Value Theory Ethics: moral goodness, obligations, principles, justification; why be moral? Social-Political Philosophy: justice, rights, responsibilities, the state, law Aesthetics: art, beauty Meaning of life

Ethics Ethical Absolutism: one set of moral values applies to all people and cultures Plato Cultural Relativism: Moral values are relative to one’s culture; there are no universally held values Sextus Empiricus Montaigne Moral Skepticism: there are no known absolute moral values: we endorse moral values simply because they are ours J L Mackie

Ethics and Objectivity Cultural Relativism: moral values are relative to one’s culture; there are no universally held values Ethical Absolutism: one set of moral values applies to all people and cultures Relative vs. absolute Subjective vs. objective

Cultural Relativism: Moral values are relative to one’s culture There are no universally held values Objection: this is simply false; universal values are interpreted differently Ethical Absolutism: one set of moral values applies to all people and cultures Relative vs. absolute Subjective vs. objective

We would have to tolerate cruel cultures [but] Objections to Ethical Relativism (the belief that no values ought to be applied to all) James Rachels (Naturalistic Fallacy) The existence of moral differences does not justify them (“is does not imply ought”) We would have to tolerate cruel cultures [but] Relativism allows for no moral progress In fact, there are universal moral values that are simply interpreted differently in cultures

Ethical relativism: no set of values ought to be applied to all Objections: The existence of moral differences does not justify them (“is does not imply ought”) If a culture’s values were always “right,” there could be no moral development or progress We would have to tolerate even cruel cultures It is difficult to define the boundaries of which culture or subculture a person’s acts reflect (Naturalistic Fallacy)

Objections to ethical relativism (the belief that no set of values ought to be applied to all) We need not respect all aspects of a culture The boundaries of a culture are difficult to set The existence of moral differences does not justify them: “is does not imply ought” (the naturalistic fallacy) Universal moral values are simply interpreted differently in different cultures

Isn’t ethics different from science because ethics lacks agreement, has no way to resolve disputes, and is not objective? No: There are wide areas of ethical agreement Ethical disputes are resolved through reason In contrast to science, ethical values are “objective” not because they are based on an independent reality but because they are based on reliable methods of reasoning that consider how practices benefit or harm people

Teleological Ethics: Morality is determined by the consequences of actions Morality is a means to an end: to know what we ought to do, we must first know what is valuable Hedonism: value (good) is pleasure/happiness Egoism: my happiness is the greatest good Utilitarianism: the good is the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people (or perhaps sentient beings)

Consequentialist Ethical Theories Egoism: the good is whatever promotes my long-term interests Hedonism: the good is pleasure Pursue pleasures not mixed with pain (beauty, prudence, honor, justice, courage, knowledge); satisfy natural desires (food, sleep), avoid vain desires (fame, fashion) Self-realization: develop harmoniously all our capacities (Plato, Aristotle, Bradley) Epicurus 341-270 BC

Objections to Egoism Egoism cannot resolve conflicts of interest (which moral theories should do) Egoism allows for no “moral point of view” of an ideal observer who is impartial, informed, and imaginatively identifies with those in the situation Egoist response: no one is completely impartial, nor should moral decisions be dispassionate

Utilitarianism: the good is the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number J. Bentham (1748-1843) J. S. Mill (1808-73) Bentham: the hedonic calculus is based on the intensity, duration, certainty, immediacy, fecundity, purity, & number of people J. S. Mill: the quality of pleasures needs to be considered, determined by competent judges Objection: this is elitist; why not use the criterion for evaluating pleasures to judge morality itself?

Variations of Utilitarianism Act utilitarianism: we are obligated to do the specific act that produces the greatest amount of happiness (regardless of rules or justice) Objections: • consequence calculation is difficult • the end justifies the means Rule utilitarianism: we should follow moral rules that, when acted upon, generally produce the greatest amount of happiness Objections: • what about when rules conflict? • in some cases, why not exceptions? Reply: then why have any theory at all?

