Bioethics - Introduction to moral philosophy · Bioethics - Introduction to moral philosophy 1. The...

Bioethics-Introductiontomoralphilosophy

Inthenextthreeclassesweshallfocuson:

1. 15February-Thechallengeofculturalrelativism;2. 17/19February-HistoryofethicsI:fromvirtuetheorytoreligious

ethicstothesocialcontract;3. 22February-HistoryofethicsII:consequentialismanddeontology.

DavideVecchi-CentrodeFilosofiadasCiênciasdaUniversidadedeLisboa(CFCUL),FaculdadedeCiênciasdaUniversidadedeLisboa-4.3.16

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


1. Thechallengeofculturalrelativism(chapters1&2);

2. Historyofethics:fromvirtuetheory(chapter13)toreligiousethics(chapter4)tothesocialcontract(chapter10);

3. Historyofethics:thebigclashbetweenconsequentialism(chapters7&8)anddeontology(chapters9&10).

Referencetochaptersofthisbook:Rachels,J.2003.TheElementsofMoralPhilosophy.4thedition.McGrawHillInternationalEditions,NewYork(1sted.1986).

2

JamesW.Rachels

1941-2003


Today:1. Whatisethics;2. Thechallengeofculturalrelativism;3. Analysingculturalrelativistarguments:theis-oughtproblem(or

naturalisticfallacy);4. Analysingculturalrelativistarguments:theexistenceofsuper-cultural

moralstandards;5. Debunkingculturalrelativism:introducingconsequentialismand

deontology;6. Overcomingculturalrelativismisnotenough.

3

1.1-Whatisethics?

Inthelastclassyouweregivenadefinitionofbioethics:“….thesystematicstudyofhumanconductintheareaofthelifesciencesandhealthcare,insofarasthisconductisexaminedinthelightofmoralvaluesandprinciples.”Reich,W.T.1978.Encyclopediaofbioethics.NewYork:FreePress.p.xix

Somehistoricalreasonswereillustratedinordertounderstandtheemergenceofthediscipline,amongthemthedevelopmentofnewtechnologies(startingwithantibioticsandmedicalventilators,butthinkmoregenerallyaboutanybiotechnology,forinstancegeneeditingetc.)andthegrowingconcernfortheenvironmentandfuturegenerations.Inbrief,theconcernabouttheimpactofthelifesciencesonthemoralcommunityandtheenvironment.

Butwhatisethics?4

1.2-Whatisethics?

Ethics=thebranchofphilosophythatdealswithmoralprinciples(Iwillconsiderethicsandmoralphilosophyasthesamething)

Ethicsisamajorpartofphilosophy(withmetaphysics,epistemologyandaesthetics)Metaphysicsorontology=whatexists?Epistemology=whatisknowledge?Aesthetics=whatisbeauty?Ethics=whatisgood?

5

1.3-Whatisethics?

Whatmakesacourseofactiongood?Isittheconsequencesofacourseofactiononthemoralcommunity?IsitthefactthatIactaccordingtoamaximthatIwishwerefollowedbyeverymoralagentatalltimes?Aremoralstandardsobjective?Aremoralstandardssubjectiveorcultural-dependentor,rather,supra-culturalorevenobjective?Whoaretherelevantmoralagents?Asubsetofthehumanpopulation,orallhumans,oralsohumansoffuturegenerations,non-humananimals,embryosandfoetusesetc.?

6

1.4-Whatisethics?

Theseareallextremelycomplicatedquestions.Somuchsothatwecanaskwhether“progress”canbemadeinethics,inanalogytoscientificprogress.Itisclearthatethicshasevolvedandthatsomeethicaljudgementsareculturallyrelative:-Anhistoricaltourwillshowthatphilosophershaveapproachedthecentralquestion“whatisgood?”indifferentways(focusofnexttwoclasses).-Giventhatdifferentcultureshavedifferentmoralcodes,theassumptionthatmoralityisobjectivebecomesdubious(focusoftoday’sclass).

7

Shouldabortionbeallowed?Shouldeuthanasiabelegalised?Shouldantibioticsbeprescribedforviralinfections?Shouldweallbecomevegan?Shouldmodificationsofthehumangenomebeallowed?Shouldpubertyblockersbeprescribedtochildrenfromage12?Shouldwemaintainbiodiversity?Shouldwestartfromvaccinatingtheoldestduringthecurrentpandemic?

Fact:thereissubstantialdisagreementonanyoftheseissuesbetweenpeopleandculturaltraditions.Doesthismeanthatmoralstandardsaresubjectiveorculture-dependent?

8

2.1-Thechallengeofculturalrelativism

Infanticide(especiallyfemale)hasbeenandisstillcommonamongmanycultures.Forinstance,Inuiteskimos(Rachels2003,p.17+pp.24-5)practiceditbythrowingbabiesintowater.Isthisbehaviourimmoral?Andwhyisitso?Youcaninventyourownexample:istheChineseone-child(actuallytwo-children)policy,orinfibulation,orabortionupto24weeks,oreatinganimals,orprivateeducationorrefusingvaccinationagainstSars-CoV-2immoral?

Culturalrelativism:giventhatdifferentcultureshavedifferentmoralcodes,isitpossibletojudgeobjectivelywhethertheyarecorrectorincorrect?Isthereavantagepointfromwhichtomakesuchajudgement?Everyoneofusbelongstoaculture;everymoralstandardfromwhichtojudgewhetheranactionisrightorwrongisculture-dependent.Hence,therearenoobjectiveanduniversalmoraltruths.

9


10Rachels2003,p.18-9


Moralpracticesshouldbebetterthoughtofasculturalproducts.Therefore,fromthevantagepointofaparticularculture,weshouldnotassumethatourculturalpracticesarebasedonabsolutemoralstandardsandimposethemforcefullyonothercultures.Fromthis,culturalrelativismextrapolatesauniversalgeneralisation:anymoralpracticeisequallyadmirableandnoneisbetterthantheother;inbrief,therearenosuper-culturalmoralstandards.

Implicationsofculturalrelativism:1.Wecannotsaythatthemoralpracticesofsomeculturesaresuperiororinferiortoothers;2.Theonlyfeasiblewaytoevaluatethemoralityofanactisbyreferringtothemoralstandardsofthatspecificculture;3.Theideaofmoralprogressbecomesmeaningless.

11


Istheargumentfromculturalrelativismsound?Notifthereisanunjustifiedjumpfromquestionsoffacttoquestionsofmoral,committingwhathasbeencalledthe“naturalisticfallacy”(derivingOUGHTfromIS).

12

1.Inuitpracmceinfanmcide(FACTUALpremise);

2.Therearenosuper-culturalmoralstandards;thismeansthattheonlymoralstandardforjudgingthemoralityofanacmonisinternaltotheInuitculture(FACTUALpremise);

Hence,infanmcidewithinInuitcultureisgoodandmoral(MORALconclusion)

3.1-Analysingculturalrelativistarguments:theis-oughtproblem

LOGICALLY JUSTIFIED JUMP ?

Istheargumentfromculturalrelativismsound?Notifthereisanunjustifiedjumpfromquestionsoffacttoquestionsofmoral,committingwhathasbeencalledthe“naturalisticfallacy”(derivinganOUGHTfromIS).

13

1.Inuitpracmceinfanmcide(FACTUALpremise);2.Therearenosuper-culturalmoralstandards;thismeansthattheonlymoralstandardforjudgingthemoralityofanacmonisinternaltotheInuitculture(FACTUALpremise);


1. DavidekilledJorgeincircumstancez(FACTUALpremise);

2.Davidehascerebralcondimonx(observableFACTUALpremise);3.Peoplewithxincircumstancezkill(inferencesupportedbyevidence,henceFACTUALpremise);

Hence,Davideshouldnotbeconvicted(MORALconclusion)

LOGICALLY JUSTIFIED

JUMP ?


Inordertoavoidthenaturalisticfallacy,amoralpremiseisneededtojustifytheinferenceofamoralconclusionfromfactualpremises.

14

1.DavidekilledJorgeincircumstancez(FACTUALpremise)2.Davidehascerebralcondimonx(FACTUALpremise)

3.Peoplewithxincircumstancezkill(FACTUALpremise);4.GiventhatDavidecannot,givenhiscondiFonx,choosehowtoactin

circumstancez,hisbehaviouriscompelled,notfree,automaFc(FACTUALpremise);5.AutomaFcbehaviourisamoralbecausemoralresponsibilityrequiresfreedom

(MORALpremise).

