Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.
-
Upload
lisbeth-knott -
Category
Documents
-
view
219 -
download
1
Transcript of Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.
![Page 1: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Meta-EthicsMeta-Ethics
Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved
Author: John Waters
![Page 2: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
MMEETTAA
EETTHHIICCSS
A.J.Ayer W.D.Ross
G.E..Moore
R.M. Hare
DavidHume
Wittgenstein Russell
G.J.Warnock
![Page 3: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
• First-order moral
discourse
• Application of
ethical theories
• e.g. Natural law,
Utilitarianism,
Kant.
• What one ought
to do…
• Second-order moral
discourse
• Beyond or after ethics
• Analyses ethical
language, structure,
meaning.
• In what sense are
statements true?
• Is there a foundation
for ethical language?
PrescriptivismPrescriptivismNormative EthicsNormative Ethics MetaethicsMetaethics
Aquinas
Bentham
J.S. Mill
Kant
G.E Moore
R.M. Hare
A.J. Ayer
Wittgenstein
![Page 4: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Analysis of Meta-EthicsAnalysis of Meta-Ethics
Cognitive(moral judgements can
be known)
Non-cognitive(moral judgements cannot
be known)
Non-naturalism(Intuitionism)
Non-definableproperty
Emotivism Prescriptivism
CommendsUniversal action
Naturalism
Empirical Yah / Boo
![Page 5: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Ethical NaturalismEthical Naturalism
Empirical Assessment
Aquinas Kant Bentham Mill
Ethics can be understood like other empirical statements
George waselected
Presidentof the USA.
War againstterrorismis good.
Both statements can be proven to be either true or false through observation or evidence
![Page 6: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Ethical naturalism may argue that, on utilitarian grounds, it can be proven that war against terrorism produces the greatest happiness for the greatest number.
Or, on Kantian grounds, war against terrorism is in accordance with upholding international law and order, (cf. United Nations) and so can be universalised.
J. S. Mill
Kant
![Page 7: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Problem of Ethical Naturalism:Problem of Ethical Naturalism:Commits the Naturalistic FallacyCommits the Naturalistic Fallacy
• Cannot deduce an OUGHT from an IS.
• Cannot move from FACTS to VALUES
• Cannot move from EPISTEMOLOGY (knowledge) to ETHICS
(G.E. Moore, Principia Ethica)
![Page 8: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
“Confusing `Good’ with a
natural or
metaphysical property
or holding it
to be identical
with such a
property.”
(Source: C. Lewy, G.E. Moore on the Naturalistic Fallacy, p.297)
Committing
the naturalistic
fallacy means
one is either:
According to GE Moore a definition According to GE Moore a definition of the Naturalistic Fallacy is: of the Naturalistic Fallacy is:
![Page 9: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Ethical Theories which Commit the Naturalistic Fallacy:Ethical Theories which Commit the Naturalistic Fallacy:
Divine Command Theory – God is the source of morality, so whatever God wills is good. ` ` God is good’ is analytically true - by definition.
Natural Law: As nature has been created by God it has within it laws which ought to be followed. This will lead to human happiness.
Utilitarianism considered by analysing human nature it is possible to prove, scientifically, that people psychologically desire pleasure.
Kant claimed that our categorical duties are a priori, and being grounded in reason follow from logical considerations.
![Page 10: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Naturalist FallacyNaturalist FallacyVulnerable To The OPEN QuestionVulnerable To The OPEN Question
Statements are sound
IF they are
not vulnerableto an
OPENquestion
George isa brother
Original statementis sound
Original statementis unsound
Is Georgemale?
MeaninglessQuestion
War against terrorismupholds international
law
Is war against terrorism good?
MeaningfulQuestion
![Page 11: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
• IF Ethical Naturalism were true it would not make any sense to ask an `Open Question’. The conclusion would already have been proven. For example the question, `George is a brother, but is George male?’ is meaningless.
• However, ethical naturalism is not proven as an open question may be put, and such a question is meaningful. For example, a utilitarian may think war against terror provides the greatest happiness for the greatest number. However, the question may still be asked, “Even if war against terror provides the greatest happiness for the greatest number, is it still good?” And, crucially, such a question is meaningful.
