1 Ethics Chapter Four Moral Theories and Moral Character.

11

EthicsEthics

Chapter FourChapter Four

Moral Theories Moral Theories

and Moral Characterand Moral Character

22

Moral Theories & Moral Character Moral Theories & Moral Character

The New York Yankees and $6 MillionThe New York Yankees and $6 Million The PromiseThe Promise

• Give the $6 million to SteinbrennerGive the $6 million to Steinbrenner The World Relief OrganizationThe World Relief Organization

• $6 million feeds 100,000 people dying of $6 million feeds 100,000 people dying of starvationstarvation

The DilemmaThe Dilemma• What to do with the money?What to do with the money?

33


The New York Yankees and $6 MillionThe New York Yankees and $6 Million Let your conscience be your guideLet your conscience be your guide

• People’s conscience will speak to them in People’s conscience will speak to them in different ways according to how they were different ways according to how they were raisedraised

• Some people believe it is alright to commit Some people believe it is alright to commit terrorist actsterrorist acts

• Some people would harm a flySome people would harm a fly

44


The New York Yankees and $6 MillionThe New York Yankees and $6 Million Do whatever is most lovingDo whatever is most loving

• Love is a wonderful value, but it is not Love is a wonderful value, but it is not enough to guide our actions where there is enough to guide our actions where there is a conflict of issuesa conflict of issues

• Love alone does not solve difficult moral Love alone does not solve difficult moral issuesissues

55


The New York Yankees and $6 MillionThe New York Yankees and $6 Million Do unto others as you would have them do Do unto others as you would have them do

unto youunto you• Or do unto others as you would have them Or do unto others as you would have them

do unto you if you were in their shoesdo unto you if you were in their shoes• The Golden Rule doesn’t tell us to whom The Golden Rule doesn’t tell us to whom

we should give the moneywe should give the money

66


The New York Yankees and $6 MillionThe New York Yankees and $6 Million The previous heuristics or rules of thumb The previous heuristics or rules of thumb

frequently help us through life in ordinary frequently help us through life in ordinary moral situationsmoral situations

But the more complicated situations, where But the more complicated situations, where there are conflicts of interest, these rules of there are conflicts of interest, these rules of thumb are limitedthumb are limited

77


The New York Yankees and $6 MillionThe New York Yankees and $6 Million The principle of promise keeping is called The principle of promise keeping is called

“Deontology”“Deontology”• Deontology is from the Greek meaning dutyDeontology is from the Greek meaning duty• The locus of value is the act or kind of act The locus of value is the act or kind of act • A Deontologist would see something A Deontologist would see something

essentially wrong in the very act of lyingessentially wrong in the very act of lying

88


The New York Yankees and $6 MillionThe New York Yankees and $6 Million The principle of giving the money to the World The principle of giving the money to the World

Hunger Relief Organization to save a large number Hunger Relief Organization to save a large number of people is called “Teleology”of people is called “Teleology”• This comes from the Greek “teleos” meaning This comes from the Greek “teleos” meaning

having reached one’s end or finishedhaving reached one’s end or finished• The focus of value is the outcome or the The focus of value is the outcome or the

consequencesconsequences• A teleologist would judge whether lying was A teleologist would judge whether lying was

morally right or wrong by the consequences it morally right or wrong by the consequences it producedproduced

99

UtilitarianismUtilitarianism

UtilitarianismUtilitarianism Utilitarianism is a consequentialist theory Utilitarianism is a consequentialist theory

which aims at maximizing happiness or utilitywhich aims at maximizing happiness or utility The greatest happiness for the greatest The greatest happiness for the greatest

number was the motto of Jeremy Bentham number was the motto of Jeremy Bentham and John Stewart Milland John Stewart Mill

They promoted penal reform, animal welfare They promoted penal reform, animal welfare and women’s rightsand women’s rights

1010


UtilitarianismUtilitarianism Before you do anything, you should consider if Before you do anything, you should consider if

the other act would promote more happinessthe other act would promote more happiness• Under this concept what should you do with Under this concept what should you do with

the $6 million?the $6 million?• What would be the greatest happiness for the What would be the greatest happiness for the

most for the greatest number of people?most for the greatest number of people?• The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in

WW II would be justified on Utilitarian groundsWW II would be justified on Utilitarian grounds

1111


Seaman Holmes and the LongboatSeaman Holmes and the Longboat A decision was made that the men must be A decision was made that the men must be

thrown overboard to save the boat and they thrown overboard to save the boat and they would all perishwould all perish

The judge instructed the jury that the law of The judge instructed the jury that the law of the sea required that passengers must always the sea required that passengers must always be saved in preference to seamen except be saved in preference to seamen except those indispensable for operating the boatthose indispensable for operating the boat