Hence,Davideshouldnotbeconvicted(MORALconclusion)

LOGICALLY JUSTIFIED JUMP


15

1.Inuitpracmceinfanmcide(FACTUALpremise);2.Therearenosuper-culturalmoralstandards;thismeansthattheonlymoral

standardforjudgingthemoralityofanacmonisinternaltotheInuitculture(FACTUALpremise);

3.InfanFcideisawaytocontrolpopulaFongrowthinaregimeofextremelylimitedresourceswhilefemaleinfanFcideisawaytocontrolsexraFobalanceinaregime

wheremaleprematuredeathiscommon(FACTUALpremise);4.MeasurestocurbpopulaFongrowthandsexraFocontrolaregoodinaharsh

environmentliketheArcFc(MORALpremise).


LOGICALLY JUSTIFIED JUMP

Inordertoavoidthenaturalisticfallacy,amoralpremiseisneededtojustifytheinferenceofamoralconclusionfromfactualpremises.


16

1.Inuitpracmceinfanmcide(FACTUALpremise);2.Therearenosuper-culturalmoralstandards;thismeansthattheonlymoralstandardforjudgingthemoralityofanacFonisinternaltotheInuitculture

(FACTUALpremise);3.Infanmcideisawaytocontrolpopulamongrowthinaregimeofextremelylimitedresourceswhilefemaleinfanmcideisawaytocontrolsexramobalanceinaregime

wheremaleprematuredeathiscommon(FACTUALpremise);4.Measurestocurbpopulamongrowthandsexramocontrolaregoodinaharsh

environmentliketheArcmc(MORALpremise).

Hence,infanmcideisgoodandmoral(MORALconclusion)

LOGICALLY JUSTIFIED JUMP but…..

Howispremise2justified?Morethanafactualpremise,itisanontologicalassumptionorpostulationconcerningtheexistenceofmoralstandards.

MORALLY JUSTIFIED JUMP ?

4.1-Analysingculturalrelativistarguments:dosuper-culturalmoralstandardsexist?

17

Considerthisanalogy:1.Peoplexbelievetheearthisflatwhilepeopleybelievetheearthisroughlyspherical;2.Therearenosuper-culturalepistemologicalstandardstoadjudicatewhethertheearthisflatorspherical;thus,theonlyepistemologicalstandardforjudgingisinternaltoculturexory;Hence,peoplexshouldbelievethattheearthisflatwhilepeopleyshouldbelievethattheearthisspherical,wherethesebeliefsaregoingtobethebasisoftheirbehaviour.Whatiswrongwiththisargument?


18

Considerthisanalogy:1.Peoplexbelievetheearthisflatwhilepeopleybelievetheearthisroughlyspherical;2.Therearenosuper-culturalepistemologicalstandardstoadjudicatewhethertheearthisflatorspherical;thus,theonlyepistemologicalstandardforjudgingisinternaltoculturexory;Hence,peoplexshouldbelievethattheearthisflatwhilepeopleyshouldbelievethattheearthisspherical,wherethesebeliefsaregoingtobethebasisoftheirbehaviour.Whatiswrongwiththisargument?Fromtheexistenceofculturalvariationdonotfollowontologicalimplicationsconcerningtheexistenceofsuper-culturalepistemologicalstandards:thereareseveralwaystoevaluateobjectivelythattheearthisspherical(e.g.,lunareclipseobservation).


19

1.Inuitpracmceinfanmcide(FACTUALpremise);2.Therearenosuper-culturalmoralstandards;thismeansthattheonlymoralstandardforjudgingthemoralityofanacFonisinternaltotheInuitculture

(ONTOLOGICALassumpFon);3.Infanmcideisawaytocontrolpopulamongrowthinaregimeofextremelylimitedresourceswhilefemaleinfanmcideisawaytocontrolsexramobalanceinaregime

wheremaleprematuredeathiscommon(FACTUALpremise);4.Measurestocurbpopulamongrowthandsexramocontrolaregoodinaharsh

environmentliketheArcmc(MORALpremise).

Hence,infanmcideisgoodandmoral(MORALconclusion)

LOGICALLY JUSTIFIED JUMP but…..

Whatiswrongwithpremise2?Fromtheexistenceofculturalvariationdonotfollowontologicalimplicationsconcerningtheexistence(orlackthereof)ofsuper-culturalmoralstandards.

MORALLY UNJUSTIFIED JUMP


Themoregeneralquestioniswhethertheacknowledgementthatmoralcodesandcustomshavechangedthroughhistoryandthatthatthereexistsabundantculturalvariationconcerningmanyhumanethicalpracticesindeedshowsthatthereisnocommoncoreinthevarietyofexistingethicalculturalpractices.Alternative:thereismuchmoreincommonbetweenculturesthantheculturalrelativistassumes:noteverymoralstandardvariesfromculturetoculture,butsomearetrans-culturalorevenpossiblyuniversal.Indeed,somenormsarebasicandnecessaryforsocietytoexist,sothattheycanbeconsidered“moralculturaluniversals”(Rachels2003,p.26).Letmegiveyoutwogeneralexamples.

20


Amoralstandardthatapproachesamoralculturaluniversalistheevaluationofcoursesofactionintermsoftheireffectsonthemembersofthemoralcommunity.MeasurestocurbpopulationgrowthandsexratiocontrolaregoodinaharshenvironmentliketheArcticbecausethechild’sfamilyandtheentirepopulationwillbenefitfromthispractice.Thelogicofthisjustificationisthat,incircumstancex,courseofactionyisgoodbecauseithas,everythingconsidered,anetpositiveconsequenceforthemoralcommunity.Therefore,acourseofactionisgoodifitgeneratesconsequencesonthemoralcommunitythatare,onthebalance,betterthanalternativecoursesofaction.Thisistheessenceofconsequentialism(22thFebruaryclass).

21

5.1-Debunkingculturalrelativism

22

1.Inuitpracmceinfanmcide(FACTUALpremise);2.ConsequenFalismprovidessuper-culturalmoralstandardsofevaluaFon

(ONTOLOGICALassumpFon);3.Infanmcideisawaytocontrolpopulamongrowthinaregimeofextremelylimitedresourcesandfemaleinfanmcideisawaytocontrolsexramobalanceinaregime

wheremaleprematuredeathiscommon(FACTUALpremise);4.MeasurestocurbpopulaFongrowthandsexraFocontrolaregoodwhenthey

generateconsequencesthatare,onthebalance,beneficialforthemoralcommunity(MORALpremise).

Hence,infanmcideisgoodandmoral(MORAL)

Premise4canbeinterpretedfromaconsequenFalistperspecFve(premise2)thatmakestheconclusionjusFfied.

MORALLY JUSTIFIED JUMPLOGICALLY JUSTIFIED JUMP &


Anothermoralstandardthatisatleasttrans-culturalistheevaluationofcoursesofactionintermsofuniversalmaximsofconduct.Childrenarepersonswithindependentinterestsandpersonscannotbeusedasmeansorinstrumentsforthebenefitofothers.Anyevaluationintermsofconsequencesmissesthiscrucialpoint.Children,likeallpersons,areendsinthemselves.Thus,killingchildrenisalwayswrong.Inordertoevaluateanypossiblecourseofactionx,youshouldaskyourselfwhetheryouwouldbewillingthatxischosenbyeveryoneallthetime.Whatwouldhappenifeveryonepracticedinfanticideallthetime?Infanticide,fromthisperspective,isnotmorallypermissible.Extrapolation:acourseofactionisgoodifitisperformedinaccordancetouniversalmaximsofconduct.ThisistheessenceofKantianethicsordeontology(22thFebruaryclass).

23


24

1.Inuitpracmceinfanmcide(FACTUALpremise);2.Deontologyprovidessuper-culturalmoralstandardsofevaluaFon(ONTOLOGICAL

premise);3.Infanmcideisawaytocontrolpopulamongrowthinaregimeofextremelylimitedresourcesandfemaleinfanmcideisawaytocontrolsexramobalanceinaregime

wheremaleprematuredeathiscommon(FACTUALpremise);4.MeasurestocurbpopulaFongrowthandsexraFocontrolarealwaysbadbecausechildrenareendsinthemselvesandbecausethesepracFcescannotbeuniversalised

(MORALpremise).

