Tweet
Tweet

Slide 1

Slide 1 text

Philosophical Ethics thinking about right and wrong George Matthews Spring 2017

Slide 2

Slide 2 text

No content

Slide 3

Slide 3 text

No content

Slide 4

Slide 4 text

! This slide show presents a series of philosophical theories on the nature of and justification for value judgments about what is right and what is wrong.

Slide 5

Slide 5 text

! This slide show presents a series of philosophical theories on the nature of and justification for value judgments about what is right and what is wrong. ! Each of these theories has had many supporters throughout history and each continues to have supporters now.

Slide 6

Slide 6 text

! This slide show presents a series of philosophical theories on the nature of and justification for value judgments about what is right and what is wrong. ! Each of these theories has had many supporters throughout history and each continues to have supporters now. ! In evaluating each of these theories consider how well supported it is by the argument given as well as any positive and negative implications it may have.

Slide 7

Slide 7 text

Cultural Relativism

Slide 8

Slide 8 text

Cultural Relativism Ruth Benedict 1887 – 1948

Slide 9

Slide 9 text

Cultural Relativism Ruth Benedict 1887 – 1948 “The trouble with life isn’t that there is no answer, it’s that there are so many answers.”

Slide 10

Slide 10 text

Cultural Relativism Ruth Benedict 1887 – 1948 “The trouble with life isn’t that there is no answer, it’s that there are so many answers.” Ruth Benedict was an American anthropologist whose studies of other cultures convinced her that there was no one set of universally valid values.

Slide 11

Slide 11 text

Cultural Relativism Ruth Benedict 1887 – 1948 We all disagree about the meaning of terms such as “right” and ”wrong.” Thus nothing is truly right or wrong, only right or wrong from a particular perspective. the cultural differences argument

Slide 12

Slide 12 text

Cultural Relativism We all disagree about the meaning of terms such as “right” and ”wrong.” Thus nothing is truly right or wrong, only right or wrong from a particular perspective. the cultural differences argument Relativism claims that the whole idea of universally valid values is mistaken, since value judgments depend on one’s perspective. Although this may seem to be an appealing approach to value judgments, it has its problems.

Slide 13

Slide 13 text

Cultural Relativism We all disagree about the meaning of terms such as “right” and ”wrong.” Thus nothing is truly right or wrong, only right or wrong from a particular perspective. the cultural differences argument The major argument for cultural relativism asserts that the fact of cultural diversity negates the possibility of their being universal values. But is this really valid reasoning?

Slide 14

Slide 14 text

Cultural Relativism We all disagree about the meaning of terms such as “right” and ”wrong.” Thus nothing is truly right or wrong, only right or wrong from a particular perspective. the cultural differences argument The premise of this argument is certainly true. But then what follows from this fact?

Slide 15

Slide 15 text

Cultural Relativism We all disagree about the meaning of terms such as “right” and ”wrong.” Thus nothing is truly right or wrong, only right or wrong from a particular perspective. the cultural differences argument Note that the conclusion makes a much stronger claim than the premise does. It says that because we disagree on something nobody could possibly be correct. But this just doesn’t follow, hence this argument is INVALID.

Slide 16

Slide 16 text

Cultural Relativism We all disagree about the meaning of terms such as “right” and ”wrong.” Thus nothing is truly right or wrong, only right or wrong from a particular perspective. the cultural differences argument Not only is the main argument for relativism invalid, this position also implies that nothing is just plain wrong – not even genocide – as long as somebody believes that it is acceptable.

Slide 17

Slide 17 text

Cultural Relativism We all disagree about the meaning of terms such as “right” and ”wrong.” Thus nothing is truly right or wrong, only right or wrong from a particular perspective. the cultural differences argument But what if different cultures agree deep down on basic values even if they may implement those values in widely divergent ways?

Slide 18

Slide 18 text

What values do cultures share?