If passengers must be sacrificed, lots must be If passengers must be sacrificed, lots must be drawndrawn

1212


Classical Utilitarianism by BenthamClassical Utilitarianism by Bentham Of the Principle of UtilityOf the Principle of Utility

• Pleasure and pain govern us in all we doPleasure and pain govern us in all we do• This is the principle which approves or This is the principle which approves or

disapproves of every action disapproves of every action • Either to promote happiness or oppose Either to promote happiness or oppose

painpain

1313


Classical Utilitarianism by BenthamClassical Utilitarianism by Bentham Value of Pleasure or Pain: MeasurementValue of Pleasure or Pain: Measurement

• The value of a pleasure or pain is The value of a pleasure or pain is measured by these four circumstancesmeasured by these four circumstances

Its intensityIts intensity Its durationIts duration Its certainty or uncertaintyIts certainty or uncertainty Its propinquity (closeness) or Its propinquity (closeness) or

remotenessremoteness

1414



• The value of a pleasure or pain is further The value of a pleasure or pain is further measured by:measured by:

Fecundity, the chance that more Fecundity, the chance that more pleasure will followpleasure will follow

Purity, the chance that it will not be Purity, the chance that it will not be followed by the oppositefollowed by the opposite

Extent, the number of persons that will Extent, the number of persons that will be affected by itbe affected by it

1515



• So, Bentham is saying what we do when we So, Bentham is saying what we do when we make a moral choice is we list all the make a moral choice is we list all the pleasures (pros) and results on one side and pleasures (pros) and results on one side and then list all the pains (cons) and results on then list all the pains (cons) and results on the other sidethe other side

• Armed with this information, we then make a Armed with this information, we then make a decisiondecision

• We may also take into account the number We may also take into account the number of people affectedof people affected

1616



• So, Bentham is saying what we do when we So, Bentham is saying what we do when we make a moral choice is we list all the make a moral choice is we list all the pleasures (pros) and results on one side and pleasures (pros) and results on one side and then list all the pains (cons) and results on then list all the pains (cons) and results on the other sidethe other side

• Armed with this information, we then make a Armed with this information, we then make a decisiondecision

• We may also take into account the number We may also take into account the number of people affectedof people affected

1717



• Can it all be so simple as this?Can it all be so simple as this?

1818


A Defense of Utilitarianism by NielsenA Defense of Utilitarianism by Nielsen Act Utilitarianism is a doctrine that says we Act Utilitarianism is a doctrine that says we

ought to evaluate each act on its own merits ought to evaluate each act on its own merits and determine if it maximizes utilityand determine if it maximizes utility

Remember “deontology” says that there are Remember “deontology” says that there are moral principles that should never be violated moral principles that should never be violated no matter what the consequences may beno matter what the consequences may be

Nielsen says there are situations when the Nielsen says there are situations when the consequences should determine the morality consequences should determine the morality of the actof the act

1919


A Defense of Utilitarianism by NielsenA Defense of Utilitarianism by Nielsen Some claim that a consequentialist’s view of Some claim that a consequentialist’s view of

ethics has implications which make such a ethics has implications which make such a conception of morality untenable (flawed)conception of morality untenable (flawed)

A consequentialist maintains that actions and A consequentialist maintains that actions and moral principles are ultimately to be judged by moral principles are ultimately to be judged by certain consequences, that by doing them certain consequences, that by doing them everyone involved will have greater satisfaction everyone involved will have greater satisfaction and less dissatisfactionand less dissatisfaction

2020


A Defense of Utilitarianism by NielsenA Defense of Utilitarianism by Nielsen Is it always wrong to kill an innocent human Is it always wrong to kill an innocent human

being, whatever the consequences of not being, whatever the consequences of not doing so may be?doing so may be?

Should every moral man be appalled at the Should every moral man be appalled at the judicial execution of the innocent or at the judicial execution of the innocent or at the punishment, torture, and killing of the innocentpunishment, torture, and killing of the innocent• What about the interviews and detention of What about the interviews and detention of

the Iraqi people?the Iraqi people?• What about the bombing of Japan in WWII What about the bombing of Japan in WWII

2121


A Defense of Utilitarianism by NielsenA Defense of Utilitarianism by Nielsen Could or can these people harm us?Could or can these people harm us?

• Can they carry bombs?Can they carry bombs?• Can they plant bombs?Can they plant bombs?• Can they conceal and support others that Can they conceal and support others that

may harm us?may harm us?• Is this subjectivism (morality of the individual Is this subjectivism (morality of the individual

at the time)?at the time)?