Hence,infanmcideisbadandimmoral(MORALconclusion)

Premise4canbeinterpretedfromadeontologicalperspecFve(premise2)thatmakestheconclusionjusFfied.

MORALLY JUSTIFIED JUMPLOGICALLY JUSTIFIED JUMP &


Theexistenceofsuper-culturalmoralstandardslikethoseendorsedbyconsequentialismanddeontologyshowsthatculturalrelativismcanberesistedandthatmoralprogressispossible.Rachelsarguesthatthereisacommoncoreanda“minimumconception”ofmoralitysharedbyallethicaltheories(chapter1).Thisissurelypartiallytrue.Rachelsisrighttosaythatmoraljudgementsmustbesupportedby“goodreasons”ratherthanbymereexpressionsoftasteandculturally-relativecustoms(sections3,4and5aimtoshowthis).Itmightalsobeaddedthattheconceptionofmoralagentbelongingtothemoralcommunityhasbeen,throughouthistory,progressivelywidened,probablytheclearestinstanceofmoralprogress.

25

6.1-Overcomingculturalrelativismisnotenough

Atthesametime,theexistenceofthe“minimumconception”ofmoralitydoesnotpreventsystematicethicaldisagreements.Oneproblemthatshouldalreadybeobviousisthatsuper-culturalmoralstandardsoftenclash:asI’veshown(slides5.2and5.4),consequentialismmightjustifyinfanticidebutdeontologydoesnot.Moregenerally,whyendorsingconsequentialismratherthandeontology?Theclashbetweensuper-culturalmoralstandardsissystematic.Considerthiscase:

POLICY:shouldnationalbordersbeclosedduringthispandemic?

26


Factualconsiderations:evidentialbasisinsupportoragainstthepolicy

A. closingborderslimitstheintroductionofmoretransmissibleand/orlethalSars-CoV-2variantsoriginatingabroadandhenceprotectsthelocalpopulation;

B. closingbordersprotectsthesuccessofthelocalvaccinationprogramme;

C. closingbordersnegativelyaffectsthelivesofmanypeopleaswellaseconomicactivity;

D. closingborderspotentiallyeradicatesinfectionlocally,butnotglobally;E. ……

27


Moralconsiderations:ethicalrationaleunderlyingthepolicy

Culturalrelativistswouldarguethateverycultureapplieslocalandculturally-specificmoralstandardstodecidewhethertopursuethispolicy.Ineffect,bordercontrolpolicyisveryidiosyncraticaroundtheglobe.Rachelswouldarguethat,asamatteroffact,super-culturalmoralstandardsareinevitablyappliedwhenthemoraljustificationofthepolicyisatissue.IthinkRachelsisright,butofcoursetheexistenceofsuper-culturalmoralstandardsisinsufficienttodeterminewhetherthepolicyismoral.

28


POLICY:shouldnationalbordersbeclosedduringthispandemic?

Theexistenceofsuper-culturalmoralstandardsisinsufficienttodeterminewhetherthepolicyismoral.Thedeeperproblemisthatthepolicymightbejustifiedaccordingtosomemoralstandardsandnotothers.

Howcanthepolicybeethicallyjustified?Examples?

Tips:consequentialistjustificationintermsoftheeffectofthepolicy?Deontologicaljustificationintermsofwhatgovernmentshavethedutytodo?

29


POLICY:shouldnationalbordersbeclosedduringthispandemic?Examplesofethicaljustificationbymeansofsuper-culturalmoralstandards:1.consequentialism:ifthenegativeconsequencesofclosingbordersoutweighsthepositiveconsequences,thepolicyisimmoral,otherwiseitismoral;2.deontology:iftheobligationofgovernmentsistosavelivesratherthanlivelihoods,thepolicyismoral;3.globalethics:localeradicationshouldbeaccompaniedbyaglobalefforttoeradicatecontagionevenincountrieswithnoresources;ifthiscannotbedone,thenclosingbordersaimingatlocaleradicationisimmoral;ifitcanbedone,itismoral.Isthereanywayinwhichwecanshowthatanethicaltheoryisbetterthantheothers?We’llseeinthenexttwoclasses.

30


Primaryresources:

1.Rachels,J.2003.TheElementsofMoralPhilosophy.4thedition.McGrawHillInternationalEditions,NewYork(1sted.1986).Chapters1and2.

2.Rachels,J.2004.ElementosdeFilosofiaMoral,Gradiva,Lisboa.Capítulos1e2.

Secondarysources

1.Reich,W.T.1978.Encyclopediaofbioethics.NewYork:FreePress.

31

Bioethics-IntroductiontomoralphilosophyII

Threeclasses:1. 15February-Thechallengeofculturalrelativism;2. 17/19February-fromvirtuetheory(chapter13)toreligiousethics(chapter

4)tothesocialcontract(chapter10);3. 22February-HistoryofethicsII:consequentialismanddeontology.

ReferencetoRachels,J.2003.TheElementsofMoralPhilosophy.4thedition.McGrawHillInternationalEditions,NewYork(1sted.1986).

DavideVecchi-CentrodeFilosofiadasCiênciasdaUniversidadedeLisboa(CFCUL),FaculdadedeCiênciasdaUniversidadedeLisboa-4.3.16

[email protected]


Inthelastclasswesawthatculturalrelativismdeniestheexistenceofsuper-culturalmoralstandardsofevaluationofcoursesofaction.Weanalysedoneofitsarguments,showingthat:1.Logicallyspeaking,amoralargumentmustpossessatleastonemoralpremise,otherwiseitderivesamoralconclusionfromfactualpremises,whichisafallacy;2.Morallyspeaking,culturalrelativistargumentsarenotsoundiftheyderiveanegativeontologicalclaim(i.e.,thenon-existenceofsuper-culturalmoralstandards)fromaclaimaboutwhatpeoplebelieve;3.Intheend,beneathculturalvariation,thereexisttrans-culturalorevenmoralculturaluniversals,i.e.,super-culturalmoralstandardsofevaluationofcoursesofaction,suchastheevaluationofacourseofactionintermsofitseffectsorintermsofuniversalmaximsofconduct.

33

Summinguplastclass

Thechallengeofculturalrelativismcanthusberesisted.Indeed,Rachelsarguesthatallethicaltheoriesandculturessharea“minimumconception”ofmorality(chapter1):1.Moraljudgementsmustbesupportedbygoodreasonsandsoundmoralprinciples;2.Moralargumentsrequiretheimpartialconsiderationofeachmoralagent’sinterests.Rachelsmightberight,butthisisirrelevantwhenweconsiderthatthedeeperprobleminethicsisthatthemoralprinciplesatthebasisofdifferentethicaltheoriesclash.Whatethicaltheoryshouldwechoosethen?Andwhy?

34

Summinguplastclass

TodayIshallbrieflyexposetherudimentsofthreeethicaltheories:religiousethics,virtuetheoryandcontractualism(i.e,socialcontracttheory).Ishallshow-moreorlessfollowingRachels’argument-thatthesethreetheoriesareeitherincoherentorsomehowincompleteandneedtobecomplementedbymoregeneralmoralprinciplessuchas,forinstance,thoseatthebasisofconsequentialism(e.g.,utilitarianism)ordeontology(e.g.,Kantianethics).Inthenextclassweshallgobacktoconsequentialismanddeontology,whichwehaveintroducedinclass1(slides5.1-5.4).

35

Planforthisclass

Divinecommand’stheory(forananalysis,seesection4.2inRachels)Godhasgivenusaseriesofmoralrulesandstandards.Theserulesandstandardsareobjective.Whatisgood/rightandbad/wrongisdeterminedbyGod.Problem:iscourseofactionxrightbecauseGodcommandsitordoesGodcommanditbecausexisright?IfitisarguedthatacourseofactionxisrightbecauseGodcommandsit,thenGod’scommandsseemmorallyarbitrary.WhatifGodtoldustokillandlie?Killingandlyingwouldbecomegood/right.IfitisarguedthatGodcommandsacourseofactionxbecauseitisgood/right,thenweareacknowledgingthatthereisamoralstandardthatispriortoandindependentofGod’sjudgement.ItisbecauseofsuchimplicationsthatDivineCommandTheoryhasbeenlargelyabandoned. 36

1.1-Religiousethics

TheTheoryofNaturalLawElementsofthetheoryofNaturalLaw:1.Everythinginnaturehasapurpose.Natureisaarationalsystemwhereeverypartofit-everynaturalthingandobject-hasaspecificpurpose.Intheend,theultimatepurposeisanthropocentric.ThisviewhasitsrootsinAristotle(Rachelsp.54):

37

1.2-Religiousethics

The difference is that Aristotle did not considerGod part of the picture(e.g.,hisethicsdoesnotmakeanyappealtoGod).ChrismanityaddedGodthecreatoroftheramonalordertothispicture.