Slide 19

Slide 19 text

What values do cultures share? images from Peter Menzel, Material World: A Global Family Portrait

Slide 20

Slide 20 text

What values do cultures share? China

Slide 21

Slide 21 text

What values do cultures share? Japan

Slide 22

Slide 22 text

What values do cultures share? Mali, West Africa

Slide 23

Slide 23 text

What values do cultures share? America (1980’s)

Slide 24

Slide 24 text

What values do cultures share? Saudi Arabia

Slide 25

Slide 25 text

What values do cultures share? India

Slide 26

Slide 26 text

What values do cultures share? Cuba

Slide 27

Slide 27 text

Divine Command Theory

Slide 28

Slide 28 text

Divine Command Theory Saint Augustine 354 – 430

Slide 29

Slide 29 text

Divine Command Theory Saint Augustine 354 – 430 “A thing is good and pleasant only because it is connected to Him. Use it apart from its Source, and it will come to taste bitter. ”

Slide 30

Slide 30 text

Divine Command Theory Saint Augustine 354 – 430 “A thing is good and pleasant only because it is connected to Him. Use it apart from its Source, and it will come to taste bitter. ” Augustine converted to Christianity as an adult and then went on to become one of the most influential Christian writers of all times; his ideas made an indelible mark on the young religion. He defended the idea that God’s will determines what is right and wrong.

Slide 31

Slide 31 text

Divine Command Theory Saint Augustine 354 – 430 The only way for moral commands to be objective and binding is for them to have been issued by an absolute moral authority. There are some objective and binding moral commands, some things we just shouldn’t do. So there must be an absolute moral au- thority and this is God. the argument from moral authority

Slide 32

Slide 32 text

Divine Command Theory The only way for moral commands to be objective and binding is for them to have been issued by an absolute moral authority. There are some objective and binding moral commands, some things we just shouldn’t do. So there must be an absolute moral au- thority and this is God. the argument from moral authority Divine command theory argues that we can only make sense of moral ideas if they are based on the commands of an ultimate moral authority.

Slide 33

Slide 33 text

Divine Command Theory The only way for moral commands to be objective and binding is for them to have been issued by an absolute moral authority. There are some objective and binding moral commands, some things we just shouldn’t do. So there must be an absolute moral au- thority and this is God. the argument from moral authority This seems like a strong claim, but some things seem like they are just wrong no matter what – such as killing babies for fun.

Slide 34

Slide 34 text

Divine Command Theory The only way for moral commands to be objective and binding is for them to have been issued by an absolute moral authority. There are some objective and binding moral commands, some things we just shouldn’t do. So there must be an absolute moral au- thority and this is God. the argument from moral authority Although this argument is valid, there is a difficult problem with trying to base moral rules on divine commands.

Slide 35

Slide 35 text

Divine Command Theory The only way for moral commands to be objective and binding is for them to have been issued by an absolute moral authority. There are some objective and binding moral commands, some things we just shouldn’t do. So there must be an absolute moral au- thority and this is God. the argument from moral authority If God says that murder is wrong, does this mean that if He had said murder was OK, would this make it so? If not, then how can God be the source of moral rules?

Slide 36

Slide 36 text

Do values depend on authority or does legitimate authority depend on values?

Slide 37

Slide 37 text

Do values depend on authority or does legitimate authority depend on values?

Slide 38

Slide 38 text

Do values depend on authority or does legitimate authority depend on values?

Slide 39

Slide 39 text

Natural Law Theory

Slide 40

Slide 40 text

Natural Law Theory Thomas Aquinas 1225 – 1274

Slide 41

Slide 41 text

Natural Law Theory Thomas Aquinas 1225 – 1274 “The natural law is nothing else than the rational creature’s participation in the eternal law. ”

Slide 42

Slide 42 text

Natural Law Theory Thomas Aquinas 1225 – 1274 “The natural law is nothing else than the rational creature’s participation in the eternal law. ” Aquinas held that being ethical involved living up to one’s potential as a self- governing, rational being, whose passions are held in check. He followed Aristotle in thinking that all natural things have an “end” or natural goal built-in to them although unlike Aristotle he thought that this end was built-in to us by God.

Slide 43

Slide 43 text

Natural Law Theory Thomas Aquinas 1225 – 1274 Human beings have a set of built-in functions and capacities. Realizing these natural functions and capacities is better than not doing so. So human nature provides a guide for ethical action. the argument from moral authority

Slide 44

Slide 44 text

Natural Law Theory Human beings have a set of built-in functions and capacities. Realizing these natural functions and capacities is better than not doing so. So human nature provides a guide for ethical action. the argument from moral authority Natural law theory claims that some things are inherently wrong: those things that violate the natural functions and capacities built in to us.

