Ethics Preliminary PDF

ETHICS: INTRODUCTION  What is Ethics? Ethics was taken from the Greek word ‘ethos’ which means ‘customs’, ‘usage’ ‘characteristic’, Analyze the news article and identify if it is an example of ETHICS or just an etiquette (ethos) [In my conversation with (...

ETHICS: INTRODUCTION  What is Ethics? Ethics was taken from the Greek word ‘ethos’ which means ‘customs’, ‘usage’ ‘characteristic’, Analyze the news article and identify if it is an example of ETHICS or just an etiquette (ethos) [In my conversation with (the mother)] I said, "Here, this is not the manner in which we eat."... I don't necessarily want students to eat with one hand or with only one instrument, I want them to eat intelligently at the table... I want them to eat correctly with respect for others who are eating with them. That's all I ask. Personally, I don't have any problems with it, but it is not the way you see people eat every day. I have never seen somebody eat with a spoon and a fork at the same time. Later reporting alleged that Luc was warned that he was tardy at the table, and so he reverted to the spoon-feeding method to save time. Luc said that he was separated from his lunchmates any time he ate that way. Bergeron was subsequently restrained from speaking on the issue by the school board; spokesperson Brigitte Gavreau stated that board policy was that students could eat with any utensils. A score of protestors outside the Canadian Embassy in Manila appealed for "respect for cultural diversity" and affirmed "we eat with a spoon and we're proud." The item was quickly picked up worldwide, especially in Filipino newspapers and websites. Are Etiquette and Ethics synonymous terms?  Technically, What is Ethics? 1. It is a branch of philosophy that is a philosophical enterprise that investigates and questions the way or the nature of human actions, see if it has a ground so that it supports its own moral claim. A Code of ethics is a set of ethical guidelines that is universally recognized. 2. Ethics investigates or studies morality. thus, the term ethics is expressed in various ways of understanding and examining the moral life of the person as it is cited by Beauchamp and Childress (1994). Are Ethics and morality synonymous terms?  3. ETHICS= IS NOT JUST ANY ACTION OF MAN, RATHER, AN ACTION THAT IS GEARED TOWARDS WHAT IS CONSIDERED MORAL, NAMELY, HUMAN ACTION. Acts of Human vs. Human Acts 1. Acts of Human - These are processes that do not require a decision-making action from a person. They happen naturally in the body, without a person's being conscious about them. Acts of Human is neither right or wrong. 2. Human Acts - These are actions that require a person to make a choice, use utmost responsibility, and use his/her conscience. Human Acts can either be right or wrong. Here are some examples of Acts of Human: 1. breathing 2. beating of the heart 3. perspiration 4. growing of the hair 5. growing of the nails Here are some examples of Human Acts: 1. telling the truth 2. giving money to the poor 3. returning a lost item Are the behaviors of a six-year-old girl considered human acts or acts of man? Is driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, resulting in a person's accident or death, classified as a human act or an act of man?  Human acts can be classified: 1. GOOD ACTION 2. BAD ACTION Acts of man is considered as: 1. AMORAL or INDIFFERENT ACTIONS  1. The Moral Aspect of Human Existence 2. Value Judgments Beyond the Scope of Ethics. 3. 2 Approaches in Ethics the ethical dimension of human existence Ethics as a subject for us to study is about determining the grounds for the values w/ particular and special significance to HUMAN LIFE.  Our first point of clarification is to recognize that there are instances when we make VALUE JUDGMENTS that are not considered to be part of ethics. 1.AESTHETIC VALUATIONS 2.TECHNICAL VALUATIONS 3.MORAL VALUATIONS  It shows us that aesthetic considerations and questions of ETIQUETTE are important facets of human life. But they do not necessarily translate into genuine ethical or moral value. THE CHOICE OF CLOTHING THAT ONE IS TO WEAR, in general, seems to be merely a question of aesthetics, and thus one is taste. Is it deemed immoral or unethical (improper behaviour) for women to wear spaghetti straps and for men to wear shorts inside the church?  Yet in some cultures, what a woman wears (or does not wear) may bring upon harsh punishment to her according to the community’s rule. Afghanistan in the 1990s was ruled by the Taliban, and women were expected to wear the full- body burqa; a woman caught in public with even a small area of her body exposed could be flogged severely.  