TheTheoryofNaturalLawElementsofthetheoryofNaturalLaw:2.Therearelawsofnaturegoverningnaturalphenomena:everynaturalobjectbehavesinaccordancetoitspurpose.Therearealsomorallawsthat,ultimately,derivefromthelawsofnaturethatGodcreated.Somemoralbehavioursarethusnaturalandpurposeful,otherunnaturalandwithoutpurpose.3.GodcreatedarationalorderandwearecreaturesofGod,sowecanunderstandthemoralnaturalorder.Thismeansthatthecorrectcourseofactioncanberationallyevaluated(ineffectmakingmoralityindependentofreligion).St.ThomasAquinasinfactsaid,“TodisparagethedictateofreasonisequivalenttocondemningthecommandofGod”(Rachelsp.57).Thisrendersthetheoryofnaturallawpartiallyconsistentwiththeminimumconceptionofmorality(e.g.,theappealtogoodreasonsandsoundprinciples). 38

1.3-Religiousethics

Arethereanydistinctivelyreligiouspositionsonmajormoralissues?AsRachelsargues,religiousethicsiseitherlogicallyincoherent(DivineCommandtheory,slide1.1)orparasiticonindependentmoralconsiderationsandprinciples(NaturalLawtheory,slides1.2and1.3).Thismightbeperceivedasamisinterpretationofactualreligiouspractice,whichisbasedontheteachingsoftheScripturesandthedictatesofreligiousinstitutions.However,Rachels(p.58)askswhetherthereareany“distinctivelyreligiouspositionsonmajormoralissues”?Considerabortion.Isthereadistinctivelyreligiouspositiononthisissue?1.Religiouspracticesdiffer(JewishvsoldChristiantraditionvscontemporaryCatholicposition);2.ItisdifficulttofindsupportforthepositionoftheCatholicChurchintheBible;3.Religiouspositionshistoricallychange; 39

1.4-Religiousethics

Arethereanydistinctivelyreligiouspositionsonmajormoralissues?3.Religiouspositionshistoricallychange:“PopePiusIXchallengedthecanonicaltraditionaboutthebeginningofensouledlifesetbyPopeGregoryXIVin1591.Hebelievedthatwhileitmaynotbeknownwhenensoulmentoccurs,therewasthepossibilitythatithappensatconception.Believingitwasmorallysafertofollowthisconclusion,hethoughtalllifeshouldbeprotectedfromthestartofconception.In1869heremovedthelabelsof‘animated’fetusand‘unanimated’fetusandconcludedthatabortionsatanypointofgestationwerepunishablebyexcommunication.”Fromhttps://embryo.asu.edu/pages/pope-pius-ix-1792-1878

40

1.5-Religiousethics

https://embryo.asu.edu/pages/pope-pius-ix-1792-1878

Arethereanydistinctivelyreligiouspositionsonmajormoralissues?3.Religiouspositionshistoricallychange:“PopePiusIXchallengedthecanonicaltraditionaboutthebeginningofensouledlifesetbyPopeGregoryXIVin1591.Hebelievedthatwhileitmaynotbeknownwhenensoulmentoccurs,therewasthepossibilitythatithappensatconception.Believingitwasmorallysafertofollowthisconclusion,hethoughtalllifeshouldbeprotectedfromthestartofconception.In1869heremovedthelabelsof‘aminated’fetusand‘unanimated’fetusandconcludedthatabortionsatanypointofgestationwerepunishablebyexcommunication.”Fromhttps://embryo.asu.edu/pages/pope-pius-ix-1792-18784.ThisalsoshowsthattheoriginalrationaleofthepositionoftheCatholicChurchtodaywasmotivatedbya-religiousmoralstandards,thatis,theadoptionoftheprecautionaryprinciple(i.e.,inthelightofabsenceofscientificevidencethatacertainirreversibledamagemightoccur,assumetheworsecasescenario). 41

1.5-Religiousethics


Arethereanydistinctivelyreligiouspositionsonmajormoralissues?Considerthe“appealtonature”arguments.Basicallytheirpointisthatwhatisnaturalisgood.Godisbenevolentandcreatednature,sonatureisgood.EveryhumansharesanaturegivenbyGod.Everyhumanmustbehaveinaccordancetowhatourcommonnaturerequires.Somebehavioursarethusnaturalandpurposeful,otherunnaturalandwithoutpurpose.Isthemoralprinciplethatwhatisnaturalisgoodsound?

42

1.6-Religiousethics

43

1.Homosexualbehaviourcanbeobservedinnatureandalsointhehumanpopulamon(factualpremise);

2.Humanhomosexualbehaviouris,however,stamsmcallyuncommon(factualpremise);

3.Humanhomosexualbehaviourisnotreproducmvelyadvantageousandhencenotadapmve(factualpremise);

4.Thereisnogenemcbasisforhomosexualbehaviourbecauseitreducesfitness(factualpremise);

5.Whatisnotnaturalisbad(MORALpremise);

Hence,homosexualbehaviourisimmoral(MORALconclusion)RELIGIOUSETHICSRATIONALE:Humanhomosexualbehaviourisunnatural

becauseuncommon,contrarytofixedhumannatureandwithoutreproducFvepurpose.


1.7-Religiousethics

44

1.Homosexualbehaviourcanbeobservedinthecaseofmanyanimals,includingbonobos,thespeciesphylogenemcallynearesttous(factualpremise);

2.Thereisagenemcbasisforhomosexualbehaviourbecauseitincreasesthefitnessofthesocialgroup(factualpremise);

3.Homosexualbehaviourisnatural(factualpremise);4.Whatisnaturalisgood(MORALpremise);

Hence,homosexualbehaviourisgoodandmoral(MORALconclusion)ALTERNATIVERATIONALE:Thereisnofixedhumannature,notallbehaviours

evolvebecauseofreproducFveadvantageandsexualreproducFonisnottheonlypurposeofsex.


1.8-Religiousethics

45

1.Rapingbehaviourcanbeobservedinthecaseofmanyanimals(factualpremise);2.ThereisagenemcbasisforrapingbehaviourbecauseitincreasesDarwinian

fitness(factualpremise);3.Rapingbehaviourisnatural(factualpremise);4.Whatisnaturalisgood(MORALpremise);

Hence,rapingbehaviourisgoodandmoral(MORALconclusion)

(SeeThornhill,R.&Palmer.2000insecondaryliterature)


1.9-Religiousethics

Giventhat it ispossibletoconcoctavarietyofargumentswith incoherentand counterintuiFvemoral conclusions from the applicaFon of themoralprinciplethatwhatisnaturalisgood,theprincipleisnotsound.Intheend,thereisnotadisFncFvelyreligiousposiFononmajormoralissues.

Virtuetheoryis-withcontractualism,utilitarianismandKantianethics-oneofthefourmajoroptionsincurrentmoralphilosophy(Rachels2003,p.155).Aristotle“NicomacheanEthics”:centralethicalquestionconcernscharacter,i.e.,whatisavirtuousperson?Whattraitsofcharactermakeoneagoodperson?Virtuouslifeisinseparablefromthelifeofreason.Inthissense,virtueethicssharespartiallythefirstcommitmentwiththeminimumconceptionofmorality(i.e.,moraljudgementsmustbesupportedbygoodreasons).GoddoesnotplayaroleinAristotelianethics.Incontrastwiththeethicaltheoriestryingtoanswerthequestionofwhatmakesacourseofactiongood.

