ethical theory and foundation

ethical theory and foundation

1. ethical theories

   • a) meta-ethics
     • asks about the very possibility and nature itself. ex: "what do the words right and wrong mean?" "Are there objective moral facts?"
       • does not ask specific moral rules or facts
   • b) normative ethics
     • theories about what rules/principles should guide our behavior. Try to figure out what we ought to do/be
       • 4 normative theories
         • a) consequentialism
           • An action is right or wrong depending on the consequences it will likely bring about
             • 2 theories
               • a) egoism
                 • "best results" of action means "best results" for me.
               • b) utilitariasnism
                 • "best results" of action is defined in terms of "overall" happiness / well-being of anyone affected by the action. Aim to maximize good consequences and minimize bad consequences to get the best outcome possible
                   • John Stuart Mill
                     • through experiment: harvesting one patient's organs to save others... (never let me go) Patient x, doctor y and surgeon Z. (patient x is recovering, but is suicidal and no one will miss him. 7 patients waiting for organ transplant with great future. we should harvest Patient x's organs) Are our moral intuitions incorrect? Is there a slippery slope argument here? (scared of going to the hospital because it is considered common practice to harvest organs)
                     • the principle of utility
                       • " Actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. By happiness is intended pleasure and the absence of pain"
                   • Jeremy Bentham
                   • act utilitarianism (AU) VS rule utilitarianism (RU)
                     • RU
                       • find the general rules that will promote the most happiness in society
                         • Rule of thumb, when I lack the time or impartiality to go through the actual calculation
                           • But, what about when breaking a rule will bring about more happiness than following it. Are rules just "rules of thumb" when I lack the time or impartiality? Does RU collapse into RU?
                     • AU
                       • each case evaluated via the principle of utility
                         • we look at the possible actions and all the expected outcomes, and then the right thing to do is the one with the best overall outcomes.
                   • Not every utilitarian associates best outcomes directly with pleasure and pain. For this reason, classical utilitarianism is called hedonistic utilitarianism (since an hedonist is someone who seeks pleasure)
                   • 2 types
                     • ideal utilitarianism
                       • best outcome should be the ideal state of affairs (equality, freedom, justice,...)
                     • eudaimonistic utilitarianism
                       • not the quantity of pleasure that counts, but the quality
         • b) non-consequentialism (deontology)
           • some obligations should never be broken even if breaking them seems to have better consequences.
           • Immanuel Kant
             • rationality and the good will as "intrinsically" valuable
             • universal ethical duties discovered via reason
             • hypothetical vs categorical imperatives
               • "If you want to get a job, then go to university..."
               • hypothetical
                 • ethical laws cannot by "hypothetical"
               • categorical imperative
                 • practical imperative or "respect" formulation
                   • CI2- Act so that you treat humanity, wether in yourself or in another, as an end and never merely as a means
                 • How to identify "perfect" and "imperfect" duties from the categorical imperative
                   • some criticisms
                     • too strict? Are imperfect duties always outweighed by perfect duties? Is ethics really limited to "rational" beings?
                 • universal law of nature formula
                   • CI1- Act in such a way that you can at the same time desire that the principle of your action become a universal law of nature
           • Sir W.D Ross
             • prima facies (at first glance) duties
               • duties that are binding unless they are overridden by some other consideration or competing duties
                 • when there is a conflict between duties, the most pressing ones would have to be respected
                   • fidelity, reparation, gratitude, justice, beneficience, self-involvement, normaleficience
                   • Ex: help bleeding person or keep promise? Most pressing one is to help bleeding person
         • c) virtue theory
           • about figuring out what kind of person I should be across a lifetime. Attempts to discover the highest virtues a human should develop.
             • ethics is not about figuring out what to do or what ias right/wrong in a particular situation
           • virtuous person with wisdom to be virtuous, and who has a genuinely fulfilling life (eudaimonia, deep happiness)
           • virtue with medicine?
             • A doctor we would most trust because he doesn't need calculation with some formula in order to make decisions because his virtue becomes second-nature
           • Aristotle
             • we become virtuous by acting virtuously, such that we develop stable character traits. (not enough to do something just once to be that way)
               • Ex: telling the truth once does not make you honest
             • virtues are a mean or middle-point between two related vices.
               • No virtue is universal
               • There is a middle ground between for ex: an excess of courage (brazenness) and a deficiency of courage (cowardliness) and the mean is the virtue of "courage" (what is reasonable)
                 • the virtuous person acts virtuously both because it is the right thing to do (reasonable) and they gain fulfillment in living a virtous life
             • being virtuous is an art (of the middle ground between the vices), not a science!
               • does not give us "hard and "fast" rules to follow like with utilitarianism
         • d) ethics of care
           • justice perspective vs care perspective
           • partial vs impartiality
             • ethics should be about minimizing harm and promoting relationships. Thus, finding a balance between impartiality and relatedness
           • we are all vulnerable and do or will need care...it is part of human experience (something that traditional ethics does not recognize), so calls into question the emphasis on the isolated individual and the value of impartiality
           • case-by-case style
             • because all the details of a given situation are important in order to illicit an appropriate response
           • Gilligan
             • feminism. argue that men tend to see the world according to the moral category of individual justice, while women tend to see the world according to the moral categories of care or relationships.
               • for example: someone who decides to change religion and parents not happy
                 • men : "I have a right to my beliefs" vs women: " I understand their fears, but wish they would understand my point of view"
           • superior to traditional approach (men) because it is not based on abstract rules
   • c) applied or practical ethics
     • attempt to resolve (at at least understant) controversial issues such as "Do animals have rights?", "What obligation does a company have to its employees or customers?", etc...