Slide 45

Slide 45 text

Natural Law Theory Human beings have a set of built-in functions and capacities. Realizing these natural functions and capacities is better than not doing so. So human nature provides a guide for ethical action. the argument from moral authority Is what is natural always what is best?

Slide 46

Slide 46 text

Natural Law Theory Human beings have a set of built-in functions and capacities. Realizing these natural functions and capacities is better than not doing so. So human nature provides a guide for ethical action. the argument from moral authority Isn’t it up to us to decide what is right and what is wrong, whatever human nature may tell us?

Slide 47

Slide 47 text

Do values come from nature or from human choices?

Slide 48

Slide 48 text

Do values come from nature or from human choices? Edward Burtynsky, Manufactured Landscapes

Slide 49

Slide 49 text

Do values come from nature or from human choices? Edward Burtynsky, Manufactured Landscapes

Slide 50

Slide 50 text

Do values come from nature or from human choices? Edward Burtynsky, Manufactured Landscapes

Slide 51

Slide 51 text

Do values come from nature or from human choices? Edward Burtynsky, Manufactured Landscapes

Slide 52

Slide 52 text

Do values come from nature or from human choices? Edward Burtynsky, Manufactured Landscapes

Slide 53

Slide 53 text

Do values come from nature or from human choices? Edward Burtynsky, Manufactured Landscapes

Slide 54

Slide 54 text

Psychological Egoism

Slide 55

Slide 55 text

Psychological Egoism Max Stirner 1806 – 1856

Slide 56

Slide 56 text

Psychological Egoism Max Stirner 1806 – 1856 “For me you are nothing but – my food, even as I too am fed upon and turned to use by you.”

Slide 57

Slide 57 text

Psychological Egoism Max Stirner 1806 – 1856 “For me you are nothing but – my food, even as I too am fed upon and turned to use by you.” Max Stirner was a German philosopher who held that all actions are by definition self-centered since we all must act on the basis of our own plans and ideas. Perhaps he was a product of his own times, the early days of industrial capitalism in Europe when workers were ruthlessly exploited in appalling condi- tions as documented by Charles Dickens and Karl Marx.

Slide 58

Slide 58 text

Psychological Egoism Max Stirner 1806 – 1856 All decisions are made by individuals based on their own understanding and interests. Thus all decisions made by anyone must be self-serving and any apparently altruistic action must have an underlying selfish motive. in defense of psychological egoism

Slide 59

Slide 59 text

Psychological Egoism All decisions are made by individuals based on their own understanding and interests. Thus all decisions made by anyone must be self-serving and any apparently altruistic action must have an underlying selfish motive. in defense of psychological egoism Psychological egoism claims that we cannot, by definition, act for the sake of others.

Slide 60

Slide 60 text

Psychological Egoism All decisions are made by individuals based on their own understanding and interests. Thus all decisions made by anyone must be self-serving and any apparently altruistic action must have an underlying selfish motive. in defense of psychological egoism If this is the case then morality would be a pointless thing to try to follow.

Slide 61

Slide 61 text

Psychological Egoism All decisions are made by individuals based on their own understanding and interests. Thus all decisions made by anyone must be self-serving and any apparently altruistic action must have an underlying selfish motive. in defense of psychological egoism But doesn’t this theory paint an excessively cynical view of human beings? We can certainly interpret all action in terms of hidden motives, but does this mean that is all that moves us?

Slide 62

Slide 62 text

Ethical Egoism

Slide 63

Slide 63 text

Ethical Egoism Ayn Rand 1905 – 1982

Slide 64

Slide 64 text

Ethical Egoism Ayn Rand 1905 – 1982 “Self-sacrifice? But it is precisely the self that cannot and must not be sacrificed.”