46

2.1-Virtueethics

Whatisavirtue?Aristotle:atraitofcharactermanifestedinhabitualaction.Virtuesarenotmanifestedonanoccasionalbasis,butalways.Butevenvicesmightbetraitsofcharactermanifestedinhabitualaction.Sowhatdistinguishesvirtuefromvice?Wecanasaconsequencedefineavirtueasatraitofcharacter,manifestedinhabitualaction,thatitisgoodforapersontohave.Butthenthequestionofwhatmakesthevirtuegoodremainspending(slide1.5).

47

2.2-Virtueethics

Whichcharactertraitsarevirtues?

48

2.3-Virtueethics

Rachelsp.176

Whatdovirtuesconsistin?Aristotle:virtuesarethemeanbetweentwocharactertraits,excessanddeficiency.Inmediostatvirtus.Courageisbetweentheextremesofrecklessnessandcowardice.Generosityisbetweentheextremesofextravaganceandstinginess.Honestyisbetweentheextremesofnaivetyanddeception.Loyaltyisbetweengeneralisedbenevolenceandbetrayal.(Notethatloyaltytofriendsandfamilyseemstocontravenetherequirementofimpartialityoftheminimumconceptionofmorality,Rachelsp.186-7).

49

2.4-Virtueethics

Whyarevirtuesgoodforapersontohave?

50

2.5-Virtueethics

Aristotle:thereissomethinggeneralaboutthesevirtues:theyareneededtoliveasuccessfullife.Giventhekindsofsociallifeweliveashumans,thevirtuesareallqualimesneededtobesuccessfulinlife.Thevirtuouspersonwillfarebeuerinlife.

Arevirtuesuniversal?Isasinglesetofvirtuesapplicabletoallpersonsinalllifecircumstances,inallsocietiesandallcultures?Shouldwespeakofthevirtuouspersonas“thegoodperson”?Aristotlewasmakingageneralclaimaboutthekindofsociallifeweliveashumans.Isthisclaimjustified?Ontheonehand,itmightbesaidthathewasmerelytalkingaboutthelifeofaphilosopherinclassicalAthens,averypeculiarkindoflife.Ontheother,Aristotlewasproposinganargumentagainstculturalrelativism:themajorvirtues(i.e.,courage,generosity,honesty,loyalty)willbeneededbyallpeopleatalltimesandthusarenotmeresocialconventionsorculturalvalues,butbasicfactsaboutourcommonhumancondition.

51

2.6-Virtueethics

LimitsofvirtuetheoryHowdoesvirtuetheoryapproachthequestionofwhatmakesacourseofactiongoodandhowshouldwebehave?Moral(especiallybioethical)problemsareoftenaboutwhatweshoulddo:shouldIabort?ShouldIrelievemyillfatherfromsuffering?ShouldIprescribepubertyblockerstochildren?ShouldIbecomevegan?Etc.Theanswerofvirtuetheoryisthatthecorrectcourseofactionistheoneavirtuouspersonwouldchoose.Doesthishelp?Consideramoralconflictcase.

52

2.7-Virtueethics

LimitsofvirtuetheoryConsiderthiscase:myfatherisextremelyillandhisconditionisgettingworsebytheday.Heisinextremepainandthedoctorssaythathecannotimprove.Heisalsosemi-consciousanditisalmostimpossibletocommunicatewithhim.However,inthepasthetoldmethatheharboursstrongfeelingsagainsteuthanasia.ShouldIrelievehimfromhispainandactcourageouslyorshouldIactloyallybyupholdinghisbeliefsagainsteuthanasia?Whatwouldavirtuouspersondoincasethevirtuesofcourageandloyaltyclash?AsRachels(2003,p.189)argues“Theadmonitiontoactvirtuouslydoesnot,byitself,offermuchhelp”incasesofconflict.

53

2.8-Virtueethics

LimitsofvirtuetheoryWhatwouldavirtuouspersondoincasethevirtuesofcourageandloyaltyclash?AsRachels(2003,p.189)argues“Theadmonitiontoactvirtuouslydoesnot,byitself,offermuchhelp”incasesofconflict.Virtueethicsis,atbest,incomplete.Consequentialismanddeontologyoffermoralguidanceinthiscase.Consequentialism:relievingmyfatherfrompainwillhave,inthiscase,anetpositiveeffectonthemoralcommunity,thusactingcourageouslyisthemoralcourseofaction.Deontology:respectingtherationality,dignity,autonomyandfreedomtochooseofhumansisadutyanduniversalmaximofconduct,thusactingloyallytowardsmyfatheristhemoralcourseofaction.

54

2.9-Virtueethics

Supposewestartourethicalanalysisfromastandpointthatisoppositetothatofreligiousethics.Moreprecisely:1.fromtheontologicalassumptionthatthereisnoGodanddivinesourceofmorality;2.andfromaparticularhypothesisabouthumannature:humansarenaturallyself-interestedandaltruismiswishfulthinking(i.e.,psychologicalegoism,cf.chapter5Rachels).WheredoesmoralitycomefromifthereisnoGodandifweareselfish?Fromthesocialcontractthatself-interestedhumanbeingssigninordertosolveapracticalproblem:avoidingthestateofnatureandliveapeacefulandcooperativeexistence.

55

3.1-Thesocialcontract

Thestateofnatureisafictioninaway.Butitremainsanimportantanalyticaltool(Rachelsp.156-7).ThomasHobbes(Leviathan,1651)asksustothinkwhatitwouldbelikeiftherewerenosocialcontractandnosocialinstitutions(nogovernmentwithitslaws,policeandcourts).Hobbesnonethelessbasedhisfictiononhistoricalconsiderations:whatwouldhappenifaviralinfectionwithahighmortalityrateengendersapandemic?ThisthoughtexperimentleadsHobbestopostulatetheexistenceofastateofnature,asituationinwhichthereis:“….continualfear,anddangerofviolentdeath;andthelifeofman,solitary,poor,nasty,brutish,andshort”(Rachelsp.142).

56


TherationaleofHobbesargumentisthefollowing:1.Equalityofneed:allhumansneedthesameresourcestosurvive;2.Scarcityofresources:theresourcesarescarce;3.Essentialequalityofhumanpower:nohumanissuperiortoeveryoneelse;4.Limitedaltruism:wecannotcountonspontaneouscharityandgenerositybecausepeopleareessentiallyself-interested.Scarcityofresourcesandequalityofneedmeansthathumanswillbeincontinuouscompetitionfortheacquisitionofresources;butgiventhatweareessentiallyequalandthatnoonewilleverprevailinthecompetition,andgiventhatself-interestandlimitedaltruismcannotbeabasisforsocialcooperation,thenthestateofnatureisastateof“constantwar,ofonewithall”(Rachelsp.143).

57


Thesocialcontractisthustheinstrumenttoescapethestateofnature.Thesocialcontractisbasedon:1.rulesguaranteeingthathumanswillnotharmoneanother;2.rulesthatenforcecooperationandtherespectoftheiragreements.Hobbes’mainpointisthatonlyGovernmentanditssocialinstitutions(itssystemoflaws,itspolicingauthorityanditsjudiciary)canestablishandensurethatthesekindsofrulesarerespected.Itisonlywithinthecontextofthesocialcontractthatwecanbecomealtruists,cooperative,beneficentor,asRousseauputit“differentkindsofcreatures”(Rachelsp.144-5).

58


ThesocialcontractexplainstheroleoftheGovernmentandalsowhatmoralityconsistsin,namely,thesetofrules,governinghowpeoplearetotreatoneanother,thatrationalpeoplewillagreetoaccept,fortheirmutualbenefit,ontheconditionthatothersfollowthoserulesaswell(principleofreciprocity).Contractualismthusmakessenseofmoralbehaviourandconduct:1.WhatmoralrulesshouldIfollow?Thosethatarenecessaryforsocialliving;2.Whyarethesemoralrulesjustified?Becauseotherwisetherewouldbenopossiblecooperationwithotherhumans;3.Whyisitreasonabletofollowthesemoralrules?Becauseitistoourownadvantageand,afortiori,mutuallybeneficialtoallmembersofsociety;4.Doesmoralityhaveanobjectivebasis?No“special”factsbutobjectivebasis:agreementbetweenrationalpeopleformutualbenefit.

