Moral Arguments

Standard Form 1. State your position 2. 1st Premise (Fact 1: State fact and source) 3. 2nd Premise (Fact 2: State fact and source) 4. 3rd Premise (Fact 3: State fact and source) 5. 4th Premise (Fact 4: State fact and source) 6. Counter Argument 7. Response to Counter Argument 8. Conclusion

Moral Arguments A moral argument is an argument whose conclusion asserts that something is morally good or bad. Moral arguments don’t usually contain the words “good” or “bad.”

What does morally good mean? Refers to something we should do “We should act a certain way because …”

Naturalistic Fallacy Confusing what we do With what we ought to do Is does not equal ought You can’t do a statistical study on how people behave and extrapolate from that how they ought to behave

Moral Argument Indicator Words accepting considerate enduring honest altruistic contented enthusiastic hopeful appreciative cooperative fair hospitable assertive courageous faithful humble Autonomous courteous farsighted idealistic aware creative flexible imaginative balanced critical focused impartial beautiful cunning forgiving independent beneficent curious free industrious benevolent defiant friendly innocent brave dependable frugal inventive caring detached funny joyful cautious determined generous just charitable devoted gentle kind chaste diligent good loving clean discerning graceful loyal committed disciplined grateful merciful compassionate discrete happy moderate confident empathic helpful well-mannered

Virtues and Vices Virtues are morally good features of people Vices are morally bad features of people.

Values When someone does something, generally we can assume they value or believe that the action or outcome will be good or beneficial

Moral Arguments and Truth

Cognitivisms either true or false Believe that moral statements that are either true or false

Noncognitivists NOT true or false Believe that no moral statements that are NOT true or false Morality is a preference There are no moral truths

Emotion and Self-Interest Moral arguments are often bound up with emotion and self-interest This self-interest and self-deception can also blind people to both good and bad arguments

Exercise 10.2 A 1-10

Evaluating Moral Arguments Structure of a Moral Argument about Actions (1) Action A has feature F. (2) It is morally good/bad to do actions that have feature F. Therefore, (3) You should/should not do A.

An Example Exposing animals to cosmetics as a form of testing can cause them unnecessary pain or even kill them. (2) (Missing) Therefore (3) Cosmetic testing should not be conducted on animals. What is the unstated premise here?

(2) It is morally wrong to cause animals unnecessary pain or even kill them for testing cosmetics

Evaluating Premise Two When we ask “When is premise (2) of the Action form true,” What we are really asking is: “What features of an action make it morally good or bad?”

Causing unnecessary pain or death of animals for cosmetics purpose is morally wrong It might not be morally wrong if we were trying to find a cure for cancer

Exercise 10.3 A 1-10

10.3 A (1) Talking on the phone while driving impairs your ability to drive (2) It is morally wrong to drive impaired Therefore (3) You should not talk on the phone while driving

Do Aplia 1-3

Consequentialist Moral Argument Form Some action causes a particular effect (a consequence) (2) Causing this particular effect is right /wrong Therefore (3) People should / should not do the action in question

An Example (1) Action A will produce C. (2) It is morally good/bad to produce C. Therefore, (3) H should/should not do A. Testing cosmetics on animals may cause them unnecessary pain. It is morally bad to produce unnecessary pain. Therefore (3) Cosmetics should not be tested on animals.

What Sort of Consequences Are Morally Important? What types of consequences might make premise (2) true? The range of consequences valued by humans is enormous. To try to answer this question philosophers distinguish between instrumental and inherent value.

Instrumental and Inherent Value

Instrumental Value Something is valued instrumentally when it’s valued as a means to getting something else. Its value is directly related to what it can get you

Inherent Value Something is valued inherently when it’s valued for its own sake. It is valued in and of itself

Universalism - all people are equally important Maximizing Consequentialist - create the most happiness for most people

Egoism Egoism is the view that an action by any person is right when it produces the most pleasure for that person.

Deontological Moral Arguments Deontological moral arguments include a premise that says that an action has a certain intrinsic feature The intrinsic features of an action are the total of all its features minus without considering its consequences.

Deontological Moral Arguments (1) Action A has intrinsic feature F. (2) It is morally good/bad to do actions with intrinsic feature F. Therefore, (3) H should/should not do A. You should show compassion for others It is morally good to show compassion for others in and of itself. Therefore (3) You should show compassion for others.

Universalizability Immanuel Kant a test to determine a deontological argument “Could I will that everyone had to do what I am about to do” Would that make sense?

Kantian Action Form Action A is not universalizable. (2) It is morally bad to do actions that are not universalizable. Therefore, (3) I should not do A.

Exercise 10.6 A 1-10

Aretaic Moral Arguments Aretaic moral arguments are moral arguments whose conclusion is a statement about the moral evaluation of a person a statement indicating that someone has a virtue or vice. “Arete = Greek for “Virtue”

Virtue Ethics Virtue ethicists hold that the moral evaluation of people is more fundamental than the moral evaluation of actions.

Action Form Action A is an action that would be done by a person with virtue V. (2) It is morally good to do actions that would be done by a person with virtue V. Therefore, (3) H should do A.

Aplia 4,5,6,

Review

Moral Arguments Conclusion makes a moral claim Deals with Virtues and Vices Virtue = Good Vice = Bad

Cognitivism moral statements have a truth value Noncognitivism Moral statements do not have a truth value

Standard Form for Moral Arguments 1. Action A has feature F 2. It is morally good/bad to do actions that have feature F Therefore 3. Person H should/should not do A

Consequentialist Moral Arguments Inherent Value Something has value in and of itself Instrumental value Something has value because of what it can get you

Consequentialists Moral Arguments Egoism You do what is best for you

Consequentialists Moral Arguments Universalism Everyone is equally important Maximizing consequentialist You should produce as much happiness as possible

Deontic Moral Arguments Universalizability What would the world be like if everyone had to do this all the time

Aretaic Moral Arguments Focuses on character qualities

Standard Form 1. State your position 2. 1st Premise (Fact 1: State fact and source) 3. 2nd Premise (Fact 2: State fact and source) 4. 3rd Premise (Fact 3: State fact and source) 5. 4th Premise (Fact 4: State fact and source) 6. Counter Argument 7. Response to Counter Argument 8. Conclusion

Evaluating Moral Arguments Structure of a Moral Argument about Actions (1) Action A has feature F. (2) It is morally good/bad to do actions that have feature F. Therefore, (3) You should/should not do A.

Consequentialist Moral Argument Form Some action causes a particular effect (a consequence) (2) Causing this particular effect is right /wrong Therefore (3) People should / should not do the action in question

Deontological Moral Arguments (1) Action A has intrinsic feature F. (2) It is morally good/bad to do actions with intrinsic feature F. Therefore, (3) H should/should not do A.