Ethics Theory and Practice Jacques P Thiroux Keith

Ethics: Theory and Practice Jacques P. Thiroux Keith W. Krasemann Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Chapter Three Nonconsequentialist (Deontological) Theories of Morality Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Nonconsequentialist Theories • Consequences do not, and should not, enter into our judging of whether actions or people are moral or immoral • What is moral or immoral is decided upon the basis of some standard or standards of morality other than consequences Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Act Nonconsequentialist Theories • Major assumption: There are no general moral rules or theories, but only particular actions, situations, and people about which we cannot generalize Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Act Nonconsequentialist Theories – One must approach each situation individually to decide the right action to take – Decisions are “intuitionistic, ” which means a person decides on a particular situation based on his or her intuition about what is right Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Intuitionism • Reasons in support of moral intuitionism: – Any well-meaning person seems to have an immediate sense of right and wrong – Human beings had moral ideas and convictions long before a system of ethics was created Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Intuitionism – Our reasoning upon moral matters usually is used to confirm our intuitions – Our reasoning can go wrong in relation to moral issues as well as others, and then we must fall back on our moral insights and intuitions Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Intuitionism • Arguments against Intuitionism – Intuition lacks scientific or philosophical respectability – There is no proof that we have an inborn, innate sense of morality Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Intuitionism • Arguments against Intuitionism – Intuition is immune to objective criticism, because it applies only to the possessor – Human beings without moral intuition have no others or establish them on other grounds Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Criticism of Act Nonconsequentialism • How can we know, with no other guides, that we feel will be morally correct? • How will we know when we have acquired sufficient facts to make a moral decision? • With morality so highly individualized, how can we know we are doing the best thing for everyone else involved in a particular situation? Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Criticism of Act Nonconsequentialism • Can we really rely upon nothing more than our momentary feelings to help us make our moral decisions? • How will we be able to justify our actions except by saying that it felt like the right thing to do? Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Rule Nonconsequentialist Theories • There are or can be rules that are the only basis for morality and consequences do not matter • The following of the rules is, itself, moral • Morality cannot be applied to consequences that ensue from following the rules Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Divine Command Theory • The Divine Command Theory states that morality is based on something higher that mundane human events • Morality is based on the existence of an allgood being or beings who are supernatural Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Divine Command Theory • They have communicated to human beings what they should and should not do morally • Morality requires humans to follow those commands Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Criticisms of the Divine Command Theory • The theory does not provide a rational foundation for the existence of a supernatural being and therefore not for morality either • Even if we could prove conclusively the existence of a supernatural being, how could we prove that this being was morally trustworthy? Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Criticisms of the Divine Command Theory • How are we to interpret these commands even if we accept the existence of a supernatural? • Rules founded upon the Divine Command Theory may be valid, but they need to be justified on some other, more rational basis Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Kant’s Duty Ethics • Kant believed that nothing was good in itself except as a good will – Will is the unique human ability to act in accordance with moral rules, laws, or principles regardless of interests or consequences Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Establishing Morality by Reasoning Alone • Kant argued that it is possible by reasoning alone to set up valid absolute moral rules that have the same force as indisputable mathematical truths – Such truths must be logically consistent, not selfcontradictory – They must also be universalizable Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Imperatives • The Categorical Imperative: An act is immoral if the rule that would authorize it cannot be made into a rule for all human beings to follow • The Practical Imperative: No human being should be thought of or used merely as a means for someone else’s ends; each human being is a unique end Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Duty Rather Than Inclination • Once moral rules have been discovered to be absolutes, human beings must obey them out of a sense of duty rather than follow their inclinations Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Criticism of Kant’s Duty Ethics • Although Kant showed that some rules would become inconsistent when universalized, this does not tell us which rules are morally valid • Kant never showed us how to resolve conflicts between equally absolute rules • Kant did not distinguish between making an exception to a rule and qualifying a rule Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Criticism of Kant’s Duty Ethics • Some rules can be universalized without inconsistency yet still have questionable moral value – Kant answered this criticism by means of the reversibility criterion, that is, the would-you-want -this-done-to-you idea (Golden Rule) – But the reversibility criterion suggests a reliance upon consequences, which goes against Kant’s system Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Criticism of Kant’s Duty Ethics • Kant seems to have emphasized duties over inclinations, in stating that we must act from a sense of duty rather than from our inclinations – But he gave us no rule for what we should do when our inclinations and duties are the same Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Ross’s Prima Facie Duties • Ross agreed with Kant as to the establishing of morality on a basis other than consequences but disagreed with Kant’s overly absolute rules • He established Prima Facie duties that all human beings must adhere to, unless there are serious reasons why they should not Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Ross’s Prima Facie Duties • Some Prima Facie duties: – Fidelity – Reparation – Gratitude – Justice – Beneficence – Self-improvement – Nonmaleficence Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Principles to Resolve Conflicting Duties • Always act in accord with the stronger prima facie duty • Always act in such a way as to achieve the greatest amount of prima facie rightness over wrongness Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Criticisms of Ross’s Theory • How are we to decided which duties are prima facie? • On what basis are we to decide which take precedence over the rest? • How can we determine when there is sufficient reason to override one prima facie duty with another? Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

Difficulty with Consequentialist Theories in General • Consequentialist theories demand that we discover and determine all of the consequences of our actions or rules – That is virtually impossible • Do consequences or ends constitute all of morality? Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

General Criticisms of Nonconsequentialist Theories • Can we avoid consequences when we are trying to set up a moral system? • Is it entirely possible to exclude consequences from an ethical system? Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

General Criticisms of Nonconsequentialist Theories • What is the real point of any moral system if not to do good for oneself, others, or both and if not to create a moral society in which people can create and grow peacefully with a minimum of unnecessary conflict? Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

General Criticisms of Nonconsequentialist Theories • How do we resolve conflicts among moral rules that are equally absolute? • Any system that operates on a basis of such rigid absolutes as does rule nonconsequentialism closes the door on further discussion of moral quandaries Copyright © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.