TECHNICAL VALUATIONS We get the English terms "technique" and "technical" from the Greek word "techne," commonly employed to denote the correct or proper method of performing tasks. However, it is important to note that a technical assessment, representing the right or wrong approach to doing things, might not inherently align with ethical considerations, as illustrated by this image  MORAL VALUATIONS They involve valuations that we make in a sphere of HUMAN ACTIONS, characterized by certain gravity and concern the human well-being and human life itself. Therefore, matters that concern life and death such as war, capital punishment, or abortion and matters that concern human well-being such as poverty, inequality, or sexual identity are often included in discussions of ethics. NORMATIVE ETHICS Normative approach is an evaluative one, it is a way of generating and FORMULATING PRINCIPLES, RULES, STANDARDS THAT WILL GUIDE HUMAN CONDUCT OR ACTION. In normative approach it includes general normative ethics and applied ethics. The former emphasizes any philosophical attempt to formulate and to defend basic moral principles and virtues governing the moral life, thus, it emphasizes ETHICAL THEORIES like natural law theory, utilitarianism, deontology, and virtue ethics etc. The PRINCIPLES found in normative general ethics that are regarded to be of help to guide an action and are commonly applied to some specific moral problems such as in medicine, nursing and other medical sciences; thus, it yields an APPLIED ETHICS  NON-NORMATIVE ETHICS This approach is a non-evaluative one. IT SIMPLY CONSIDERS BY KNOWING WHAT IT IS AND DESCRIBES CERTAIN ACTIONS, PRACTICES AND EVENTS. It is not expressed by categorizing that is right or that is wrong, rather IT SIMPLY EXPRESSED WHAT IS THE ACTION AND THE WAY AN ACTION WAS DONE. Under this approach it presents two considerations, namely: DESCRIPTIVE ETHICS AND METAETHICS. The former, simply reports through description and explanation of moral behavior and belief of a person. For example, the stages of moral development by Lawrence Kohlberg. Now, in metaethics or analytic ethics it analyzes the peculiarity of an ethical language, such as ‘ought’, ‘good’, ‘wrong’ or ‘bad’. It asks the question ‘what is’ and also analyzes the structure of logic and moral reasoning. These are investigated in metaethics. These are not the only forms of nonnormative ethics. There are other forms, such as those that consider the biological bases of moral behavior and the ways in which humans do not differ from animals. External Authority Internal Authority External vs. Internal Authority in Ethics: A Snapshot External Authority: Origin: Derived from societal norms, legal systems, religious doctrines, or cultural traditions. Influence: Guides behavior through external rules, regulations, or expectations, often driven by fear of punishment or societal approval.  Internal Authority: Origin: Stems from an individual's values, conscience, and sense of morality. Influence: Guides behavior based on personal convictions, moral values, and ethical beliefs, driven by an internal moral compass.  External Authority 1. Law(State) Law refers to a system of rules, regulations, and principles established by a governing authority (such as a government) to regulate the behavior of individuals and groups within a society. Note: NOT ALL LEGAL IS MORAL, AND NOT ALL MORAL IS LEGAL Abortion may be permitted by law in the United States, but the Catholic Church considers it immoral. Expressing one's opinions freely is against the law in North Korea, but it is generally considered morally right. 2.RELIGION (FAITH)- MULTIPLICITY of religion Polygamy is considered morally acceptable in Islam but is deemed immoral in Christianity. Eating dinuguan is considered immoral by certain religions but not by Catholics. 3. CULTURE- cultural relativism (aesthetic differences, religious differences , etiquette differences.) “we are in no position to judge whether the ethical thought or practice of another culture is acceptable or unacceptable” “Ethics? It is simple. Just follow whatever your cultures says”  JAMES RACHELS (1941-2003) Rachels defines CULTURAL RELATIVISM AS THE POSITION THAT CLAIMS THAT THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS OBJECTIVE TRUTH IN THE REALM OF MORALITY. The argument of this position is that since different cultures have different moral codes, then THERE IS NO ONE CORRECT MORAL CODE THAT ALL CULTURES MUST FOLLOW. The Eskimos also seemed to care less about human life. Infanticide, for example, was common. Knud Rasmussen, an early explorer, reported meeting one woman who had borne 20 children but had killed 10 of them at birth. Female babies, he found, were especially likely to be killed, and this was permitted at the parents’ discretion, with no social stigma attached. Moreover, when elderly family members became too feeble, they were left out in the snow to die. FEMALE CIRCUMCISION in some Filipino tribes He posits three ABSURD CONSEQUENCES of accepting the claim of cultural relativism. First, if cultural relativism was correct, then one cannot criticize the practices or beliefs of another culture anymore as long as that culture thinks that what it is doing is correct. But if that is the case, then the Jews, for example, cannot criticize the Nazis’ plan to exterminate all Jews in World War II, since obviously, the Nazis believed that they were doing the right thing.  