Slide 65

Slide 65 text

Ethical Egoism Ayn Rand 1905 – 1982 “Self-sacrifice? But it is precisely the self that cannot and must not be sacrificed.” Ayn Rand was a highly influential novelist who emigrated from Russia to the U.S. She defended the capitalist idea that the good of all was only to be achieved by ignoring the demands of others and pursuing selfish gain. Among her contemporary followers are Alan Greenspan and Ron Paul who named his son Rand after her.

Slide 66

Slide 66 text

Ethical Egoism Ayn Rand 1905 – 1982 The most important human value is the value of the individual. Acting for the sake of others requires denying the value of the individual. Thus one should never act for the sake of others. Rand’s argument against altruism

Slide 67

Slide 67 text

Ethical Egoism The most important human value is the value of the individual. Acting for the sake of others requires denying the value of the individual. Thus one should never act for the sake of others. Rand’s argument against altruism Aren’t there also values to be found in cooperative activity?

Slide 68

Slide 68 text

Ethical Egoism The most important human value is the value of the individual. Acting for the sake of others requires denying the value of the individual. Thus one should never act for the sake of others. Rand’s argument against altruism Is life really a “zero sum game,” in which my benefit requires your loss?

Slide 69

Slide 69 text

Ethical Egoism The most important human value is the value of the individual. Acting for the sake of others requires denying the value of the individual. Thus one should never act for the sake of others. Rand’s argument against altruism Is it always rational to ignore others’ interests?

Slide 70

Slide 70 text

Social Contract Theory

Slide 71

Slide 71 text

Social Contract Theory Thomas Hobbes 1588 – 1674

Slide 72

Slide 72 text

Social Contract Theory Thomas Hobbes 1588 – 1674 Without enforceable social rules we should expect “continual fear, and danger of violent death; And the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.”

Slide 73

Slide 73 text

Social Contract Theory Thomas Hobbes 1588 – 1674 Without enforceable social rules we should expect “continual fear, and danger of violent death; And the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” Thomas Hobbes was the first modern political philosopher. He thought that social rules – moral and political – should be based on self- interest. We all have an interest in living under the rule of law rather than in the anarchy of the “state of nature.”.

Slide 74

Slide 74 text

Social Contract Theory Thomas Hobbes 1588 – 1674 We owe allegiance to rules only if they serve our interests. Social rules are in our best interests to follow since living by them is better than fending for ourselves. So we should follow the basic rules of society and trade some individual liberty for the rule of law. In Defense of the Social Contract

Slide 75

Slide 75 text

Social Contract Theory We owe allegiance to rules only if they serve our interests. Social rules are in our best interests to follow since living by them is better than fending for ourselves. So we should follow the basic rules of society and trade some individual liberty for the rule of law. In Defense of the Social Contract We all share basic interests such as life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Slide 76

Slide 76 text

Social Contract Theory We owe allegiance to rules only if they serve our interests. Social rules are in our best interests to follow since living by them is better than fending for ourselves. So we should follow the basic rules of society and trade some individual liberty for the rule of law. In Defense of the Social Contract In a state of nature we have greater liberty, but also much greater insecurity than in society‘.

Slide 77

Slide 77 text

Social Contract Theory We owe allegiance to rules only if they serve our interests. Social rules are in our best interests to follow since living by them is better than fending for ourselves. So we should follow the basic rules of society and trade some individual liberty for the rule of law. In Defense of the Social Contract Even if we may have an interest in accepting basic rules, what if the payoff for cheating on these rules is high enough to tempt us to cheat?

Slide 78

Slide 78 text

Social Contract Theory We owe allegiance to rules only if they serve our interests. Social rules are in our best interests to follow since living by them is better than fending for ourselves. So we should follow the basic rules of society and trade some individual liberty for the rule of law. In Defense of the Social Contract What if we could get away with not paying taxes, or otherwise taking advantage of “public goods” for private gain – why shouldn’t we?

Slide 79

Slide 79 text

The Tragedy of the Commons

Slide 80

Slide 80 text

The Tragedy of the Commons Even if we all have an interest in a clean world . . .

Slide 81

Slide 81 text

The Tragedy of the Commons we also all have an interest in getting something for nothing . . .

Slide 82

Slide 82 text

The Tragedy of the Commons and taking more than our fair share.