59


Hence,contractualismhasseveraladvantages.Italsopartiallysharesthecommitmentsoftheminimumconceptionofmorality:1.Moraljudgementsmustbesupportedbygoodreasons(thesocialcontractisanagreementbetweenrationalpeople)andsoundmoralprinciples(justifiedwithintheframeworkofthesocialcontract);Butconsidertheothercommitment:2.Moralargumentsrequiretheimpartialconsiderationofeachmoralagent’sinterests(Rachels-2003,pp.157-9-arguesthatcontractualismisflawedbecauseitdoesnotcomplywiththisprinciple).Hobbesstartedfromtheassumptionthatallhumansareequalintermsofneedandpower(slide3.3).Butweknowthat,historicallyspeaking,notallhumanshavebeenandareconsideredequalmoralagents.Thehistoryofhumanityisahistoryofdiscrimination.

60


Considerasituationinwhichagroupofmoralagentsisdiscriminatedorisnotevenconsideredasapartofthecontract,aspartofthemoralcommunity.Arethemembersofsuchgroupsallowedtobreaktherulesofthecontract?Oneansweristhatthiswouldbeallowedwhenreciprocityisviolated.ReciprocityinthissensemeansthatIacceptthemoralrulesofthesocialcontract(henceforthacceptinglimitationstomyfreedom)ontheconditionthatothersdothesame.Forinstance,wepunishcriminalsbecausetheyviolatethereciprocityrule.Anotheransweristhateventheviolationofreciprocityisinsufficientforcivildisobedience.

61


A-CivildisobedienceismoralWithintheframeworkofthesocialcontractracialsegregationruleshavebeenformulated.Thereisaninfringementoftheimpartialitycommitmentoftheminimumconceptionofmoralitybecausesomegroupsofpeoplearediscriminated.Thesepeopledonotenjoythesamebenefitsofthesocialcontractasothers.Thetermsofthesocialcontractarenotbeinghonouredbecausereciprocityisnotrespected.Hence,civildisobedienceandbreakingracialsegregationlawsisallowed.

62


B-CivildisobedienceisimmoralWithintheframeworkofthesocialcontractracialsegregationruleshavebeenformulated.Moralitymeanscomplyingwiththerulesofthesocialcontractindependentlyoftheirobjectionablenature.Legalisequivalenttomoral.Allmoralagents,eventhosewithlessrights,shouldthusobeyalllawsandcannotpickandchoose.Otherwisethesocialcontractwouldbedestroyedfromwithinandwewouldbebacktothestateofnature.Hence,civildisobedienceandbreakingracialsegregationlawsisneverallowed.

Thepossibilityofdiscriminationposesageneralproblemforcontractualism:whatisthebasisforthemoraljustificationoftherulesofthecontract?Forinstance,howcandiscriminationlegislationbemorallyjustified?Ifitisdonebyreferringtotheinternalstandardsofthesocialcontract,it’sequivalenttoculturalrelativism.Toarguethatwhatislegalismoralseemsanabomination.Legislationcanbeasarbitraryanddiscriminatoryasyouwishanditwillinevitablybejustified.Thus,theonlyalternativeisthatlegislationisjustifiedbyreferringtomoralstandardsthatareexternaltothecontract.Butifthisisthecase,thenthesocialcontractisanethicaltheorywithlimitationsbecauseitmakesreferencetomoregeneralmoralstandards.

63


Considerthisexample:privateeducationisaconsistentfeatureofmanynationaleducationalsystems.Someprivateeducationinstitutions(Eton,UK,establishedin1440;annualfeeover£40,000)areolderthantheUniversityofPorto(establishedin1836)and,moregenerally,predatetheStateeducationsystem.Supposethesocialcontractallowsprivateeducation.Supposealsothatgovernmentpossessesevidencethatprivateeducationcreatessocialfragmentationandclassinequality.Shouldgovernmentchangethetermsofthesocialcontractandbanishprivateeducation?Whatisthebasisforthemoraljustificationofthedecisiontheytake?Anyideas?

64


Whatisthebasisforthemoraljustificationofthedecisiontakenbygovernmentswhentheyconsiderchangingthetermsofthecontract?1.Privateeducationcreatesanunfairadvantagetothefewwhocanaffordit.Itisaviolationofthemoralprincipleofequalopportunitiesforall.Itshouldthusbebanned.2.Privateeducationhas,basedontheevidenceavailable,anegativeeffectonsociety.Itshouldthusbebanned.3.Manytransnationallegislativeframeworks(e.g.,theUniversalDeclarationofHumanRights(UDHR)Article26(3))allowparentstochoosethekindofeducationtheywanttheirchildrentohave(e.g.,inaccordancewithreligiousviews).Thus,therighttooptforprivateeducationshouldbeprotectedbylaw.Itisinevitablybyappealingtogeneraloruniversalmoralstandards(e.g.,equality,consequentialism,humanrights)externaltothecontractthatgovernmentscanmorallyjustifyeducationalpolicies. 65


Primaryresources:

1.Rachels,J.2003.TheElementsofMoralPhilosophy.4thedition.McGrawHillInternationalEditions,NewYork(1sted.1986).Chapters4,11and13.

2.Rachels,J.2004.ElementosdeFilosofiaMoral,Gradiva,Lisboa.Capítulos4,11e13.

Secondaryresources

1.Fromhttps://embryo.asu.edu/pages/pope-pius-ix-1792-1878

2.Rachels,J.2003.TheElementsofMoralPhilosophy.4thedition.McGrawHillInternationalEditions,NewYork(1sted.1986).Chapters5.

3.Thornhill,R.&Palmer,C.T.2000.ANaturalHistoryofRape:BiologicalBasesofSexualCoercion.MITPressThornhill,R.&Palmer.2000.WhyMenRape?https://www.csus.edu/indiv/m/merlinos/thornhill.html

4.OnHobbesandthesocialcontractseeforinstance:https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hobbes-moral/#StaNatTheStanfordEncyclopediaofPhilosophyisanexcellentresourcefordeepeningyourknowledgeandunderstandingofphilosophyandethics.

66


https://www.csus.edu/indiv/m/merlinos/thornhill.html

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hobbes-moral/#StaNat

Bioethics-IntroductiontomoralphilosophyII

Threeclasses:1. 15February-Thechallengeofculturalrelativism;2. 17/19February-fromvirtuetheory(chapter13)toreligiousethics(chapter

4)tothesocialcontract(chapter10);3. 22February-HistoryofethicsII:consequentialism(chapters7and8)and

deontology(chapters9and10).

ReferencetoRachels,J.2003.TheElementsofMoralPhilosophy.4thedition.McGrawHillInternationalEditions,NewYork(1sted.1986).

[email protected]ênciasdaUniversidadedeLisboa(CFCUL),FaculdadedeCiênciasdaUniversidadedeLisboa-4.3.16 67


InthelastclassIexposedRachels’argumentsagainstthreeethicaltheories:1.virtuetheoryisatbestincompletebecausewhenIcanactvirtuouslyinaccordancetoconflictingvirtuesitdoesn’tprovideclearguidance;2.religiousethicsdoesnotprovideadistinctivelymoralpositiononmoralissuesbutreliesonmoregeneral,a-religious,moralstandards;3.thesocialcontractisanethicaltheorywithlimitationsbecauseitmakesreferencetomoregeneralmoralstandardsthatarenotspecifictothecontractitself.Inallsuchcases,theargumentwasthatallsuchtheoriesultimatelyrelyon……super-culturaldeontologicalorconsequentialistconsiderations.

68

Summingup-Incompleteethicaltheories

Deontology:ethicsbasedondutyandobligationratherthananevaluationoftheirconsequences.Somemoralrulesareabsoluteandholdwithoutexceptionineverypossiblecircumstance.Somecoursesofactionareforbiddenwhateverconsequencestheyhaveonthemoralcommunity.Buthowisitpossibletoevaluatecoursesofactionwithoutconsideringconsequences?Kantgavearationalistargument(withnoappealtoGod’scommand).

69

1.1-Deontology

Analysingthenatureofmoralobligation,Kantfirstdistinguishesbetweenhypotheticalandcategoricalimperatives.Hypotheticaloughts:givendesiredaimx,courseofactionywillbeinstrumentaltoachievex;hence,IOUGHTtodoy.E.g.:mydesiredaimistocontainCovid-19infections;restrictingtripsabroadisinstrumentaltoachievethisaim;hence,IOUGHTtorefrainfromtripsabroad.Thisistheepitomeofinstrumentalthinking:givendesirableaimx,courseofactionyisameanstoachievex.