Secondly, if cultural relativism was correct, then one cannot even criticize the practices or beliefs of one’s own culture. If that is the case, the black South African citizens under the system of apartheid, a policy of racial segregation that privileges the dominant race in a society, could not criticize that official state position  Thirdly, if cultural relativism was correct, then one cannot even accept that moral progress can happen. If that is the case, then the fact many societies now recognize women’s rights and children’s rights doe not necessarily represent a better situation than before when societies refused to recognize that women and children even had rights. Rachels believed that moral progress is possible and that societies can improve their moral standards over time. Accepting moral beliefs without questioning them can hinder this progress because it may prevent individuals from challenging and revising outdated or harmful moral norms.  NO CULTURE, WHETHER IN THE PRESENT WORLD OR IN THE PAST, WOULD PROMOTE MURDER INSTEAD OF PROHIBITING IT. a hypothetical culture that promotes murder would immediately cease to exist because the members would start murdering each other.  Cultural Relativism Critique Rachels argued against cultural relativism, which is the idea that moral beliefs are entirely determined by one's culture, and there are no universal moral truths. He believed that this view could lead to moral stagnation because it discourages questioning and moral progress. If individuals unquestioningly accept their cultural moral beliefs, they may fail to recognize and correct morally problematic aspects of their culture.  SENSES OF THE SELF 1. SUBJECTIVISM “No one can tell me what is right and “The starting point of wrong”. subjectivism is the “No one knows my situation better recognition that the than myself”. individual thinking person “I am entitled to my own opinion”. (the subject) is at the heart “It is good if I say that it is good”. of all moral valuations.” “THE INDIVIDUAL IS THE SOLE DETERMINANT OF WHAT IS MORALLY GOOD OR BAD, RIGHT OR WRONG.”  2. PSYCHOLOGICAL EGOISM “Human beings are naturally self-centered, so all our action are always already motivated by self-interest.” All People are Selfish in Everything They Do  3. ETHICAL EGOISM we should make our own ends, our own interest, as the single overriding concern. An act is right for a person to perform if and only if that act is in the person’s best interest. We may act in a way that is beneficial to others, but we should do that only if it ultimately benefits us. External Authority Internal Authority LAW RELIGION CULTURE SUBJECTIVISM PSYCHOLOGICAL EGOISM ETHICAL EGOISM  LAWRENCE KOHLBERG STAGES OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT PRE-CONVENTIONAL LEVEL STAGE 1: PUNISHMENT AND OBEDIENCE STAGE 2: INDIVIDUAL AND INSTRUMENTAL EXCHANGE CONVENTIONAL LEVEL STAGE 3: MUTUAL AND INTERPERSONAL CONFORMITY STAGE 4: LAW AND ORDER POST-CONVENTIONAL LEVEL STAGE 5: SOCIAL CONTRACT AND INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS STAGE 6: UNIVERSAL ETHICAL PRINCIPLES Stage 1 - Obedience and Punishment Orientation: Morality is based on avoiding punishment. Stage 2 - Individualism and Exchange: Morality involves pursuing one's own interests while respecting others' interests. A moral perspective characterized by the principle of "an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth" is based on a retaliatory or retributive approach to justice.  Gandhi and Jesus Christ transcended Stage 2 rather than being confined to it. I will reciprocate because I anticipate receiving a reward or benefit in return. 'You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours' A reciprocal arrangement where I help you if you help me.  Stage 3 - Good Interpersonal Relationships: Morality is defined by social approval, maintaining relationships, and conforming to societal expectations. Stage 4 - Maintaining Social Order: Morality is about following laws and upholding social order.  Why did Jesus Christ choose to disregard the Sabbath law?  