2222


A Defense of Utilitarianism by NielsenA Defense of Utilitarianism by Nielsen Nielsen says where the good to be achieved is Nielsen says where the good to be achieved is

great enough, he advocates violence toward great enough, he advocates violence toward the innocentthe innocent

It is not always wrong to advocate violence and It is not always wrong to advocate violence and to do so would advocate for a kind of moral to do so would advocate for a kind of moral absolutism absolutism

2323


A Defense of Utilitarianism by NielsenA Defense of Utilitarianism by Nielsen The Case of the Innocent Fat ManThe Case of the Innocent Fat Man

• Is it always wrong to kill in innocent man?Is it always wrong to kill in innocent man? What would the deontologist or What would the deontologist or

absolutionist say?absolutionist say? What would the consequentialist say?What would the consequentialist say? Who is right and who is wrong?Who is right and who is wrong?

2424



• Would the killing of the fat man set a Would the killing of the fat man set a precedent or would it haunt the perpetrators precedent or would it haunt the perpetrators forever and make them more moral?forever and make them more moral?

• Killing is something which is undertaken with Killing is something which is undertaken with the greatest reluctancethe greatest reluctance

• It is only when it is quite certain that there is It is only when it is quite certain that there is not other way to save the lives of the othersnot other way to save the lives of the others

2525



• Blowing up the fat man is indeed monstrous, Blowing up the fat man is indeed monstrous, but letting him remain stuck while the whole but letting him remain stuck while the whole group drowns is still more monstrousgroup drowns is still more monstrous

2626


A Defense of Utilitarianism by NielsenA Defense of Utilitarianism by Nielsen The Magistrate and the Threatening MobThe Magistrate and the Threatening Mob

• The judge is faced with a large and The judge is faced with a large and uncontrollable mob, demanding a culprit for uncontrollable mob, demanding a culprit for a crimea crime

• Unless the criminal is produced, tried and Unless the criminal is produced, tried and executed they will take their own bloody executed they will take their own bloody revengerevenge

• But the real culprit is unknown to policeBut the real culprit is unknown to police

2727



• There is within easy reach a disreputable, There is within easy reach a disreputable, disliked and useless mandisliked and useless man

• Although he is innocent, he could easily be Although he is innocent, he could easily be blamed, tried, convicted and executedblamed, tried, convicted and executed

• To most of use this would be unacceptableTo most of use this would be unacceptable

2828



• By framing and executing the innocent man By framing and executing the innocent man this would solve the immediate problem, but this would solve the immediate problem, but in the long run cause still more suffering in the long run cause still more suffering through the corrupting effect on the through the corrupting effect on the institution of justiceinstitution of justice

• Just like that face that we don’t negotiate Just like that face that we don’t negotiate with terrorists (we set a precedent and they with terrorists (we set a precedent and they use this against us)use this against us)

2929



• So, the precedent may be set, but how often So, the precedent may be set, but how often would we encounter such a set of would we encounter such a set of circumstances?circumstances?

• The lesser of two evils is to commit judicial The lesser of two evils is to commit judicial murder of the innocent manmurder of the innocent man

• Is the lesser of two evils always to be Is the lesser of two evils always to be preferred to the greater of two evils preferred to the greater of two evils

3030



• The Consequentialist is saying that as the The Consequentialist is saying that as the world goes, there are good grounds for holding world goes, there are good grounds for holding the judicial killings are morally intolerablethe judicial killings are morally intolerable

• But the Consequentialist is not committed to But the Consequentialist is not committed to denying the universality of moral judgmentsdenying the universality of moral judgments

• If the situation is the same and the people are If the situation is the same and the people are similar, then they should act morally, the same similar, then they should act morally, the same

3131


Against Utilitarianism by WilliamsAgainst Utilitarianism by Williams Utilitarians frequently require us to reject Utilitarians frequently require us to reject

conscience and our personal ideals in favor of conscience and our personal ideals in favor of the “lesser of two evils”the “lesser of two evils”

This is the concept of “Negative Responsibility”This is the concept of “Negative Responsibility” We are responsible for evil if we knowingly let it We are responsible for evil if we knowingly let it

happen when we could do something about it happen when we could do something about it even when they require us to violate moral even when they require us to violate moral principles and do great harmprinciples and do great harm

3232


Against Utilitarianism by WilliamsAgainst Utilitarianism by Williams George the PhD and his family problemsGeorge the PhD and his family problems A chemist can get George a job, but the job A chemist can get George a job, but the job

requires research into chemical and biological requires research into chemical and biological research which is against George’s moral beliefsresearch which is against George’s moral beliefs

If George refuses the job it will go to someone If George refuses the job it will go to someone who will pursue the research with vigorwho will pursue the research with vigor

Should George take the job, for his family and to Should George take the job, for his family and to prohibit the other researcher from employment?prohibit the other researcher from employment?

