Date post: | 13-Dec-2014 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | ammar-iyyad-b-amran |
View: | 283 times |
Download: | 0 times |
OUTLINE
•Why study ethics?•What is ethics?•Different approaches to ethics -Ethics and Religion -Ethics and Reason•Ethical reasoning and arguments -Fallacious Arguments -Arguments•Ethical theories -Objective source of morality -Subjective source of morality•Why be moral?•Conclusion
WHY STUDY ETHICS?
How can we decide what is the right thing to do in any given situation?
Some decision are not ethical or moral-e.g. move left foot after right foot when walking-Walking away from an injured person-ethical Faced with many ethical decision everyday-Rarely question why we do certain things Contemporary ethics teaches:-what the most important philosopher have said on the subject-Evaluate and debate ethical statements If a person cannot feel pain,how do you persuade them to
stop hurting someone?
WHAT IS ETHICS?
A branch of philosophy,also called moral philosophy
-Greek:philia=love or friendship,sophia=wisdom-’love of wisdom’-critical examination of the grounds for
fundamental beliefs and an analysis of the basic concepts employed in the expression of such beliefs
Branches of philosophy:-Epistemology:philosophy of knowledge-Metaphysics:nature of reality-Ethics:determining what is right or wrong-philosophy of sciencePhilosophy of law-Aesthetics:philosophy of art
Ethics:a set of normative values that
determine whether any particular action
is good or bad
WHAT IS ETHICS?
Ethical and moral frequently interchangeable -ethos(Greek):meaning character
Relates to individual characteristics of a person -moralis(Latin) :meaning custom or manners
Relates to relationships between people Ethical/moral associated with ‘good’, ‘right’ -Good:pleasure or happiness
Malicious pleasure:e.g.sadism-consent issues -Bad : unhappiness or pain Nonmoral:-e.g. a light bulb
Sadism:a sadist derives pleasure from hurting
othersNonmoral:does not
involve morality.Immoral:goes agaist
morality
WHAT IS ETHICS?
Excellence:most good things involve excellence
-e.g. 1-0 win is good, 5-0 is excellent -displaying superior skills in a particular area Harmony : -Stopping a war is good: harmony -Starting a war is bad: discord Amoral - Sociopath:no remorse
Amoral:having no sense of what is moral
Excellence:the quality of displaying superior skills in a
particular area.
DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO ETHICS
Normative/Perscriptive ethics: “should”,”ought”…telling you what to do Deciding what is preferable in any give situation
Used in medicine, law, politics…
Metaetchics: older approach, exploring the meaning of ethical terms E.g. what does “good” mean? What does fair
mean? What does “fair” mean?
Normative: conforming to or based on valuesPrescriptive: that which defines what ought to be done
DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO ETHICS
Overlaps with other specialisations: Epistemology: knowledge – how do we know something is good or bad
Scientific/Descriptive No value judment: e.g. crime statistics
Combination of approaches possible E.g. Capital punishment:
Crime rate does not fall, therefore not a deterrent Therefore it should not be practiced It is not ‘good’
DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO ETHICS
Not all evaluation are moral Manners/ etiquette close but not the same
Moral judgements overide other normative values Civil disobedience: morality over law Public nudity: morality over aesthetics
Etiquette: the proper conduct in social or official life.
OBJECTIVE SOURCES OF MORALITY Supernatural
Impossible to prove, depends on faith Natural laws
Scientific natural laws are descriptive and always hold true
Naturalistic moral laws are prescriptive and have many example of exceptions
Anthropocentric value (human centredness) How can politics or art have value
without the humans who created them?Anthropocentrism: assessing everything in relation to humans.
SUBJECTIVE SOURCES OF MORALITY
Moral value derives from humans alone No external sources
Three variables for subjective and values The thing being valued, the thing of value The valuer, the conscious being who
values The context where the valuing takes place
MORALITYCustomary morality
From evolution of society and collective historical experiences Religious, legal “That’s the way we’ve always done it”
Reflective morality• Applying reason and interpretation of events
to decide upon morality• Can be used to re-evaluate customary
morality– E.g. Slavery, lying, fine/punishment during
elementary school
“ All evil is ignorance ”- Plato
What does this mean?"Evil actions are the result of ignorance.“
What does ‘evil’ mean? Does it exist? in itself it is a value-laden term Are some things or people
intrinsically evil? Plato is suggesting that ignorance is intrinsically evil, but it can be overcome. Therefore evil itself is not
intrinsically evil?
Intrinsic: belonging to the essential
nature or constitution of
something Evil: that which is
extremely morally
reprehensible
ETHICS AND RELIGION
Most ethical/ moral systems derive from religions E.g: Thou shalt not kill; respect your eldest… Religion probably existed before separate moral and legal systems – more than an ethical system
Divine command theory:
A moral system is right because it was ordained by divine powers Arbitrary, should we kill in the name of a (non-existent) God?
