (control, exploitation, and manipulation). meaning “the quality or state of being useful”, Also involves the feature of self-sufficiency, the from the Latin ‘utilis’ or “useful”, opportunity to be empowered and acquire “advantageous”, or “beneficial”. capabilities. The following principles characterize classical Utilitarianism utilitarianism: Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill Hedonism – where pleasure is what is good Follows a Teleological (consequentialist) Impartiality – where the happiness of one framework counts the same as everyone else’s Practical basis of morality geared towards Instrumentality of the action – where no action bringing about change. is morally good “in itself”, actions are a means to Secular basis for morality. an end. The Principle of Utility (2 formulations): An action is considered good if it promotes the greatest balance of pleasure over pain (follows a ‘Hedonistic’ principle) ETHICS MIDTERM REVIEWER Two Modern Interpretations of Promoting Utility Between a Pig Satisfied and Socrates Dissatisfied: “Is pleasure all that matters?” 1. Act Utilitarianism We ought to do the action with the best John Stuart Mill - “It is better to be a human being consequences (direct form) dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates 2. Rule Utilitarianism dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the We ought to do what would be prescribed by the pig, are of different opinion, it is because they only know rules with the best consequences for people in their own side of the question.” (Utilitarianism) society to try to follow (indirect form) Focuses on quality of happiness Important Features/ Comparisons 3 important counterarguments against Bentham’s Consequentialist version of utilitarianism which highlights the quantity of Incompatible with the assumptions of natural pleasure. law which argue that an action is good in itself. 1. First, it tends or may fail to understand the Diverges from the view of deontology where an importance of preserving individual human action is considered good based on the rights supposition of actions as duties or obligations. 2. Second, due to its instrumentalist orientation As a normative ethical theory, it focuses on (instrumental rationality), it tends to corrupt the evaluating goodness or rightness of actions. intrinsic motivations and values of certain Measure of Happiness actions supposedly pursued in themselves; 3. Last, it is problematic to aggregate all values and Bentham argues that the highest principle of preferences and translate into numerical terms – morality is to maximize the general welfare or it is difficult to put a definite number into certain collective happiness and the overall balance of forms of experiences. pleasure over pain. He arrives at this principle by following the The Pursuit of the Quality of Happiness reasoning that mankind is “governed by two Qualitative pleasures allow us to engage and sovereign masters – pleasure and pain.” develop our higher human faculties rather than Accordingly, this fundamental self-evident settling with appetitive pleasures. feature of human experience allows us to the genuine application of the greatest determine the distinction between “good” and happiness principle can be achieved as a “bad”, or what is “right” from “wrong”. community and not individually and (most Maximizing the quantity of pleasure over pain important of all) with impartiality. It is in this line of argument that he stresses the paramount importance of “justice” in his normative claims. ETHICS MIDTERM REVIEWER Higher Pleasures Society may never achieve perfect equality, but equity (the recognition that individuals have different needs, Mill on character formation and the cultivation of circumstances, or barriers that may require different high-quality pleasures: types of support to achieve certain identified “Utilitarianism, therefore, could only attain its opportunities) may indeed be a more realistic end by the general cultivation of nobleness of possibility. character, even if each individual were only A society is divided if its citizens experience and pursue benefitted by the nobleness of others, and his pleasure in their own private lives but become united if own, so far as happiness is concerned, were a they get to share and experience common pleasures sheer deduction from the benefit.” and pains. Note here the possible connection to virtue ethics Mill on Addressing the Tyranny of the Majority The guiding principle of justice and fairness is to ensure the collective welfare of the people affected by our adopted action. This addresses one of the main problems in the naïve application of utilitarianism, which is a game of numbers that leads to the phenomenon known as the tyranny of the majority – i.e., where the simplistic rule of the majority inevitably creates the marginalization of individuals or minorities that may trample their rights and dignity as persons. Equality or Equity? Mill rationalizes this by arguing that if we consider collective interests or the common good, we progress as a society that creates a more inclusive space for each and every person’s pursuit of happiness, characterized as a life of well-being. ETHICS MIDTERM REVIEWER Arguments “For” and “Against” Utilitarianism may be deemed unfair to those who exerted effort to pass) Criticism #1: Human rights Following the principle of impartiality as Utilitarianism and its merits become encapsulated in the notion of “being equally questionable in cases where the principle of concerned for everyone” places a much utility (the happiness of the greatest number) demand on us that may devalue personal may trample human rights and dignity. realities of intimacy, love, affection, and Criticism #2: Lacks “Backward-Looking Reasons” friendship. (Should certain decisions be based or (Retrospective Reasoning) considered on what is experienced on a personal Utilitarianism makes the past seem irrelevant. level?) The orientation of a consequentialist theory is Criticism #5: The Greatest Possible often “progressive” which may devalue certain Consequence remains a Probability traditions or valuable aspects of past histories. Logical induction teaches us that our (e.g., devaluing historical sites in favor of building expectations from a course of action may not new malls) necessarily end up the way we envisioned it to Criticism # 3: The Tyranny of the Majority be. Since utilitarianism subscribes to “the greatest The utilitarian vision of providing the greatest good” for the greatest number”, it may turn into happiness for the greatest number is open to a mob-like play of numbers especially when the possible miscalculations and unintended decision is based on sentiments. Furthermore, outcomes. even in cases of a rule-based approach, the (e.g., the way we envisioned how social media question of whether the majority makes things platforms make human connections realizable. This, right is a recurring concern. however, also ended in people living in isolation). Criticism #4: The Problem of Providing Equality Criticism # 6: Corruption of Intrinsic Values & (Being Equally Concerned for Everyone) Motivations The concern for providing equal opportunity is As demonstrated by Michael Sandel, the often questioned by its failure to consider consequentialist and instrumentalist meritocracy. orientation of utilitarianism may change the meaning of certain practices and values (e.g., passing students who failed by adding additional excessive points is tantamount to rewarding failure that pursued for their own sake. Hence, it diminishes or disregards intrinsic values or goods. ETHICS MIDTERM REVIEWER Defense #1: Values have a Utilitarian Orientation Defense #5: Moral Progress and Reform (Empirically speaking) Utilitarianism carries the progressive movement We cannot step outside of our human of thought where concepts (including moral experience. This materialist orientation in conceptions) are revised to acknowledge the understanding the nature of values provides us changing nature of the human condition. with the crucial insight that considering the best This suggests that it is flexible and malleable possible consequences counts or matters when with its moral imagination as time and we think about the best course of action to be circumstance empirically would suggest. taken in any given situation. Defense #6: Rational Clarity Defense #2: Impartiality and Equal Opportunity Utilitarianism offers a clear and rational The demand for impartiality allows us to approach to our ethical imagination which continuously think reflectively about our biases allows us to evaluate the best possible options or prejudices concerning our decision to reach a in a more informed and consistent manner consensus for the common good. The demand crucial to our decisions. to consider everyone’s welfare involves a process of open democratic discussion that provides. more room for inclusivity and diversity. It is not a simple rule of the majority based on “common sense” driven feelings but rather is more deliberative in thinking on the possible reasons guided by rules. Defense #3: Happiness Understood as Well-being Recent versions of utilitarianism replace the term “happiness” with “well-being” to clear off the problem when we ground our valuations on naïve satisfaction of pleasures. Defense #4: Reducing Possible Harms Utilitarianism as an ethical principle considers minimizing possible harm or suffering. This resonates with the principle of non- maleficence.