BASIC ETHICS

1. CONSEQUENTALISM VS UTILITARIANISM AGENDA 1. CONSEQUENTALISM VS UTILITARIANISM 2. HARM PRINCIPLE 3. DIFFERENCE PRINCIPLE 4. COMMUNITARIANISM

UTILITARIAN PRINCIPLE: A. CONSEQUENCIALISM UTILITARIAN PRINCIPLE: GREATEST GOOD FOR THE GREATEST NUMBER SO WHAT’S THE PROBLEM? IS IT OKAY TO CUT OPEN SOMEONE TO GIVE THEIR ORGANS TO FIVE DYING PEOPLE? UTILITY MONSTER REPUGNANT CONCLUSION INTER-PERSONAL UTILITY CALCULATIONS PICTURE: JEREMY BENTHAM 1. CONSEQUENTALISM VS UTILITARIANISM 2.HARM PRINCIPLE 3.DIFFERENCE PRINCIPLE 4. COMMUNITARIANISM

CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE (REPHRASED) : B. KANTIANISM CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE (REPHRASED) : YOU CAN NEVER TREAT SOMEONE MERELY AS A MEANS, THEY MUST ALWAYS ALSO BE AN END IN THEMSELVES IMPLICATIONS: UNIVERSAL PRINCIPLE CAPITAL PUNISHMENT DETERMINISM PROBLEM? ONE INNOCENT > BILLION INNOCENTS LYING TO THE NAZI OFFICER PICTURE: IMMANUEL KANT 1. CONSEQUENTALISM VS UTILITARIANISM 2.HARM PRINCIPLE 3.DIFFERENCE PRINCIPLE 4. COMMUNITARIANISM

THBT DESECRATION OF RELIGIOUS SITES IS A LEGITIMATE TACTIC OF WAR USING UTILITARIANISM AND KANTIANISM THBT DESECRATION OF RELIGIOUS SITES IS A LEGITIMATE TACTIC OF WAR PROP (UTILITARIAN) WAR IS DREADFUL, HENCE WE MUST TO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO MAKE THE WAR END FASTER OPP (KANTIAN) THERE ARE THINGS WE DON’T DO EVEN IN WAR (E.G. HUMAN SHIELDS, TORTURE, RAPE AS A WEAPON OF WAR) DESECRATION OF RELIGIOUS SITES IS SUCH A THING (TARGETING NON-COMBATANTS) PICTURE: JEREMY BENTHAM 1. CONSEQUENTALISM VS UTILITARIANISM 2.HARM PRINCIPLE 3.DIFFERENCE PRINCIPLE 4. COMMUNITARIANISM

1. CONSEQUENTALISM VS UTILITARIANISM USING UTILITARIANISM AND KANTIANISM THBT THOSE WHO BUY NON-ESSENTIAL ITEMS RATHER THAN DONATING TO CHARITY ARE MORALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DEATH’S OF STARVING AFRICAN CHILDREN PROP (UTILITARIAN) If a child is drowning and you fail to help him – you are morally responsible for his death. Death of starvation in Africa is no different. OPP (KANTIAN) Causal chain – the situation with starving Africans is exactly the same as if you have never been involved, never been born. It is implausible that there is some moral duty relative to that individual with whom you have never been involved. PICTURE: JEREMY BENTHAM 1. CONSEQUENTALISM VS UTILITARIANISM 2.HARM PRINCIPLE 3.DIFFERENCE PRINCIPLE 4. COMMUNITARIANISM

1. CONSEQUENTALISM VS UTILITARIANISM C. NEOCLASSICAL SYNTHESIS OF RIGHTS & UTILITY HARM PRINCIPLE : The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others." J.S. Mill MILL MAINTAINS THIS IS STILL OPTIMAL UNDER UTILITARIANISM. WHY? A) FREEDOM OF THOUGHT AND DISCUSSION IS THE PATH TO TRUTH. TRUTH HELPS ACHIEVE OPTIMAL OUTCOMES. B) ONLY THE INDIVIDUALS THEMSELVES CAN DECIDE WHAT MAKES THEM HAPPY AND THUS THROUGH LIBERTY & NEGATIOATION ACHIEVE OPTIMAL OUTCOMES. PICTURE: JOHN STEWART MILL 1. CONSEQUENTALISM VS UTILITARIANISM 2.HARM PRINCIPLE 3.DIFFERENCE PRINCIPLE 4. COMMUNITARIANISM