70

1.2-Deontology

Categoricaloughtsarenothypothetical.Theyhaveanotherlogicalform:“IOUGHTtodox”.Nofinalityisconsideredandnoanalysisininstrumentaltermsisrequired.But,howcanwebeobligatedtofollowcourseofactionxregardlessoftheendwewishtoachieve?Whilehypotheticaloughtsarejustifiedinstrumentallyasmeanstoachieveourdesiredaims,categoricaloughtsarejustifiedbyreason,derivedfromaprinciplethateveryrationalagentmustaccept,thefamouscategoricalimperative:“Actonlyaccordingtothatmaximbywhichyoucanatthesametimewillthatitshouldbecomeauniversallaw”(Kant,I.1785.GroundworkoftheMetaphysicofMorals,cf.Rachelsp.121).

71

1.3-Deontology

“Actonlyaccordingtothatmaximbywhichyoucanatthesametimewillthatitshouldbecomeauniversallaw”(Kant,cf.Rachelsp.121).

72

1.4-Deontology

Notlyingisanabsolutemoralrulebecause:1.therule“Itispermissibletolie”would,ifadopteduniversally,beself-defeating;2.wemightthinkthat,inparticularcircumstances,theconsequencesofhonestymightbebad,butKantarguesthatthisconsequentialistwayofthinkingisflawedbecausewecanneverknowwithcertaintythatgoodconsequenceswillensuebylying;furthermore,evenlyingforaltruisticmotives(e.g.,savingsomeone’slife)mighthavenegativeunpredictableconsequences;3.thus,thebestpolicyisalwaystoavoidtheknownevilbecause,evenincaseourhonestywillgeneratenegativeconsequences,itwillnotbeourfaultaswehavedoneourduty.

73

1.5-Deontology

ConsiderasituationwherebylyingImightsavesomeone’slifeandbybeinghonestImightfacilitatethemurderofaninnocentperson.Isn’tinsuchcircumstancesmoraltolie?ShouldwebesopessimisticasKantandagreethatwecannotknowatallwhatconsequencesanactionwillhave?Canwerefrainfromevenconsideringthepotentialconsequencesofourconduct?Andisitacceptabletoconsidersomeoneresponsibleforthenegativeconsequencesoflyingbutnotforthenegativeconsequencesofhonesty?Kant’sdeontologyisextremelydemanding.

74

1.6-Deontology

AnotheraspectofKantianethicsisthathumansarespecialbecauseonlyhumanscanbetreatedasrational,consciousandfreeagents.Rationalityiskeybecausewithoutrationalitythereisnomorality:themorallawisthelawofreasonandwithoutrationalbeingsthemoraldimensionoftheworldwoulddisappear.Humansinthissensehaveanintrinsicworthasendsinthemselves.Humansaretheonlylivingbeingsforwhommere“things”havevalue.Butthevalueofahumanisabsolute.Thuswehaveadutytothepromotionoftheirwelfare:

75

1.7-Deontology

Thisisasecondversionofthecategoricalimperative(Kant,I.1785.GroundworkoftheMetaphysicofMorals,Rachelsp.131).Howdoesitrelatetothefirstformulation?Andwhatdoesthismean?Thecrucialideaisthattreatinghumansasendsinthemselvesmeansrespectingtheirrationality.Considertheissueofhowweshouldtreatcriminals.ForKant,rehabilitationisincompatiblewithhumandignity;thetreatmentofcriminalsdependsontreatinghumansasrational,consciousandfreeagents,ontreatingthemasagentswhoactinaccordancetotheuniversalisationmaxim(thefirstformulationofthecategoricalimperative,slides1.3-1.4).

76

1.8-Deontology

Punishmentshouldthusworkaccordingtotwoprinciples:1.peopleshouldbepunishedonlybecausetheyhavecommittedcrimesratherthanbeingconducivetotherehabilitationoftheindividualorthereparationofthesocialdamagetheyhavecaused,asthiswouldtreatthemasmeanstoanend;ifwetreatpeopleasneedingrehabilitation,wewouldviolatetheirstatusasrational,consciousandfreeagents;2.punishmentshouldbeproportionaltotheseriousnessofthecrime;forinstance,capitalpunishmentismoralbecause“ifyoukillanother,youkillyourself”(Rachelsp.137);executionistheonlywaytorespectamurdererasarational,conscious,freeagentwho,asamoralagent,hasdignityandresponsibility;onlyinthiswaywearetreatingmurderersasmoralagentswhocomplywiththefirstversionofthecategoricalimperative.Somewillfindthislineofreasoningobjectionable.

77

1.9-Deontology

JeremyBentham:themoralityofanyactionorsocialpolicydoesnotdependonpleasingGod(cf.religiousethics)orfollowingabstractrules(cf.Kant),butontheadoptionofthemostgeneralmoralprinciple,the“principleofutility”(Bentham,J.ThePrinciplesofMoralsandLegislation.ChapterI.2,cf.Rachelsp.92):

78

2.1-Utilitarianism

JohnStuartMill:imaginethestateofaffairsthatwewouldliketoseecomeabout.Whatwouldthisbe?Astateofaffairsinwhicheverymoralagent’sexistenceisasfreeaspossiblefrompainandasrichaspossibleinenjoyments.Moralactionaimstobringaboutthisstateofaffairs(Mill,J.S.1861.Utilitarianism.Chapter2,cf.Rachelsp.93):

79

2.2-Utilitarianism

Consequentialism:evaluationofacourseofactionintermsofitsconsequencesonthemoralcommunity.Notethatthereisnoreferencetothedesiredgoalofthecourseofaction.Utilitarianism:consequentialismwithaspecificdesiredgoal:promotingthegreatesthappinessforthegreatestnumberofmoralagents.Utilitarianismisahedonistmoraltheory.Hedonism=theonlyfundamentalgoodispleasure(andtheonlyfundamentalbadispain);hence,themoralityofanactionismerelymeasuredintermsofthepleasuresandpainsgenerated(asopposedtoothersupposedgoods,suchasfreedom,equalityetc.).Actionsaremoralinsofarastheypromotehappiness(definedaspresenceofpleasureandabsenceofpain).

80

2.3-Utilitarianism

Promotingthehappinessofwhom?Themoralityofacourseofactiondependsontheconsequencesforallsentientbeings(asopposedtoonlytheindividualagentoranyotherlimitedgroup).Thereasonisthatsentientbeingsarethosebeingsthatcanexperiencepainandpleasure(cf.classesonanimalethics).Thisformofuniversalismimpliesimpartiality,i.e.,thesubordinationofpersonalinteresttothepromotionofthehappinessofallsentientbeingsofthemoralcommunity.AsMill(Mill,J.S.1861.Utilitarianism.Chapter2)said(Rachelsp.102):

81

2.4-Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism:1.providesapowerfulalternativetoreligiousethicsandKantianethics;2.clarifiesinsimpletermsunderstandabletoeveryonewhattheendofmoralactionis;3.iseasilyapplicabletoavarietyofethicaldilemmas,providingpossiblesolutions;4.providesasuper-cultural(indeeduniversal)standardofmoralevaluation,complyingwiththefirstrequirementoftheminimumconceptionofmorality;5.complieswiththeimpartialitycriterionoftheminimumconceptionofmorality:allsentientbeingsareequalmembersofthemoralcommunity.

82

2.5-Utilitarianism

Ofcourse,utilitarianismcanbecriticisedformanydifferentreasons:1.Hedonisticprinciple=onlypleasureisintrinsicallygood?2.Impartialitycriterion=happinessofallsentientcreationshouldbeimpartiallyconsidered:woulditbereallyimmoraltoprivilegethewelfareofyourselfandyourfamilywhenyouact?3.Consequentialism=coursesofactionandsocialpoliciesaretobeevaluatedmerelyintermsofconsequences:butisthisenough?4.EstimationProblem:thecalculationofthepainandpleasuregeneratedbyanactionorsocialpolicyonthemoralcommunityisfraughtwithinsurmountabledifficulties.Letusconsidercriticisms3and4.