Why did numerous Filipinos defy the martial law during the 1970s? In Kohlberg’s reasoning, people who merely follow the rules and regulations of their institution, the laws of their community or state, the doctrine of their religion—even if they seem to be the truly right thing to do—are trapped in this second or conventional level, which is still not yet the highest. Stage 5 - Social Contract and Individual Rights: Morality transcends individual perspectives and considers societal agreements and individual rights. Stage 6 - Universal Principles: Morality is guided by universal ethical principles, even if they conflict with societal laws or rules. I will do what is good because… 1: PUNISHMENT AND OBEDIENCE- I want to avoid punishment 2: INDIVIDUAL AND INSTRUMENTAL EXCHANGE- I want to have a reward or in exchange of something 3: MUTUAL AND INTERPERSONAL CONFORMITY- to gain the approval of others 4: LAW AND ORDER- it is according to the law and rules 5: SOCIAL CONTRACT AND INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS- it will be for the common good 6: UNIVERSAL ETHICAL PRINCIPLES- it is the good thing to do.  MORAL MATURITY therefore is seen in an agent who acts on what she has understood, using her full rationality, to be what is right, regardless of whether the act will bring the agent pleasure or pain and even regardless of whether the act is in accordance with one’s community’s laws or not. ACTIVITY: Cite some of your own personal experiences to validate your answer.  THE SAMPLE IS BIASED According to Gilligan (1977), because Kohlberg’s theory was based on an all- male sample, the stages reflect a male definition of morality (it’s androcentric). Mens' morality is based on abstract principles of law and justice, while womens' is based on principles of COMPASSION AND CARE. A CASE OF EUTHANASIA AND PHYSICIAN –ASSISTED SUICIDE A nurse and the physician are caring for a terminally ill man and that the man is in great pain who is asking the doctor and the nurse for enough barbiturates to commit suicide. What are the appropriate responses that the health care provider will take based from the moral development of Kohlberg?  Stage 1: the health professional in stage one might reply, ‘I will not do it because I could lose my license if anybody found out I have done that’. Stage 2: the stage two, professionals (physician/nurse) might expressed, ‘I will not do it because if I became known as a doctor or perhaps a nurse who did that kind of thing then other doctor or nurse might not refer patients to me’. Stage 3: in this stage, perhaps the physician/nurse might reply, ‘I will not because my colleagues would no longer respect me if they knew I have done that’  Stage 4: at this stage the reply could be, ‘I will not because it is against the law and the professional should obey the law’ or maybe, Stage 5: the stage five, a health professional might say, ‘YES: because no one benefits from keeping individual alive longer than they want to live’, ‘NO :even though the patient might suffer less, we need to be faithful to our respect for life otherwise we might lose our standards and abuse it’. Stage 6: at this stage the reply could be, NO, because I personally believe that no one has a right to take his or her own life and so I cannot be a part to such action’ or YES: ‘the decision to exit life is such a serious one that it needs to be honored if it is made reasonably’.  HEINZ DILEMMA Heinz’s wife was dying from a particular type of cancer. Doctors said a new drug might save her. The drug had been discovered by a local chemist, and the Heinz tried desperately to buy some, but the chemist was charging ten times the money it cost to make the drug, and this was much more than the Heinz could afford. Heinz could only raise half the money, even after help from family and friends. He explained to the chemist that his wife was dying and asked if he could have the drug cheaper or pay the rest of the money later. The chemist refused, saying that he had discovered the drug and was going to make money from it. The husband was desperate to save his wife so he was thinking that night to break into the chemist’s house and steal the drug. 1. The husband was correct in stealing the drug because he was a good man for wanting to save her and that his intentions were good that of saving the life of someone’s he loves. Answer: ________________ 2.The husband should steal for his wife because he might return the favor some day. Answer: ________________ 3. The wife’s life to live is a moral right that must be protected. 4. it is his husband’s duty to save his wife. Activity: Answer: ________________ Identify the 5. The husband has a good motive of saving the life of his wife. 6. The authority cannot simply ignore wrong doings. stage Answer: ________________ number. 