SUMMARY: Characteristics that a moral theory needs to “work” –Needs to help resolve moral issues in manner acceptable to society at large. The functions.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Higher RMPS Lesson 4 Kantian ethics.

Advertisements

By Dr Lewis and Professor Blake. For Kant, acting purely from emotion or outcome was not a sufficient on its own to deem an action a good one. For him,

What is deontology?.

Morality As Overcoming Self-Interest

Kant’s Ethical Theory.

Categorical Imperative

Introduction to Ethics

Ethical Theory.

The Potter Box By Alex Pontoski. The Creator The Potter Box was developed by Ralph B. Potter, a theologian and former professor at Harvard Divinity School.

Ethics and Morality Theory Part 2 11 September 2006.

Ethics and ethical systems 12 January

COMP 381. Agenda  TA: Caitlyn Losee  Books and movies nominations  Team presentation signup Beginning of class End of class  Rawls and Moors.

Ethics & Computers Sources: “The Right Thing to Do”, P. Aarne Vesilind, Lakeshore Press, 2004, (ISBN ) “Ethics for the Information Age”, Michael.

How Actions Can Be Morally Evaluated l Teleological Ethics: morality is the means to achieve what is identified as good or valuable l Deontological Ethics:

How Actions Can Be Morally Evaluated l Teleological Ethics: morality is the means to achieve what is identified as good or valuable l Deontological Ethics:

Kantian Ethics Exam Questions

THE RIGHTS APPROACH Jill Stiemsma M, 8:30 Ethical Theories Presentation April 21, 2008.

Consequentialism, Natural Law Theory, Kantian Moral Theory

THEORIES ABOUT RIGHT ACTION (ETHICAL THEORIES)

Kant’s Ethics of Duty 3 insights form the basis for his theory  An action has moral worth if it is done for the sake of duty. (DUTY)  An action is morally.

1Chapter SECTION OPENER / CLOSER: INSERT BOOK COVER ART Defining Ethics Section 1.1.

UNIT 1 Ethics and the Law Section 1.1 Defining Ethics Section 1.2

Philosopher Review. Who Believes… Humans are by nature social beings Your moral virtues control your character Hint: Plato’s student.

Chapter One: Moral Reasons

What is the right thing to do?

Ethical Theory and Business Chapter Two

Chapter 4 Ethics, Law, Business. I. Ethics and Values Why Study Ethics? What is Ethics? Value Systems and Moral Beliefs 6 Influences That Shape Value.

“A man without ethics is a wild beast loosed upon this world.”

Kantian Ethics Introduction to Philosophy Jason M. Chang.

Introduction to Thomas Hobbes We begin with some background on Hobbes' era and his ethics. As you read ask yourself the following questions What are the.

THEORIES OF ETHICS PART 2 OF CHAPTER 12 (ETHICS).

NCA Group Ratings Ranked Most Important in 21 st Century Ranked Least Important in 21 st Century Group Rankings.

Consequentialism Is it OK to inflict pain on someone else? Is it OK to inflict pain on someone else? What if it is a small amount of pain to prevent a.

Kant Good Will –Morally praiseworthy actions are done from a sense of duty. Our duty is to follow the right moral rules.

Normative Ethical Theory: Utilitarianism and Kantian Deontology

Key Words to be happy with deontological – actions, not consequences summum bonum – the supreme good prescriptive – ‘I ought’ means ‘I can’ ‘a priori’

A balance between theory and practice

Aristotle Human beings have a function

Chapter One: Moral Reasons Review Applying Ethics: A Text with Readings (10 th ed.) Julie C. Van Camp, Jeffrey Olen, Vincent Barry Cengage Learning/Wadsworth.

AREA 1 GUIDING PRINCIPLES SECTION 3 Consequences (Utilitarian Ethics) Duty and Reason (Kantian Ethics)

A Universal Moral Theory Dennis R. Cooley Department of History North Dakota State University 19 January 2003 Supported by a USDA/CSREES/IFAFS grant, “Consortium.

Consequentialism, Natural Law Theory, Kantian Moral Theory

KANT Kant was looking for some sort of objective basis for morality – a way of knowing our duty.

Ethics and Morality Theory Part 3 30 January 2008.

1Chapter SECTION OPENER / CLOSER: INSERT BOOK COVER ART Defining Ethics Section 1.1.

Plaisance, Chapter 2 “Ethics in Media”. A Systematic Approach to Making Ethical Decisions –The Multidimensional Ethical Reasoning and Inquiry Task Sheet.