83

2.6-Utilitarianism

Thelimitsofutilitarianism:isconsequentialismenough?Supposethataseriesofcrimeshasbeencommittedandthat,asaresult,socialupheavalandriotsensue.Thepoliceislookingforthecriminalbuthavenoclue.Eventually,theytargetmyneighbour,anoldandsolitarypersonwithminorcriminalprecedentsasachildmolester.Idon’tknowthissocialoutcastwellatall,butwhatIdoknowisthathe’sinnocent.IameventuallyaskedbythepoliceandprosecutionwhetherIhaveanyelementstoconvicthim.Aftermuchthought,giventhatriotshavebeencontinuingforseveraldaysandmanypeoplehavediedinthemeantime,Idecideto“frame”myneighbourbybearingfalsewitness.Ismyactionmoral?

84

2.7-Utilitarianism

Fromaconsequentialistperspective,theactionis“good”ifitgeneratesanincreaseinsocialhappiness;preventingsocialchaosincreasessocialhappinesswhileframingasocialoutcastdecreasesit;however,onthebalance,socialhappinessincreases,soframingthenon-guiltypersonisgood.Fromadeontologicalprospective,lyingisimmoral(slide1.5);framingsomeoneevenmoreso(thinkaboutuniversalisingthisbehaviour).Framingsomeoneisalsoincompatiblewiththeprincipleofjustice(i.e.,treateveryoneequallyaccordingtothesameimpartialmoralstandards):itisobscenetoheldsomeoneresponsibleofacrimethathe/shehasnotcommitted.Consequentialismthusclasheswithdeontologyandothermoralintuitions(e.g.,theprincipleofjustice).Thus,dowereallyevaluateactionsmerelyaccordingtotheirconsequences?

85

2.8-Utilitarianism

Asimilarkindofclashisattherootofthedifferencebetweentheconsequentialistdefenceandthedeontologicalcondemnationofinfanticidepractices.Fromaconsequentialistperspective,ifinfanticidepromoteshappinessinthemoralcommunity,itisgood(seeclass1slide5.2).Fromadeontologicalperspective,theinfantisamoralagentwithrightstoliveandflourish,anendinhim/herself,amoralagentthatcannotbetreatedasameansforfamily’sandcommunity’sbenefit(seeclass1slide5.4).Consequentialismthusclasheswithdeontologyandtheideathatmoralagentshavenaturalrights.Wedonotseemtoevaluateactionsmerelyaccordingtotheirconsequences,butalsoaccordingtoothermoralstandards.

86

2.9-Utilitarianism

Utilitarianismseemswrongbecauseitviolatessomeofourdeep-rootedmoralintuitions.Butwhyshouldwetrusttheseintuitionsinthefirstplace?Considertheexampleoffalsetestimony.Theintuitionisthatframinganinnocentisunjustifiable.Butautilitarianconsidersalsotheotherinnocentpeoplekilledduringtheriots.So,doestheintuitionholdwhenthealternativesaresacrificingoneinnocentpersonforthebenefitofseveralotherinnocentpeoplewhomightbesavedintheriots?Intheinfanticidecase(class1,slides5.1-5.4),amoralintuitionisthateverychildhastherighttoliveandflourish.Butwhatabouttherightstoliveandflourishofthechildren’sfamilyandsocialgroup?Doestheintuitionholdwhenthealternativesaresacrificingachildforthebenefitofseveralmembersofthemoralcommunityofinterest?

87

2.10-Utilitarianism

WhatshouldIdointhecaseofthe“trolley”problem(Thomson,J,J..1976.Killing,LettingDie,andtheTrolleyProblem.TheMonist59:204-17)?1.pulltheleverandbeingresponsiblefor1death?Atwhichpointwouldyouacceptautilitarianstance(peopleontrackA=n=10,100,1.000…)?2.donothing?Buthowcanitbemoralnottoact?

88

TrackA

TrackB

2.11-Utilitarianism

WhatshouldIdo?

Thelimitsofutilitarianism:theestimationproblemItisextremelydifficulttoestimatethehappinessgeneratedbyactionsandsocialpoliciesbecause:a.sometimestheestimaterequiresthecomparisonbetweenincommensurableunitsofanalysis;forinstance,governmentsintroducelockdownpolicieswiththeaimofreducingthenumberofCovid-19infections;thepolicyontheonehandsaveslivesbut,ontheother,hashealthcosts(e.g.,onnon-Covid-19patients)andsocialcosts(e.g.,jobloss);howcanthebenefits(e.g.,livessaved)andcosts(e.g.,joblosses)ofthepolicybecompared?b.short-term,medium-termandlong-termconsequencesonthemoralcommunityaredifficulttocompare;forinstance,lockdownshaveshort-termbenefits;butwhataretheirsocietalcostsinthelongterm?

89

2.12-Utilitarianism

March2020:aviralinfectionwithanexpectedinfectionfatalityrateof0.7%emerges;wedoneitherhaveknowndrugsnorvaccinestofightit;mortalityisaffectingmainlytheoldergenerations;vaccineswillneedalongtimetobedevelopedandwehavenoideahoweffectivetheywillbe.Shouldpopulationimmunitythroughnaturalinfectionbepursuedbygovernments(whathasbeencalled“herdimmunity”)?Howmightdeontologyandutilitarianismdirectgovernments’policyinsuchcircumstances?

90

Casestudy1

Deontology:savinglivesshouldbethedriverofgovernments’policies;lockdownisbesttosavelives;anindefinitelockdownuntildrugsorvaccinesareavailableisneeded;anherdimmunitypolicyishardlyjustifiable.Utilitarianism:savinglivesisnotenough;sustainablesocialpoliciesshouldbethedriverofgovernments’policies;thebestpolicyistokeeptheinfectionlevellowenoughasnottoleadtocollapseofhealthsystem;somepeoplewillinevitablydie,butclosingsocietyuntiltheavailabilityofvaccinesanddrugsisnotfeasiblebecausetheymightnotarrivesoon;someformofherdimmunitypolicyisthusjustifiable.Wheredoyoustand?

91

Casestudy1

Supposethat,followingavirusoutbreak,youhave1.000peopleneedingintensivecarebutonly500intensivecareunits.Inwhichwayshouldaccesstointensivecareunitsberegulated?Howmightdeontologyandutilitarianismsolvethisproblem?

92

Casestudy2

Deontologyarguesthatallhumansareendsinthemselvesandthatwecannotuniversaliseanydiscriminatorycourseofaction.Onthisbasis,wegiveaccesstointensivecareunitsonarandombasis,lottery-style.Utilitariansthinkintermsofhappinessoftheentiremoralcommunity;inthisrespect,considerationsconcerningthesocialroleofpatientsareimportantinmoralevaluation.Utilitariansalsothinkintermsoflong-termhappiness,soconsiderationsoflife-expectancyareimportantinmoralevaluation.Onthisbasis,wegiveaccesstointensivecareunitsonaprioritybasis(firsttopregnantwomenandparentsofchildren…..onlyafterwordstopatientswithlowerlifeexpectancy).Wheredoyoustand?

93

Casestudy2

Primaryresources:

1.Rachels,J.2003.TheElementsofMoralPhilosophy.4thedition.McGrawHillInternationalEditions,NewYork(1sted.1986).Chapters7,8,9and10.

2.Rachels,J.2004.ElementosdeFilosofiaMoral,Gradiva,Lisboa.Capítulos7,8,9e10.

Secondaryliterature

Thomson,J,J..1976.Killing,LettingDie,andtheTrolleyProblem.TheMonist59:204-17

94

Summingup:theexaminationquestions(inEnglish)relativetothesethreeclassesontheintroduction(extremelyquick)tomoralphilosophywillbebasedonRachels’book:

Rachels,J.2003.TheElementsofMoralPhilosophy.4thedition.McGrawHillInternationalEditions,NewYork(1sted.1986).

Rachels,J.2004.ElementosdeFilosofiaMoral,Gradiva,Lisboa.

Thequestionswillbebasedon:1.thepdfsofthepresentationsoftheclassesand2.onchapters1,2,4,7,8,9,10,11,13ofRachels’bookthatIhavepartiallyexplainedintheclasses.

Youcancontactmebyemailforanydoubtandissueat:[email protected]

Ishallalsoteachyoutheclassesonabortion,euthanasiaandanimalsentiencefromtheendofMarch.

95


Date post:	07-Aug-2021
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	8 times
Download:	0 times

Bioethics - Introduction to moral philosophy · Bioethics - Introduction to moral philosophy 1. The...

Documents