7. The husband should not steal it for it is against the law. Answer: ________________ 8. it’s bad to steal since stealing punished the wrong doers. Answer: ________________ 9. Saving the life of the wife of the husband is the most important thing to do over any other properties. Answer: ________________ PRE-CONVENTIONAL LEVEL STAGE 1: PUNISHMENT AND OBEDIENCE STAGE 2: INDIVIDUAL AND INSTRUMENTAL EXCHANGE CONVENTIONAL LEVEL STAGE 3: MUTUAL AND INTERPERSONAL CONFORMITY STAGE 4: LAW AND ORDER POST-CONVENTIONAL LEVEL STAGE 5: SOCIAL CONTRACT AND INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS STAGE 6: UNIVERSAL ETHICAL PRINCIPLES  Issue, Decision, Judgment, and Dilemma 1.MORAL ISSUE- We should add that “issue” is also often used to refer to those particular situations that are often the source of considerable and inconclusive debate (thus, we would often hear topics such as capital punishment and euthanasia as moral “issues”). 2.MORAL DECISIONS- When one is placed in a situation and confronted by the choice of what act to perform. 3.MORAL JUDGMENT- When a person is an observer who makes an assessment on the actions or behavior of someone. 4.MORAL DILEMMA- one is torn between choosing one of two good or bad choosing between the lesser of two evils. when an individual can choose only one from a number of possible actions, and there are compelling ethical reason for the various choices. A mother may be conflicted between wanting to feed her hungry child, but then recognizing that it would be wrong for her to steal is an example of a moral dilemma. ETHICAL DECISION-MAKING  A MODEL FOR MORAL DECISION MAKING 1. GATHER THE FACTS – Frequently ethical dilemmas can be resolved simply by clarifying the facts of the case in question. In those cases that prove to be more difficult, gathering the facts is the essential first step prior to any ethical analysis and reflection on the case. In analyzing a case, we want to know the available facts at hand as well as any facts currently not known but that need to be ascertained. Thus one is asking not only “What do we know?” but also “ What do we need to know?” in order to make an intelligent ethical decision. 2. DETERMINE THE ETHICAL ISSUES The ethical issues are stated in terms of competing interests or goods. It’s these conflicting interests that actually make for an ethical dilemma. The issues should be presented as ______versus _________ format in order to reflect the interests that are colliding in a particular ethical dilemma. For example, in business ethics there is often a conflict between the right of a firm to make profit and its obligation to the community. In this case, the obligation pertains to the environment. 3. WHAT ETHICAL PRINCIPLES HAVE A BEARING ON THE CASE In any ethical dilemma, there are certain moral values or principles that are central to the conflicting positions being taken. It is critical to identify these principles, and in some cases, to determine whether some principles are to be weighted more heavily than others. Clearly, biblical principles will be weighted the most heavily. There may be other principles that speak to the case that come from other sources. There may be constitutional principles or principles drawn from natural law that supplement the biblical principles that come into play here. The principles that come out of your mission and calling are also important to consider. 4. LIST THE ALTERNATIVES Part of the creative thinking involved in resolving an ethical dilemma involves coming up with various alternative courses of action. Although there will be some alternatives that you will rule out without much thought, in general the more alternatives that are listed, the better the chance that your list will include some high-quality ones. In addition, you may come up with some very creative alternative that you had not considered before. 5. COMPARE THE ALTERNATIVES WITH THE PRINCIPLES At this point, the task is one of eliminating alternatives according to the moral principles that have a bearing on the case. In many instances, the case will be resolved at this point, since the principles will eliminate all alternatives except one. In fact, the purpose of this comparison is to see if there is a clear decision that can be made without further deliberations. If a clear decision is not forthcoming, then the next part is the model that must be considered. At the least, some of the alternatives may be eliminated by this step of comparison. 6. WEIGH THE CONSEQUENCES If the principles do not yield a clear decision, then a consideration of the consequences of the remaining available alternatives is in order. Both positive and negative consequences are to be considered. They should be informally weighed, since some positive consequences are more detrimental than others. 7. MAKE A DECISION Deliberations cannot go on forever. At some point, a decision must be made. Realize that one common element in ethical dilemmas is that there are no easy and painless solutions to them. Frequently the decision that is made is one that involves the least number of problems or negative consequences, not one that is devoid of them. ACTIVITY: A. Gathering of facts B. Determine the Ethical Issues C. Ethical Principles D. List the Alternatives E. Weigh the Consequences 1. Positive and negative results must to be considered. 