3333


Against Utilitarianism by WilliamsAgainst Utilitarianism by Williams Jim the “Honored Visitor” has the dilemma of Jim the “Honored Visitor” has the dilemma of

killing an innocent Indian rebel or having all the killing an innocent Indian rebel or having all the Indian rebels killed by PedroIndian rebels killed by Pedro

What should Jim do? What should Jim do?

3434


Against Utilitarianism by WilliamsAgainst Utilitarianism by Williams The certainty that attaches to these hypotheses The certainty that attaches to these hypotheses

about possible effects is usually pretty lowabout possible effects is usually pretty low They are so implausible that it would scarcely They are so implausible that it would scarcely

pass if it were not being used to deliver the pass if it were not being used to deliver the respectable moral answerrespectable moral answer

3535


Against Utilitarianism by WilliamsAgainst Utilitarianism by Williams Can we ever know the psychological effects on Can we ever know the psychological effects on

the actors?the actors? How George or Jim will be effected if they take How George or Jim will be effected if they take

one course of action over the other?one course of action over the other? The effects may be bad enough to cancel out the The effects may be bad enough to cancel out the

initial utilitarian advantages of their course of initial utilitarian advantages of their course of actionaction

3636


Against Utilitarianism by WilliamsAgainst Utilitarianism by Williams IntegrityIntegrity

• When were are measuring happiness, who’s When were are measuring happiness, who’s happiness are were measuring?happiness are were measuring?

• Maybe the Indian rebels wanted to die, so that Maybe the Indian rebels wanted to die, so that they would become martyrs and have ten they would become martyrs and have ten virgins waiting for them when they died?virgins waiting for them when they died?

• The decision is so determined, but what if it The decision is so determined, but what if it interferes with some project of mineinterferes with some project of mine

3737


Against Utilitarianism by WilliamsAgainst Utilitarianism by Williams IntegrityIntegrity

• So, another person actions can control your So, another person actions can control your integrity?integrity?

3838


The One Who Walks Away from OmelasThe One Who Walks Away from Omelas Is it acceptable to exchange all the goodness and Is it acceptable to exchange all the goodness and

grace of every life in Omelas for the single grace of every life in Omelas for the single happiness of one?happiness of one?

Is our happiness predicated on the suffering of Is our happiness predicated on the suffering of poorer nations form whom we get cheap goods? poorer nations form whom we get cheap goods?

3939


The Utilitarian Social Engineer & the SavageThe Utilitarian Social Engineer & the Savage The Alpha Plus IntellectualsThe Alpha Plus Intellectuals The Beta and Delta WorkersThe Beta and Delta Workers The Epsilon Minus MoronsThe Epsilon Minus Morons What happens when Savage attempts to What happens when Savage attempts to

bring them freedom? bring them freedom?

4040


The Utilitarian Social Engineer & the SavageThe Utilitarian Social Engineer & the Savage Would you like to live in such a world where Would you like to live in such a world where

people are happy?people are happy?• They get what they want, and they never want They get what they want, and they never want

what they can’t havewhat they can’t have• They are well off, they’re safe, they’re never ill, They are well off, they’re safe, they’re never ill,

they’re not afraid of death…they’re not afraid of death… A room with everything that you could possible A room with everything that you could possible

want would still result in a prisonwant would still result in a prison

4141


The Utilitarian Social Engineer & the SavageThe Utilitarian Social Engineer & the Savage What happened when the Controllers cleared the What happened when the Controllers cleared the

island of Cyprus and populated the island with all island of Cyprus and populated the island with all Alphas?Alphas?

What happened when they gave all the workers What happened when they gave all the workers in Ireland a four hour work day?in Ireland a four hour work day?

Every change is a menace to stabilityEvery change is a menace to stability Every discovery in pure science is potentially Every discovery in pure science is potentially

subversive (science is treated as the enemy)subversive (science is treated as the enemy)

4242


The Utilitarian Social Engineer & the SavageThe Utilitarian Social Engineer & the Savage What would happen if we got rid of everything What would happen if we got rid of everything

that was unpleasant instead of learning to put up that was unpleasant instead of learning to put up with it with it • The bad makes the good, betterThe bad makes the good, better

What is everything was free, would it be worth What is everything was free, would it be worth anythinganything• What if everyone got an A in the class, what What if everyone got an A in the class, what

would it be worth, a college degree?would it be worth, a college degree? Can we claim the right to be unhappy? Can we claim the right to be unhappy?

1 Ethics Chapter Four Moral Theories and Moral Character.

Documents

Transcript of 1 Ethics Chapter Four Moral Theories and Moral Character.