How Actions Can Be Morally Evaluated Teleological Ethics Motive/Intention (Character) ACT Consequences Deontological Ethics Teleological Ethics: morality is the means to achieve what is identified as good or valuable Deontological Ethics: the good or valuable is doing our duty (the morally right, obligatory) Divine Command $Natural Law $Kant $Buddhism

Why Should I Be Moral? The Ring of Gyges This question is not about what is moral (an issue of “normative” ethics) but about why I should do what I acknowledge is moral when it is not in my self-interest to do so (a “metaethical issue).

Answers to “Why Be Moral?” Rational: my justification for acting morally is precisely because I see it as moral Objection: why be rational? Religious: God links sanctions (punishments and rewards) to immoral/moral behavior Objection: not persuasive to non-believers Social: adherence to moral rules promotes the rational self-interest of everyone Objection: not persuasive to free riders

Divine Command Theory The good is whatever God commands (as identified in the Scriptures) because it is God’s command Objections: What God wills can be arbitrary Scriptures conflict and need interpretation If God’s will is not arbitrary, then moral principles are justified non-religiously

Social Contract Theory Following moral rules is the best way for us to promote our rational self-interests To discourage free riders, we need to make it difficult to get away with breaking rules Objection: this does not explain why everyone has an obligation to be moral

Contemporary Liberalism: John Rawls: Justice as Fairness All citizens should share in a society’s wealth and be given equal economic opportunities In a just society, rational individuals under a veil of ignorance about their original position in the society should endorse a theory that: gives everyone as much liberty as possible allows for the unequal distribution of wealth only when the existence of such inequalities benefits everyone and is accessible to everyone

Critiques of Social Contract Theories Communitarianism: the State’s authority does not depend on the consent of individuals; rather, individuals depend on the State for their fulfillment and identity (Aristotle, Hegel) Feminism: because women typically are expected to focus on private (family) matters, they are excluded from full participation in the social contract Susan Okin

Karl Marx (1818-85) Human beings are naturally inclined to work and be sociable. Capitalism alienates us from the products of our labor and thus alienates us from ourselves and others Only communal ownership of property can counteract social alienation

Natural Law Theory Thomas Aquinas Epictetus Natural Law: we should follow reason and our God-instilled inclinations (Stoics, Aquinas) Objections: inclinations sometimes conflict Reply: principle of double effect: our intention should always be to do the good Counter-replies: $natural is not always good $people differ on what is natural $even double effects are intended

Kant’s Ethics (Formalism) The essential feature of morality is obligation; you are obligated only if everyone else is too; the form of moral obligation is its universality Moral obligation does not vary from person to person. It is not a hypothetical imperative (if you want Y, you ought to do X); rather, the imperative is categorical (you must do X) Your intention must be to do your duty, to act for the sake of doing your duty

Kant: Objections to Consequentialism, Divine Command & Natural Law Theories If we are naturally oriented to seek happiness, we are not free and thus cannot be morally obligated to seek happiness: ought implies can Because opinions differ about what happiness is, we could never agree on moral principles Consequences are often out of our control, so we cannot be held responsible for our actions We can hold ourselves responsible only if the moral law is self-imposed (“autonomous”)

Kant: The Categorical Imperative Always act only on maxims (rules) that you could will everyone universally to adopt Two tests for universalizability: Consistency: a maxim must be universalizable without contradiction Acceptability: a universalized maxim must be acceptable Objection: W. D. Ross: duties sometimes conflict; this shows how they are valid only prima facie T. Regan: duties to animals are not indirect

Kant’s Categorical Imperative (continued) Because human beings can act rationally, they can act for the sake of doing their duty; that is, they can act on the basis of a “good will” Rational beings are capable of self-obligating behavior; we should therefore treat others as ends-in-themselves, freely consenting agents Objection: humans are not simply rational