Slide 83

Slide 83 text

The Tragedy of the Commons What might prevent such selfish behavior?

Slide 84

Slide 84 text

Utilitarianism

Slide 85

Slide 85 text

Utilitarianism John Stuart Mill 1806 – 1873

Slide 86

Slide 86 text

Utilitarianism John Stuart Mill 1806 – 1873 “The Greatest-Happiness Principle holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.”

Slide 87

Slide 87 text

Utilitarianism John Stuart Mill 1806 – 1873 “The Greatest-Happiness Principle holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.” John Stuart Mill was a British economist, philosopher and social reformer. He assumed that humans were self- interested, yet that we could also be convinced to act for the good of others. Mills philosophy of utilitarianism remains popular to this day among economists and policy makers.

Slide 88

Slide 88 text

Utilitarianism John Stuart Mill 1806 – 1873 We are all after the same thing – happiness. There is no reason why my happiness should be considered more important than anyone else’s happiness So we should always act to maximize overall happiness, by choosing what leads to the greatest benefit for the most people involved. An argument for utilitarianism

Slide 89

Slide 89 text

Utilitarianism We are all after the same thing – happiness. There is no reason why my happiness should be considered more important than anyone else’s happiness So we should always act to maximize overall happiness, by choosing what leads to the greatest benefit for the most people involved. An argument for utilitarianism Even if different things might make different people happy we all share the quest for happiness.

Slide 90

Slide 90 text

Utilitarianism We are all after the same thing – happiness. There is no reason why my happiness should be considered more important than anyone else’s happiness So we should always act to maximize overall happiness, by choosing what leads to the greatest benefit for the most people involved. An argument for utilitarianism If happiness is valuable in itself then what reason can I have for saying that my happiness counts but yours doesn’t?

Slide 91

Slide 91 text

Utilitarianism We are all after the same thing – happiness. There is no reason why my happiness should be considered more important than anyone else’s happiness So we should always act to maximize overall happiness, by choosing what leads to the greatest benefit for the most people involved. An argument for utilitarianism Utilitarianism bases the value of an action purely on the consequences of that action.

Slide 92

Slide 92 text

Is what is “good” always what is “right?”

Slide 93

Slide 93 text

Is what is “good” always what is “right?” Does the end always justify the means?

Slide 94

Slide 94 text

Is what is “good” always what is “right?” How do we know what the ultimate consequences of our actions are?

Slide 95

Slide 95 text

Is what is “good” always what is “right?” Can we put a price on human lives?

Slide 96

Slide 96 text

Is what is “good” always what is “right?” Is anything just plain wrong?

Slide 97

Slide 97 text

Kantian ethics

Slide 98

Slide 98 text

Kantian ethics Immanuel Kant 1724 – 1804

Slide 99

Slide 99 text

Kantian ethics Immanuel Kant 1724 – 1804 “Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of another, always at the same time as an end and never simply as a means.”

Slide 100

Slide 100 text

Kantian ethics Immanuel Kant 1724 – 1804 “Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of another, always at the same time as an end and never simply as a means.” Kant was a major figure in the intellectual movement known as the Enlightenment. He sought to provide a rational basis for the values of the French Revolution – liberty, equality, fraternity.

Slide 101

Slide 101 text

Kantian ethics Immanuel Kant 1724 – 1804 Acting selfishly always involves assuming that others will follow the rules I break. An act can be a moral act only if it can be universally accepted. Selfish action cannot be universally accepted since it contradicts itself. So selfish action is fundamentally wrong. Kant’s argument for universal morality

Slide 102

Slide 102 text

Kantian ethics Acting selfishly always involves assuming that others will follow the rules I break. An act can be a moral act only if it can be universally accepted. Selfish action cannot be universally accepted since it contradicts itself. So selfish action is fundamentally wrong. Kant’s argument for universal morality If I lie or make false promises I am assuming that you value telling the truth and keeping one’s promises otherwise you’d never take me at my word.

Slide 103

Slide 103 text

Kantian ethics Acting selfishly always involves assuming that others will follow the rules I break. An act can be a moral act only if it can be universally accepted. Selfish action cannot be universally accepted since it contradicts itself. So selfish action is fundamentally wrong. Kant’s argument for universal morality To say that something is morally acceptable or unacceptable is to make an unconditional claim.