Who determines what the divine wants? How to reconcile different believers?
Reason and experience to develop ethical systems
Not exclude religious moral systems, but has to be sustainable for other reasons that for faith alone Non-religious people have morals too.Most satisfactory ethical system incorporates all people of all persuasions.
ETHICS AND REASONS
Ethics demands reasons for particular standpoints “Why did you steal that bread?”
Ethical arguments develop through reason But not need ‘objective rationality’ Subjective feelings of pleasure may support a reasonable argument But not sufficient: E.g: need to explain why pleasure is always good
Give reasons for argument
Objective: objective knowledge is based on evidence that can be observed through the
senses and independently verified.
Rational: That which is developed through reason and is not influenced by emotions,
prejudices, etc.
Ethical reasoning and arguments
Sound arguments vs. false/ weak arguments Premise:
“Lying is wrong…” can be a value judgement, an empirical statement…
Argument: “…because if everyone lied all the time then society would break down…”
Based on supporting and conflicting empirical and/ or logical evidence
Uses value judgements and evidence
But you can’t use your original premise to prove your argument E.g: the red dress doesn’t suit you because it’s red
Conclusion:
“…so you should not have lied to the policeman.”
There should be one logical conclusion There can be more Which is similar to having none in a way
Depends on how you weigh up the different conclusions.
FALLACIOUS ARGUMENTS
Ad hominem reasoning
“Whatever the Pope says must be
wrong!”
“ Women are stupid because they are not clever”
Circulus in probando
Circular Argument
FALLACIOUS ARGUMENTS
RATIONALISM
It was right to gamble because I won money!!
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
“After the sun came up it rained; therefore the sun caused the rain”
Conceptual matters
“Did he mean to kill the man?”Intention
An explanation is
not a justification
Analogy
“Killing animals is as bad as killing people because they all feel
pain
Factual assertionSupported by
Verifiable evidence
ARGUMENTS Analogy -using a similar case to argue for similar conclusions * if things are alike in some respects then they are
likely to be in other respects Concept -Abstract and systemised idea generalised from
particular instances Factual assertions Statements that are empirically verifiable Ad hominem - Rejecting an argument because of the person saying
it Circular argument -using a conclusion to support itself Rationalisation -reasons given after the event that are not the true
reasons Post hoc ergo propter hoc -coincidental correlation
ETHICAL THEORIES -- HOMEWORKDeductive
Theory principles judgements Decide on basic ethical values
Derives principles Conclusion: Such-and-such an action is wrong
InductiveJudgements principles theory
Lots of people kill other people Why? Can I kill others? What does killing serve?
Theory: Killing is OK when done for good reasons
Motive, act, or consequences
ResponsibilityOnly human can be held to be normally
responsible
Consequentialist• a.k.a Teleological
• Ends justifies the means Judge actions by their outcome
• e.g. Utilitarianism
Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832 “greatest happiness of the greatest number”
-- HOMEWORK --
Non-consequentialist• a.k.a Deontological• Judge the actual action, regardless of the consequences - e.g. Pacifism• Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) - judged actions by whether they conform to requirements of rationality and human dignity
Naturalistic ethical theories
• Human nature as the source of what is right of wrong - The instinct to survival is the strongest, therefore it is wrong to commit suicide.
• Either teleological (similar to consequentialist- judged by the end result) or deontological (similar to non-consequentialist- the act is judged in itself, not according to the result)
- E.g: ‘shallow ecology’ vs. ‘deep ecology’For example: # Shallow ecology evaluates the results of pollution# Deep ecology tries to assign value to nature itself
Theories of Care
Feminism -Classic ethics is patriarchal worldwide -But also criticised by feminists – said to imply that women should always do the caringEmphasize contingency, consensus and care -As opposed to generalised impersonal theories -” he stole the bread to feed his family “
WHY BE MORAL?
Ethical egoisme -It’s in my interest to be ethical, because it will help me to get
what I want ‘Enlightened self-interest’ -I won’t steal because if everyone stole there would be too
many problems,and I’ll be punished if I do.
Because everyone else will be happier -Difficult to persuade someone not to do something that they
want to do it
“Because that’s the way your mother did it” Encourages blind obedience
Moral laws help to ensure everyone’s needs are met
‘
CONCLUSIONS
A branch of philosophy - About human relationships - Trying to identify what is ‘good’ *A dynamic social force that promotes human well
being Uses argument to determine moral valiues - Based on theories *Consequentialist,deontological,naturalist,feminist -Observations,reason,logic Religion needs morality,but moral system doesn’t
need religion