ETHICALETHICALETHICALETHICAL PRINCIPLESPRINCIPLESPRINCIPLESPRINCIPLES.

Ethics Overview: Deontological and Teleological ( Consequentalist) Systems.

Media Ethics. Morals vs. Ethics Morals - a religious or philosophical code of behavior Morals - a religious or philosophical code of behavior Ethics -

Jody Blanke, Professor Computer Information Systems and Law.

Introduction  Based on something other than the consequences of a person’s actions  Unlike Egoism  People should act in their own self-interest  Unlike.

Kantian Ethics Good actions have intrinsic value; actions are good if and only if they follow from a moral law that can be universalized.

Aristotle ( BCE) Virtue Ethics An act is good if and only if it says good things about one’s character Usually weighed by “moderation” of virtue.

Social Ethics continued Immanuel Kant John Rawls.

Ethics: Theory and Practice

KANT Kant was looking for some sort of objective basis for morality – a way of knowing our duty.

universalizability & reversibility

Theory of Health Care Ethics

Moral Sense Theory.

Stanley E. Jenne, Ph.D., CPA, CFE

Introduction to Thomas Hobbes

Moral Reasoning Ethical dilemmas in management are not simple choices between “right” and “wrong”.They are complex judgments on the balance between economic.

Higher RMPS Lesson 4 Kantian ethics.

Theories of Justice Retributive Justice – How should those who break the law be punished? Distributive Justice – How should society distribute it’s resources?

Moral Reasoning Ethical dilemmas in management are not simple choices between “right” and “wrong”.They are complex judgments on the balance between economic.

1. STABILITY: constant, consistent

Functions of a moral theory

Moral Reasoning Ethical dilemmas in management are not simple choices between “right” and “wrong”.They are complex judgments on the balance between economic.

Presentation transcript:

SUMMARY: Characteristics that a moral theory needs to “work” –Needs to help resolve moral issues in manner acceptable to society at large. The functions of a moral theory –To keep society from falling apart –To diminish human suffering –To promote human flourishing –To resolve conflicts of interest in just & orderly ways –To assign praise & blame: responsibility

CHARACTERISTICS of Moral Theories Moral Theories should provide for 1. STABILITY: constant, consistent –decisions not made on whim or caprice. 2. UNIVERSALITY: Principles or practices applied fairly/equally [same playing field ] –not different rules for different people in the same situation. 3. IMPARTIALITY: avoid inclinations/each person counts for one –showing favoritism for a friend or yourself. 4. OBJECTIVITY: Make decisions on a verifiable basis, apart from inclinations/emotions –decisions made on non-verifiable basis, or according to personal preference. 5. [Compassion?]

How do our philosophers provide for STABILITY 1.Hobbes: contract irrevocable/absolute ruler. 2.Mill: decide on the basic of publicly verifiable consequences – may lack stability because nothing is absolutely wrong 3.Kant: based in human reason, with all inclination and personal preference removed. 4.Aristotle: moral actions flow from people of good moral character.

How do our philosophers provide for UNIVERSALITY 1.Hobbes: all men agree to the covenant made. 2.Mill: be sure to consider the consequences for all those affected by an action 3.Kant: the moral law consists of universalizable principles. [1st Cat. Imp.] 4.Aristotle: assumes all persons seek the good.

How do our philosophers provide for IMPARTIALITY 1.Hobbes: the covenant covers everyone in society -- no “opt-outs” 2.Mill: consider the consequences for all affected by an action, your interests count for only one in that calculation 3.Kant: acting from reverence for the law – acting from principles, not from inclinations or emotions. “mere means” 4.Aristotle: the role of practical reason.

How do our philosophers provide for OBJECTIVITY 1.Hobbes: individual morality is relative to our desires & aversions, thus we need the covenant and the absolute ruler to override that. 2.Mill: consequences are publicly verifiable. 3.Kant: no inclinations and no material considerations. Both formulations of the categorical imperative 4.Aristotle: the form of the good as encountered in the world.

How do our philosophers provide for COMPASSION 1.Hobbes: nope! 2.Mill: believes that we have sympathy for others and that our happiness depends on the well-being of others. Kant: not morally valuable. Aristotle: “fine” [able to make small distinctions] emotions part of identifying & resolving moral dilemmas.

RAWLS Being in the original position behind a veil of ignorance would lead us to pick rules that are fair to everyone. If we resolve moral dilemmas using those rules the characteristics will be fulfilled. STABILITY -- UNIVERSALITY IMPARTIALITY -- OBJECTIVITY QUESTION: Can you get the RESULTS of Compassion without engaging the emotions?