Slide 104

Slide 104 text

Kantian ethics Acting selfishly always involves assuming that others will follow the rules I break. An act can be a moral act only if it can be universally accepted. Selfish action cannot be universally accepted since it contradicts itself. So selfish action is fundamentally wrong. Kant’s argument for universal morality What makes immoral action wrong is that it fails to treat others as equals by acting on a double standard.

Slide 105

Slide 105 text

Kantian ethics Acting selfishly always involves assuming that others will follow the rules I break. An act can be a moral act only if it can be universally accepted. Selfish action cannot be universally accepted since it contradicts itself. So selfish action is fundamentally wrong. Kant’s argument for universal morality This is the basis for the idea that there are universal human rights – fundamental limits in the way we should treat each other.

Slide 106

Slide 106 text

Universal Rights

Slide 107

Slide 107 text

Universal Rights Democracy is based on the idea that we all deserve equal protection of the law.

Slide 108

Slide 108 text

Universal Rights Discrimination is wrong because it fails to treat equals as equals.

Slide 109

Slide 109 text

Universal Rights What happens when a society fails to protect the rights of its citizens?

Slide 110

Slide 110 text

Universal Rights Is deliberate violation of unjust laws acceptable?

Slide 111

Slide 111 text

Feminist Ethics

Slide 112

Slide 112 text

Feminist Ethics Carol Gilligan 1936 –

Slide 113

Slide 113 text

Feminist Ethics Carol Gilligan 1936 – “My research suggests that men and women may speak different languages that they assume are the same, using similar words to encode disparate experiences of self and social relationships.”

Slide 114

Slide 114 text

Feminist Ethics Carol Gilligan 1936 – “My research suggests that men and women may speak different languages that they assume are the same, using similar words to encode disparate experiences of self and social relationships.” Carol Gilligan refused to accept that standard models of moral development did justice to the moral experience of women.

Slide 115

Slide 115 text

Feminist Ethics Carol Gilligan 1936 – Philosophy and psychology presume that morality requires following impartial and universal rules. This “masculine” approach to moral decision-making leaves out “feminine” concerns with concrete relationships. A complete picture of morality requires balancing abstract rules with particular relationships. Gilligan’s argument

Slide 116

Slide 116 text

Feminist Ethics Philosophy and psychology presume that morality requires following impartial and universal rules. This “masculine” approach to moral decision-making leaves out “feminine” concerns with concrete relationships. A complete picture of morality requires balancing abstract rules with particular relationships. Gilligan’s argument The dominant theory of moral development, that of Lawrence Kohlberg, argues that moral ma- turity requires following universal rules regardless of the human costs involved.

Slide 117

Slide 117 text

Feminist Ethics Philosophy and psychology presume that morality requires following impartial and universal rules. This “masculine” approach to moral decision-making leaves out “feminine” concerns with concrete relationships. A complete picture of morality requires balancing abstract rules with particular relationships. Gilligan’s argument In Kohlberg’s tests female subjects tended to focus on social contexts at the expense of universal rules.

Slide 118

Slide 118 text

Feminist Ethics Philosophy and psychology presume that morality requires following impartial and universal rules. This “masculine” approach to moral decision-making leaves out “feminine” concerns with concrete relationships. A complete picture of morality requires balancing abstract rules with particular relationships. Gilligan’s argument Rather than accept that these subjects were “under-developed” Gilligan defends the idea of differing and complementary moral “voices.”

Slide 119

Slide 119 text

Feminist Ethics Philosophy and psychology presume that morality requires following impartial and universal rules. This “masculine” approach to moral decision-making leaves out “feminine” concerns with concrete relationships. A complete picture of morality requires balancing abstract rules with particular relationships. Gilligan’s argument Do men and women have different moral “styles?”

Slide 120

Slide 120 text

Feminisms

Slide 121

Slide 121 text

Feminisms First wave: allow women to participate!

Slide 122

Slide 122 text

Feminisms Second wave: end discrimination!

Slide 123

Slide 123 text

Feminisms Third wave: autonomy now!