2. Part of the creative thinking involved in resolving an ethical dilemma involves coming up with various courses of action. 3. Frequently ethical dilemmas can be resolved simply by clarifying the data of the case in question. 4. The ethical problems are stated in terms of competing interests or goods. 5. In business ethics there is often a conflict between the right of a firm to make profit and its obligation to the community. 6. You may come up with some very creative ideas/actions that you had not considered before. 7. In any ethical dilemma, there are certain moral values that are central to the conflicting positions being taken. 8. To determine whether some moral values are to be weighted more heavily than others. 9. If the principles do not yield a clear decision, then a consideration of the results of the remaining available alternatives is in order. 10. The better the chance that your suggested actions will include some high-quality ones. 3 Steps in Ethical Decision-Making: FORMAT 1.MORAL PROBLEM- Whether A or B (not) 2.MORAL ANALYSIS- Positive and Negative Consequences of Option A Positive and Negative Consequences of Option B 3. MORAL DECISION- A or B, (explain why)  Here is an example of a case study format. 1. WHETHER to (Cheat during exams) or NOT? 2. OPTION A: if I cheat- Positive Consequences Negative Consequences OPTION B: If I do not cheat- Positive Consequences Negative Consequences 3. I will cheat since I want to pass in the course.  Activity: What is the Ethical dilemma, Ethical analysis and decision Rajendra is a reputed structural engineer and is working for a major metro rail project. He is in charge of design, construction and positioning of pillars of metro flyover. A junior engineer in his team tells him that there is a major flaw in two erected pillars supporting a section of the flyover and they should be replaced/readjusted at any cost. These two pillars supported a flyover curve and if collapsed, it would cause a major accident and put many lives into danger. Moreover, in few days it is to be inaugurated for trial runs. Rajendra brushes aside the apprehension and warning by his junior. But later in the evening, on second thought, he once again scrutinizes his plans and drawings, and finds that his junior was indeed right. Accepting his mistake would tarnish his reputation for Rajendra. If any accident happens, which is certain to happen at certain point of time in future, it would affect the reputation of the company that constructed it. It will embarrass the government too. Also, replacing the pillars would inflate the cost for the company and would further delay the project. Examples of ETHICAL DILEMMA Imagine you are standing beside some tram tracks. In the distance, you spot a runaway trolley hurtling down the tracks towards five workers who cannot hear it coming. Even if they do spot it, they won’t be able to move out of the way in time. As this disaster looms, you glance down and see a lever connected to the tracks. You realise that if you pull the lever, the tram will be diverted down a second set of tracks away from the five unsuspecting workers. However, down this side track is one lone worker, just as oblivious as his colleagues. So, would you pull the lever, leading to one death but saving five? Now consider now the second variation of this dilemma. Imagine you are standing on a footbridge above the tram tracks. You can see the runaway trolley hurtling towards the five unsuspecting workers, but there’s no lever to divert it. However, there is large man standing next to you on the footbridge. You’re confident that his bulk would stop the tram in its tracks. So, would you push the man on to the tracks, sacrificing him in order to stop the tram and thereby saving five others? The outcome of this scenario is identical to the one with the lever diverting the trolley onto another track: one person dies; five people live. The interesting thing is that, while most people would throw the lever, very few would approve of pushing the fat man off the footbridge. KILLING VS LETTING DIE In the first trolley dilemma, the person who pulls the lever is saving the life of the five workers and letting the one person die. After all, pulling the lever does not inflict direct harm on the person on the side track. But in the footbridge scenario, pushing the fat man over the side is in intentional act of killing.  THIRD VARIATION Imagine you are a doctor and you have five patients who all need transplants in order to live. Two each require one lung, another two each require a kidney and the fifth needs a heart. In the next ward is another individual recovering from a broken leg. But other than his knitting bones, he’s perfectly healthy. So, would you kill the healthy patient and harvest their organs to save five others?