Rights Approach Presentation prepared by Anna Peachy, Kelsey Rickerman, and Angie Kelly LP: Ethical...

16
Rights Approach Presentation prepared by Anna Peachy, Kelsey Rickerman, and Angie Kelly LP: Ethical Theory Presentation Section: Tuesday, April 1 st 2008 @ 1:30 pm

Transcript of Rights Approach Presentation prepared by Anna Peachy, Kelsey Rickerman, and Angie Kelly LP: Ethical...

Page 1: Rights Approach Presentation prepared by Anna Peachy, Kelsey Rickerman, and Angie Kelly LP: Ethical Theory Presentation Section: Tuesday, April 1 st 2008.

Rights Approach

Presentation prepared by Anna Peachy, Kelsey Rickerman, and Angie Kelly

LP: Ethical Theory Presentation

Section: Tuesday, April 1st 2008 @ 1:30 pm

Page 2: Rights Approach Presentation prepared by Anna Peachy, Kelsey Rickerman, and Angie Kelly LP: Ethical Theory Presentation Section: Tuesday, April 1 st 2008.

Immanuel Kant (1724-1804)

Kantian Ethics: Rights Approach

Page 3: Rights Approach Presentation prepared by Anna Peachy, Kelsey Rickerman, and Angie Kelly LP: Ethical Theory Presentation Section: Tuesday, April 1 st 2008.

Kantian Ethics: Rights Approach

Each human being has dignity and is worthy of respect.

Human dignity gives rise to fundamental moral rights.

Page 4: Rights Approach Presentation prepared by Anna Peachy, Kelsey Rickerman, and Angie Kelly LP: Ethical Theory Presentation Section: Tuesday, April 1 st 2008.

Rights

Rights are legitimate claims persons

have on others and society

*Two kinds

~Protects human freedom

~Minimum level of well being

Page 5: Rights Approach Presentation prepared by Anna Peachy, Kelsey Rickerman, and Angie Kelly LP: Ethical Theory Presentation Section: Tuesday, April 1 st 2008.

Categorical Imperative

A Rule For Testing Rules

StepsConsider the maximGeneralize the principle

Perform test onePerform test two, if necessary

Page 6: Rights Approach Presentation prepared by Anna Peachy, Kelsey Rickerman, and Angie Kelly LP: Ethical Theory Presentation Section: Tuesday, April 1 st 2008.

Example OneUsing test one

Maxim: I may make a false promise… Generalized: Anyone may make a false

promise…

~This is self-contradictory because:

If anyone may make a …Result: I may not act on that maxim. The maxim fails Test One.

Page 7: Rights Approach Presentation prepared by Anna Peachy, Kelsey Rickerman, and Angie Kelly LP: Ethical Theory Presentation Section: Tuesday, April 1 st 2008.

Example TwoUsing test one and two

Maxim: I may refuse to help another…Generalized: Anyone may refuse to

help…

~Can it be conceived? Yes.

~Could you will to be universal law?Result: You cannot act on the "Bad

Samaritan" maxim.

Page 8: Rights Approach Presentation prepared by Anna Peachy, Kelsey Rickerman, and Angie Kelly LP: Ethical Theory Presentation Section: Tuesday, April 1 st 2008.

Good Will Kant says that only one (kind of)

thing is inherently good, and that is the good will.

Page 9: Rights Approach Presentation prepared by Anna Peachy, Kelsey Rickerman, and Angie Kelly LP: Ethical Theory Presentation Section: Tuesday, April 1 st 2008.

Good WillWe control will behind action

Morally good action vs. morally right action.

“Without qualification”

Moral worth depends on motive

Page 10: Rights Approach Presentation prepared by Anna Peachy, Kelsey Rickerman, and Angie Kelly LP: Ethical Theory Presentation Section: Tuesday, April 1 st 2008.

The Duality of the Human The Duality of the Human SituationSituation

~Humans vs. Animals~Humans vs. Animals~Morality~Morality

Page 11: Rights Approach Presentation prepared by Anna Peachy, Kelsey Rickerman, and Angie Kelly LP: Ethical Theory Presentation Section: Tuesday, April 1 st 2008.

Criticisms

~Kant’s approach gives

little aid for complex situations

Page 12: Rights Approach Presentation prepared by Anna Peachy, Kelsey Rickerman, and Angie Kelly LP: Ethical Theory Presentation Section: Tuesday, April 1 st 2008.

Criticism

~Kant dismisses emotions such as pity and compassion as

irrelevant to morality

Page 13: Rights Approach Presentation prepared by Anna Peachy, Kelsey Rickerman, and Angie Kelly LP: Ethical Theory Presentation Section: Tuesday, April 1 st 2008.

Criticism

~Kant’s approach doesn’t take the consequences of actions seriously enough

Page 14: Rights Approach Presentation prepared by Anna Peachy, Kelsey Rickerman, and Angie Kelly LP: Ethical Theory Presentation Section: Tuesday, April 1 st 2008.

Current Ethical Dilemma

Euthenasia: Does the intent to relieve suffering outweigh the responsibility to preserve life?

*Dr. Kevorkian

Page 15: Rights Approach Presentation prepared by Anna Peachy, Kelsey Rickerman, and Angie Kelly LP: Ethical Theory Presentation Section: Tuesday, April 1 st 2008.

Conclusion

After two hundred years, Kant remains After two hundred years, Kant remains an absolutely central figure in the Rights an absolutely central figure in the Rights Approach, one from whom we can learn Approach, one from whom we can learn much even when we disagree with himmuch even when we disagree with him..

Page 16: Rights Approach Presentation prepared by Anna Peachy, Kelsey Rickerman, and Angie Kelly LP: Ethical Theory Presentation Section: Tuesday, April 1 st 2008.

Review QuestionsReview Questions

1.1. What do you consider the weakness of What do you consider the weakness of Kant’s Rights Approach?Kant’s Rights Approach?

2.2. What do you consider the strengths of What do you consider the strengths of Kant’s Rights Approach?Kant’s Rights Approach?

3.3. Do you see yourself using the Rights Do you see yourself using the Rights Approach in your life?Approach in your life?