THW BAN COSMETIC SURGERY INTENDED TO ALTER RACIAL FEATURES USING THE HARM PRINCIPLE THW BAN COSMETIC SURGERY INTENDED TO ALTER RACIAL FEATURES PROP (HARM PRINCIPLE) State has the right to intervene in two situations- when there’s a social and when there’s an individual harm, autonomy has never been absolute. Individual choices don’t just affect them alone, they affect social perceptions of every other member of that race. WOULD MILL AGREE? 1. CONSEQUENTALISM VS UTILITARIANISM 2.HARM PRINCIPLE 3.DIFFERENCE PRINCIPLE 4. COMMUNITARIANISM

VEIL OF IGNORANCE CONCLUSION: D. RAWLS VEIL OF IGNORANCE CONCLUSION: WE SHOULD MAXIMIZE THE UTILITY OF THE WORST OFF INDIVIDUAL RAWLS LOOKS FOR A SITUATION EVERYONE COULD CONSENT TO PROBLEM? So what if there was a principle that gave a small benefit to the least advantaged, but at a HUGE cost to the middle class? RESPONSE: GRAVE RISKS PICTURE: J. RAWLS 1. CONSEQUENTALISM VS UTILITARIANISM 2.HARM PRINCIPLE 3.DIFFERENCE PRINCIPLE 4. COMMUNITARIANISM

1. CONSEQUENTALISM VS UTILITARIANISM USING THE DIFFERENCE PRINCIPLE THBT MICRO-CREDIT INSTITUTIONS OPERATING IN THE DEVELOPING WORLD SHOULD ONLY GIVE LOANS TO WOMEN PICTURE: J. RAWLS 1. CONSEQUENTALISM VS UTILITARIANISM 2.HARM PRINCIPLE 3.DIFFERENCE PRINCIPLE 4. COMMUNITARIANISM

COMMUNITARIANISM: HUMAN PHSYHOLOGY IS SHAPED BY CIRCUMSTANCES E. MACINTYRE COMMUNITARIANISM: HUMAN PHSYHOLOGY IS SHAPED BY CIRCUMSTANCES BASIC IDEAS INTERDEPENDENT UTILITY NO ‘CREATIVE, PRE-SOCIETAL’ HUMAN BEING OUR CIRCUMSTANCES CHANGE US IMPLICATIONS A SOCIETY THAT MAKES PEOPLE THAT ARE ‘GOOD’ HOWEVER, CONCEPTIONS OF ‘GOOD’ ARE BASED ON SOCIETAL CONTEXT PICTURE: A. MACINTYRE 1. CONSEQUENTALISM VS UTILITARIANISM 2.HARM PRINCIPLE 3.DIFFERENCE PRINCIPLE 4. COMMUNITARIANISM

TH WELCOMES THE FALL OF GLOBAL CAPITALISM USING THE COMMUNITARIAN APPROACH TH WELCOMES THE FALL OF GLOBAL CAPITALISM PROP (COMMUNITARIANISM) Even if we were inherently selfish, it is better to live under a system that molds you into being better and not worse. Some cultures in Southern Africa, for example, don't even have a concept of individuality, hence it’s possible. CAPITALISM MAKES US SELFISH, COMMUNISM MAKES US ALTRUISTIC. PICTURE: J. RAWLS 1. CONSEQUENTALISM VS UTILITARIANISM 2.HARM PRINCIPLE 3.DIFFERENCE PRINCIPLE 4. COMMUNITARIANISM

RESOURCES STANFORD ENCYCLOPEDIA OF PHILOSOPHY http://plato.stanford.edu/