THINK! THINK! THINK! THINK! THINK! THINK! THINK!
![Page 12: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Rejecte
d
Divine Command
Rejecte
d
Natural Law
Rejecte
d
Utilitarianism
Rejecte
d
Duty
Sartre’s Existentialism rejected Ethical Naturalism’s viewSartre’s Existentialism rejected Ethical Naturalism’s view that there is any one given view of human nature.that there is any one given view of human nature.
With the removal of an objective foundation for human nature there is no basis on which Ethical
Naturalism can assert an ethic to be right or wrong.
It is up to the individualto use their freedom
to choose theirown values.
Ethical Naturalism is therefore false, as there isno objective, natural view of what it is to be human.
For Sartre Ethical Naturalism is a self-deception of our responsibility to choose.
![Page 13: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Non-NaturalismNon-Naturalism(Intuitionism)(Intuitionism)
G.E. Moore W.D. Ross
G.E. Moore, Principia Ethica 1903“Good is a non-definable property”
Like the colourYellow
“We know what `yellow’ is, and can recognise it
whenever it is seen, but we cannot actually
define it.” (GE Moore)
“In the same way we know what`good’ means but cannot
define it.” (GE Moore)
•Goodness is like beauty•A quality found in things•But which cannot be defined.
![Page 14: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Non-NaturalismNon-Naturalism(Intuitionism)(Intuitionism) G.E. Moore
“Good means GoodSelf-evident.”
“A Simple idea:cannot be broken down
into simpler Ideas.”
Certain words in the dictionary are non-definablee.g. `not’ – a simple word; cannot be defined further than the simple building block we use
it to define other ideas.
![Page 15: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
G.E. Moore’s G.E. Moore’s IntuitionismIntuitionism
According to Philippa
Foot, G.E. Moore’s
central thesis was that
“goodness is a non-
definable property
discovered by
intuition.”
![Page 16: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Problems of Problems of Moore’s IntuitionismMoore’s Intuitionism
• What if one is ethically colour blind?
(Yellow is Green or Good is evil?)
• Lacks an authoritative foundation for ethics.
• Was G.E. Moore himself an intuitionist or an
Ideal Utilitarian?
• What to do when intuitions conflict? e.g. do
not lie, protect innocent life?
G.E. Moore
![Page 17: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil, argued that what is good may
be evil and what is evil may be thought to
be good.
Intuitionism lacks an objective assessment for right and wrong
What if one is ethically colour blind? What if one is ethically colour blind? (Yellow is Green or Good is Evil?)(Yellow is Green or Good is Evil?)
Virtue is Vice?
Christian virtues of humility and obedience are
detrimental to the human spirit,
individuality and the intuitive
evolutionary need for self-assertion.
Vice is Virtue
The vice of pride, condemned by St
Paul, is to be regarded as a
virtue - otherwise humanity will
remain subservient.
![Page 18: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Intuitionism Lacks an Authoritative Intuitionism Lacks an Authoritative
Foundation for Ethics Foundation for Ethics
Offers the individual too much freedom.
May suffer from anti-nomianproblems, similar to those of
Sartre’s Existentialism?
“Man is the measure of all things.” (Protagoras)
IntuitionismRejects
Divine Command
Magisterium
Duty
Jean Paul Sartre Protagoras
![Page 19: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
G.E. Moore(1873-1958)
An Intuitionist or an Ideal Utilitarian?An Intuitionist or an Ideal Utilitarian?G.E. Moore is famous for his analysis of ethical language in Principia
Ethica, 1903, where he famously asserted that: Good is a non-definable property. This led to Moore being labelled an intuitionist, as
“We know what`yellow’ is, and can recognise it whenever it is seen, but we cannot actually define it. In the same way we know what `good’
means but cannot define it.” (Ethica, 1903)
However, closer analysis reveals that, “it seems selfevident that our duty is to do what will produce the best effects upon the whole, no matter how bad the effectsupon ourselves may be and no matter how much we ourselves may lose by it.” (Ethica, p.143)
As an Ideal utilitarian Moore suggests that there arethree intrinsic goods: Pleasure, Friendship, Aestheticappreciation – and so right actions are those which increase / promote these in the world for the most people.