Buddhist Ethics The craving for individuality (including life, pleasure, power) produces suffering—which is ended through virtue and meditation Being virtuous requires us to respect ourselves and others, and to be patient, moderate, and to maintain a clear and balanced mind Personal enlightenment consists not in merely following rules but in seeing one’s place in the universe

Challenges to Ethical Theorizing: Anti-foundationalism Morality is not a pursuit of abstract principles; it is an attempt to give our lives order. This requires that it assumes changeable values Instead of discussing morality in terms of acts or judgments based on rules or principles, we should focus on developing a good character or maintaining personal relationships

Virtue Ethics (Aristotle) To be moral means being sensitive to the social and personal dimensions of life “Rational” actions are not based on abstract principles but on moderation (golden mean) Objection: this does not provide the specific moral guidance needed in difficult situations

Feminist Ethics Carol Gilligan Nel Noddings Morality is not about abstract principles, rights, or impartial (typically male) theories of justice, but about caring for persons and maintaining relationships (Gilligan) The (feminine) virtue of caring for others in specific situations is the basis upon which all ethical thinking is grounded (Noddings)

Challenges to Ethical Theorizing: Feminist Ethics and Virtue Ethics Instead of discussing morality in terms of acts or judgments based on rules or principles, we should focus on maintaining personal relationships or developing a good character

Gender and Morality Wollstonecraft Carol Gilligan Women can be as rational about morality as men if they receive a comparable education Morality is not about abstract principles, individual rights, equality, or impartial (typically male) theories of justice, but about caring for persons in specific situations and maintaining relationships

Virtue Ethics Morality requires developing habits that promote human excellence (and happiness) To be virtuous means being rational, sensitive to the social and personal dimensions of life Rational actions are not based on abstract principles but on moderation (golden mean) Aristotle Virtue is linked to intentions, which are in turn intelligible only within a unified personal and communal narrative MacIntyre

Implications Different ethical theories highlight different features of moral situations. For example: Abortion: what makes a being morally significant? whose interests need to be considered? what impact will the decision have on the development of one’s character? Euthanasia: is life always better than death? should consequences or how we would like to be treated influence our judgments?

Moral Responsibility Excusability: we are not morally responsible if: the consequences of actions are unexpected actions are constrained by external threats or uncontrollable internal forces consequences of acts are beyond our control we do not have the ability or opportunity to do otherwise

Moral Responsibility (continued) Determinism/Libertarianism/Compatibilism Determinism: we are not morally responsible because our actions are not really free Libertarianism: we are morally responsible because our actions are based on reasons (not causes) over which we have control Compatibilism: we are morally responsible when our actions are caused by our choices; if caused by other forces, we are not responsible

Principles of a Moral Code A set of values becomes a person’s moral code only as a result of personal reflection Ethical behavior is based on wanting to do the right thing, not simply acting because we were raised a certain way or people expect it Considering the consequences of our actions helps us determine the moral value of actions

Social Philosophy Social philosophy is not ethics, because it is not concerned with identifying a norm of good conduct; nor is it politics, because it is not concerned with describing how power is expressed in institutions. Instead, it evaluates institutional power in terms of moral principles Issues: how are individuals related to society? •how is State authority justified? what is the role of government and law? •what are justice, civil rights, freedom?

Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) Fear of others in the state of nature (apart from society) prompts people to form governments through a social contract State power/authority (the sovereign) is based on the choice of subjects that there be one will. Since the sovereign determines what is right, rebellion against the sovereign is unjustified As brutal as a State may be, it is always better than having no State or government

John Locke (1632-1704) We have God-given rights to our lives, liberty, property (e.g., bodies) We establish governments to clarify & protect our natural rights. State authority is thus based on the consent of the people, who can rebel against the State if it fails to respect our rights Tacit consent is given by anyone who lives in a country and is protected by its laws

Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-78) I am obligated to obey the law only if it is self-imposed. Externally-imposed laws are based on force and are not morally legitimate The social contract is our tacit agreement to abide by the general will, which is what we all will for ourselves as members of a community Objection: consent is often uninformed and unavoidable (Hume)

Contemporary Liberalism: John Rawls: Justice as Fairness All citizens should share in a society’s wealth and be given equal economic opportunities In a just society, rational individuals under a veil of ignorance about their original position in the society should endorse a theory that: gives everyone as much liberty as possible allows for the unequal distribution of wealth only when the existence of such inequalities benefits everyone and is accessible to everyone

Critiques of Social Contract Theories Communitarianism: the State’s authority does not depend on the consent of individuals; rather, individuals depend on the State for their fulfillment and identity (Aristotle, Hegel) Feminism: because women typically are expected to focus on private (family) matters, they are excluded from full participation in the social contract Susan Okin

Types of Justice Retributive justice: punishment/reward given to someone for something he/she has done Distributive justice: the distribution of goods, services, or responsibilities based on: productivity and merit (Plato) social utility, public interest (J. S. Mill) need and ability (socialism: Marx) equal opportunity (welfare liberalism: Rawls) ownership of property, entitlement, free choices (classical liberalism: Nozick)

Karl Marx (1818-85) Human beings are naturally inclined to work and be sociable. Capitalism alienates us from the products of our labor and thus alienates us from ourselves and others Only communal ownership of property can counteract social alienation

Types of Justice Retributive justice: punishment/reward given to someone for something he/she has done Distributive justice: the distribution of goods, services, or responsibilities based on: productivity and merit (Plato) social utility, public interest (J. S. Mill) need and ability (socialism: Marx) equal opportunity (welfare liberalism: Rawls) ownership of property, entitlement, free choices (classical liberalism: Nozick)

Minimal State (Entitlement) Theory: Robert Nozick We are entitled to use our property as we see fit. The State’s legitimate power is limited to preventing harm and protecting property rights Taxation for anything other than protection (e.g, to impose a pattern to redistribute wealth) is unjust because it ignores how goods are acquired fairly through trade, labor, gifts, etc.

Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900): Beyond Good and Evil Ethics itself is an expression of the impulse to create value, the will to life, the will to power The creation of value is good because it promotes advancement beyond the “human, all too human.” By contrast, the failure to create value, to “overcome man,” is bad because it fails to “transvaluate values”

Master Morality The ethical impulse is perverted by those who think that the good is determined by God or is an intrinsic characteristic of actions instead of a value for which we take responsibility The “good” man arouses fear because, in acting passionately, he challenges others. The “bad” man is despicable because he does not make any difference in the creation of values

Slave Morality The slave resents those who determine values and calls all who are morally creative evil: “good” means what is equally beneficial to even those who are timid and insignificant Slave (herd) values: pity, tolerance, modesty, sympathy, humility, respect for others, freedom, happiness—anything that avoids the burden of real existence and having to take responsibility for creating value

The Question of Selfless Conduct Human Nature: we are either inherently good (Mencius) or inherently evil (Hsun-tzu); environmental influences divert us from our true natures Psychological egoism: all actions are aimed at promoting one’s own self-interest even in pity and charity, we think of ourselves in another’s situation Hsun-tzu Mencius Hobbes

Altruism and Self-Interest Concern for others (benevolence) is not incompatible with self-love, because we can be happy in achieving our aims (which might include helping others) Joseph Butler To avoid concluding that egoism is not falsifiable, sociobiology argues that altruism can be seen in how it promotes group survival Edward O. Wilson

Reason and Moral Judgments A factual inclination toward self-interest does not imply that we ought to promote it Judgments of moral approval/disapproval are based on feeling or sentiment, not reason Searle’s Reply: obligations are institutional Hume Emotivism/Prescriptivism: moral claims are not true/false; they merely express feelings or recommendations A. J. Ayer Kurt Baier: morality is not based on emotions but on determining the best reasons for acting