Deontology

2007hallam
Mind Map by , created over 5 years ago

A Levels Ethics Mind Map on Deontology, created by 2007hallam on 04/30/2014.

82
1
0
2007hallam
Created by 2007hallam over 5 years ago
A2 Ethics - Virtue Ethics
Heloise Tudor
situation ethics
96arthur.g
A2 Philosophy and Ethics: Ethical Theory - Key Philosophers
Adam Cook
Mechanics
james_hobson
Revision Time Table
jessica3008
Deontology Edexcel A Level
fstok
Kantian Ethics
Alexa Smith
A Level ethics
zoevardi24601
Kantian Deontological Ethics
James Hudson
A2 Philosophy and Ethics: Ethical Theory
Adam Cook
Deontology
1 Kant
1.1 The Critique of Pure Reason, 1781 The Critique of Practical Reason, 1788
1.1.1 What humans can know directly through practical reason (Syntheic) and through pure reason (Analytic) is limited by our existence within space and time
1.1.1.1 The Noumenal - How things really are The Pheunoumenal - how we tangibly experience things
1.2 The goodness of 'Good Will' is not from its results
1.2.1 An evil act that leads to good does not render the intent of the original act good
1.2.2 "Act for the sake of Duty"

Annotations:

  • A grocer does not overcharge his customers, so people are served honesty - in order for everyone to buy his products "We cannot assume him to have an inclination towards his customers, leading him out of love, to not preference one man over another. The action was not done out of duty or inclination, but self interest"
1.3 He rejects the hypothetical Imperitive
1.3.1 If I want to 'x' I must do 'y'
1.4 1. Has to be universally applied 2. Never treat another as a means to an end 3. Create your maxims as if you were a member of a kingdom of ends

Annotations:

  • The Formulae of right action
1.4.1 Universally Required Morals act as a Catagorical Imperitive

Annotations:

  • If you owed money, but spent that money on something you wanted, you would be breaking the maxim of 'Keep your promises.' If everybody failed to keep promises, they would not mean anything and thus is not Universally applicable
1.4.2 "Be Fair to your customers" is universally applicable, but "Be fair to your customers so they return" is not. The hypothetical imperitive seeks to achieve an end.
1.5 You have no responsibility for others as they are autonomos as their own moral agent

Annotations:

  • If a murderer asks you where their intended victim is, you should not lie as Lying is wrong.
1.6 Catagorical Imperitive is good without qualification
1.7 Sunnom Bonnem
1.7.1 Afterlife thus is required in order to achieve the complete order of things
1.7.2 Moral Law would be judged post-mortem
2 W D Ross
2.1 Prima Facie duties
2.1.1 Conditional duties that ought to be followed unless there is an over riding reason not to

Annotations:

  • "I ought to lie, unless lying will save a life"
2.1.2 The mature person understand which duties to follow 'at first glance'
2.1.2.1 Helps overcome dilemmas with conflicting duties. Do not lie? Protect innocent lives?
2.2 Morality is objective, but not absolute and universal and can be adapted within different contexts
2.3 Fidelity Gratitude Justice Beneficience Self Improvement NonMalevolence

Annotations:

  • 1. Faithful to promises 2. Appreciation for support 3. Impartial, equal treatment 4. Help for others 5. Self-fulfilment 6. Avoid the harm of others 
2.3.1 This list is inexhaustive and may present room for self indulgences
3 Crictcisms
3.1 MacIntyre
3.1.1 With sufficient ingenuity, almost every precept can become universalized. All I need to do is characterize proposed actions in such a way that the maxim will permit me to do what I want whilst prohibiting others from ding what would nullify the maxim if universalized. The test of the catagorical imperitive imposes restrictions only on those insufficiently equipped with ingenuity.
3.2 How far can goodwill mitigate a disastrous outcome?
3.3 Can we be satisfied by being told "Do your duty" without knowing why.
3.4 Reductio ad absurdum: "All girls with red hair should wear green" can be universilized, this does not make it a moral statement
3.5 Naturalistic Fallacy - The 'is' 'ought' gap.
3.6 Frankena
3.6.1 There is more to the moral point of view than willingness to universalize ones rules
3.7 Peter Singer
3.7.1 Only once you remove sympathy with humans can you no longer be moved by inclination
3.7.2 Moral Fanaticism - The elevation of perceived duty above actual humans
3.8 Causal Determinism - If you do 'x' you will cause 'y' therefore you are competely responsible, autonomously, for any results caused by your actions
3.9 Hegal
3.9.1 Gives no moral social outlines. For example, following Kantian Ethics does not determine whether a system of social property is moral as both answers entail an inability to be universialised
3.9.2 If everyone gave to the poor, there would be no poor, therefore this is a contradiction and so you 'Ought not to give to the poor'

Media attachments