![Page 20: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
W.D Ross: Prima Facie DutiesW.D Ross: Prima Facie Duties
Do not lieProtect innocent
life.W.D. Ross
Prima Facie Duties are conditional, not absolute, and may change
depending on the situation.
Prima Facie duties “at first glance” which the mature person recognises intuitively through reason
What should one do when intuitions conflict? For example: Do you lie to a gunman to protect the intended innocent victim?
![Page 21: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
• W.D. Ross was an intuitionist who argued that the mature person intuitively knows what is good.
• “Morals, like the principles of mathematics, are self-evident, to the mature mind….. The moral order expressed in propositions is just as much part of the fundamental nature of the universe as is the spatial or numerical structure expressed in the axioms of geometry or arithmetic.” (Ross)
Morality is objective, but morals are conditional – whether they should be followed depends on which is one’s over-riding duty in the particular situation.
• When a conflict between duties arise one should follow the over-riding duty.
W.D. Ross
![Page 22: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
W.D. Ross W.D. Ross
Six Prima Facie DutiesSix Prima Facie Duties(Duties one ought to follow, intuitively
in the absence of an over-riding duty)
• Fidelity – faithful to promises made.
• Gratitude – appreciation for support offered.
• Justice – impartial, equal treatment of others and distribution of pleasure
• Beneficience – help for others.
• Self-improvement – self-fulfilment
• Non-malificence - avoid harming others.
•Ross does not rankthese duties in order
of importance.•The mature person intuitively knows these prima facie
duties are true and may follow the
appropriate duty given the demands
of the particular situation.
![Page 23: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
EmotivismEmotivism
Ethical statements merely express a person’s emotions. They have no cognitive, knowledge content.
i.e. ethical statements are neither true or false.
e.g. “Torture is good.”
Boo!Hooray
!
Desmond Tutu Saddam Hussein
![Page 24: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
EmotivismEmotivism
• Became popular through the work of
Alfred Ayer and Logical Positivists.
• Ethical Statements simply express an
individual’s emotion.
• Yah – Boo theory of ethics
• Importance of David Hume.
A.J. Ayer
![Page 25: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
“Take any action allowed to be vicious: wilful murder, for instance. Examine it in all lights, and see if you can find that matter of fact, or real existence, which you call vice. In which ever way you take it, you find only certain passions, motives, volitions, thoughts. There is no other matter of fact in the case. The vice entirely escapes you, as long as you consider the object. You will never find it, till you turn your reflection into your own breast, and find a sentiment of disapprobation, which arises in you, towards this action. It lies in yourself, not in the object. So that when you pronounce any action or character to be vicious, you mean nothing, but that from the constitution of your nature you have a feeling or sentiment of blame from the contemplation of it.” (Hume)
![Page 26: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Hume - SentimentHume - Sentiment
Morality cannot be proven empirically.
Rather, it is a question of personal sentiment.
“Reason is and ought to be the slave of the passions.”
Justification for such thinking lies in Hume’s analysis of language; known as “Hume’s fork”
![Page 27: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Hume’s ForkHume’s ForkHume categorised two kinds of knowledge as being either
Analytic or Synthetic statements
Analytic Statements(Tautologies)
Explain `relation of ideas’
Formal, abstract knowledgee.g. Mathematics 2 + 2 = 4, and Logic
Synthetic statements(Empirical statements)
Explain `matters of fact’
Derived from the five sense - empirical
knowledge based on impressions from sense
experience.
![Page 28: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Verification PrincipleVerification Principle(Criterion for meaningful statements)(Criterion for meaningful statements)
A.J. Ayer, “A statements is either analytic or synthetic to be meaningful”
Tautologies
(Analytic)
True by definition
e.g. Maths, Grammar
Empirical
(Synthetic)
Sense experience
Scientific observation
Logical Positivists(20th century)
Verification Principle
Two Types of Statement
Ethical statements:Neither True or False according to
Verification Principle, therefore meaningless
![Page 29: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Problems of Emotivism
![Page 30: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Verification Principle does Verification Principle does not pass its own test!not pass its own test!
Meaningful statements are either tautological or empirical
Verification Principle is neither tautological orempirical
Verification Principle determines whether statements are meaningful
Therefore the verification principle is itselfMEANINGLESS
![Page 31: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Emotions Influence Knowledge ClaimsEmotions Influence Knowledge Claims
With regards to the abortion debate it is interesting to note that the contentious issue, “Is the foetus a life with
potential or a potential life.”The difficulty arises in so far as people’s emotions colour their interpretation of the evidence.
Peter Singer believes the foetus is of little moral value,
lacking personhood.
Whilst the Pope believes it is an innocent human being
from the moment of conception.
![Page 32: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Challenges to EmotivismChallenges to Emotivism
Emotions: based on BeliefsEmotions: based on Beliefs Philippa Foot G.J. Warnock
EmotionsBased on
Beliefs or Reasonso emotionscan change
Philippa Foot•Emotions are based
on beliefs.•If one can show
beliefs are inaccurate it is possible to change emotions.
G.J. Warnock•Ethics is not
concerned with emotions but
whether claims are valid; can be supported by
reasoned argument.
![Page 33: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Emotions Based on BeliefsEmotions Based on Beliefs(Open to Rational Challenge?)(Open to Rational Challenge?)
•When Osama Bin Laden claims he is
killing innocent people because he
believes it is the will of Allah…
One might rationally ague against this
by appealing to the writing of the
Koran which condemns the killing of
innocent life.
If it can be shown that emotions are
based on incorrect beliefs such
emotions should be abandoned.
![Page 34: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
PRESCRIPTIVISMPRESCRIPTIVISM
(Non-cognitive)(Non-cognitive) R.M. Hare
Descriptivism
Ethical language
simply describes
choices people make.
Emotivism
Ethical language
expresses the
subjective
individual’s emotions
RejectedINSTEADPRESCRIPTIVISM
•Must have a logical, syllogistic, structure•No objective right or wrong, but
•Ethical language is action guiding•Universalise moral principles
![Page 35: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Prescriptivism – A Kantian InfluencePrescriptivism – A Kantian Influence
Hare’s idea of universalising moral maxims can be seen to have its roots in Kant’s categorical imperative.
At the heart of prescriptivism is the importance of logic and consistency within ethics.
For Hare it is inconsistent to advocate a moral approachand yet not be prepared to assert that others in a similarsituation should not act in a similar fashion. Reason and logic would suggest that universal application is centralto ethics.
![Page 36: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Problems of Prescriptivism Problems of Prescriptivism Too General…allows for universal evils?Too General…allows for universal evils?
As with Kant’s categorical imperative it is possible forprescriptivism to universalise moral maxims which are
intrinsically evil.
For example, Hitler’s desire to universalise the genocideof the Jews would be logically acceptable for those who
support prescriptivism.
Hare recognises the importance of putting oneself in the other’s position, so being able to universalise one’s
moral maxims. However, if one is fanatical it might be assumed that one would think the particular group
deserved to be punished.
![Page 37: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
A Possible Way ForwardA Possible Way Forward
GeoffreyWarnock
?
Naturalism
Intuitionism
Emotivism
Prescriptivism
![Page 38: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Entropy / Anti-EntropyEntropy / Anti-Entropy
Entropy Principle of Social Relations This theory points to the limitations of
resources, intelligence, knowledge, rationality
and sympathy. As a consequence the social
fabric tends to fall apart, producing a state of
nature in which chaos reigns; classically
outlined by Thomas Hobbes.
Hobbes G.J. Warnock
Geoffrey Warnock considered that it was the role of ethics do offer an anti-entropic response, to
offer order and structure within society.
![Page 39: Meta-Ethics Socratic Ideas Limited © All Rights Reserved Author: John Waters.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062518/56649cab5503460f9496b88e/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Entropy / Anti-EntropyEntropy / Anti-Entropy
Ethics is Anti-entropic
G.J. Warnock counteracts limited sympathies by upholding virtues which
help make for an ordered society:
Hobbes G.J. Warnock
Such principles offer a vision for human flourishing.For Warnock whilst morality is not absolute, it is objective.
1. Non-maleficience: non harm
2. Beneficience: social cooperation
3. Impartiality: upholding justice
4. Truthfulness: so avoiding self-deception