ETHICS TOK LAJM

ORIENTATION (1) When was the last time you did something wrong/ bad? – What was the action? What made it wrong/ bad? (2) When was the last time you did something right/ good? – What was the action? What made it right/ good?

I Basic Concepts Morals – views of right and wrong Ethics – study of morals

TASK: morals or ethics? You betrayed me! You did that on purpose! If you don’t care, you could at least refrain from worsening my situation Agreements are considered as morally obligatory, so braking agreements is wrong We are responsible of the intentional harm we inflict on others The minimum requirement for moral action is to refrain from hurting another

I Basic Concepts Moral values – attributes that make some things good and worth pursuing – goals of our actions Moral values guide our moral actions

TASK What kind of things are valuable and important to you? – write a list of at least five different things that you value – try to do a hierarchy: what is the most important value to you? – can your values conflict each other? How?

I Basic Concepts Intrinsic values – values that are important for their own sake Instrumental values – values that are important as means to other values

TASK What are intrinsic and instrumental values in your list of important things ? – mark intrinsic and instrumental values into your list Compare your list to your neighbours list – how different or similar are they?

TASK Compile a code of conduct for a school which core value is: – (1) physical attractiveness – (2) equality between sexes – (3) patriotism – (4) reputation – (5) respect for traditions

I Basic Concepts Moral norms – rules of behaviour that protect certain values Values create norms

TASK Carefully read through the IB learner profile – what values and norms can you find from the profile? – from your own perspective how relevant are the values and norms mentioned in the profile?

TASK How can you study/ research morality?

II Branches of Ethics Each branch studies morality on a different level

1. Descriptive Ethics Describes people’s beliefs about morality – doesn’t prescribe how we should act

2. Normative Ethics Evaluates and justifies ethical theories and principles – prescribes how we should act

3. Meta-ethics Studies the nature of ethics and the language of ethics

4. Applied Ethics Describes, evaluates and justifies values and norms in a particular issue in life – e.g. clinical ethics and business ethics

TASK How are these statements different? – (1) There is a whiteboard in the classroom – (2) Teacher is strangling a student – (3) It is wrong to strangle

III Factual And Normative Statements Factual statements state how things are – e.g. teacher is strangling a student Normative statements state how things ought to be – e.g. you should not strangle anyone

TASK Make up normative and factual statements related to your list of valuable things – what kind of norms can you derive from your values? – what kind of factual statements can you make from your values? What kind of facts are related to your list of valuable things? – can you derive your important values from these facts?

IV Hume’s Guillotine ”No ought from is” – we cannot derive moral values and moral norms from facts

V Ethical Fallacies Naturalistic fallacy – assuming that if something is ’natural’, it is therefore morally good – unjustified jump from ’is’ to ’ought’ Moralistic fallacy – assuming that if something is considered morally good, it must be so in nature – unjustified jump from ’ought’ to ’is’

TASK Do we have universal moral values? Do we have universal moral standards to evaluate what is morally good and morally wrong?

VI Moral Relativism (P1) Values differ from culture to culture (P2) We do not have a universal method to say which culture is ultimately right (CON) There are no universal values

TASK Is moral relativism right? – can you find any counter arguments against moral relativism?

Arguments Against Moral Relativism (1) A relativist must admit, that a same thing can be morally right and morally wrong at the same time – brakes the law of contradiction ~(A&~A) (2) If moral relativism is argued in the name of tolerance, then tolerance is considered to be a superior or universal moral value – contradicts the very definition of moral relativism

Arguments Against Moral Relativism (3) According to empirical research, people’s conceptions about right and wrong tend to be quite similar across cultures – we can have some universal core values (4) We can form rational arguments for our moral principles and values – morality seems be something more than just a matter of taste

VII Theories of Normative Ethics Systematic and coherent approaches to good life and right action Stress different things in moral evaluation

1. Virtue Ethics Virtue – a morally admirable feature in a person Approaches life as a whole – life has a telos, a purpose or a final end – telos is reached through virtuous activity which leads to happiness

1.1. Aristotle’s Virtue Ethics Every species have a telos of their own To live a good life is to strive for the telos of their own species

TASK What is the telos for humans? – what could be the purpose or the final end for humans? – what could be the virtues to achieve it? Form groups and make a poster of human telos and the related virtues

1.1. Aristotle’s Virtue Ethics Human telos: what distinguishes humans from other species? – rationality and morality Happiness is achieved through morally virtuous activity in the guidance of reason

1.1. Aristotle’s Virtue Ethics Virtues are tendencies to act in a morally right way in different situations Virtues are acquired through nurture and practise

1.1. Aristotle’s Virtue Ethics Intellectual virtues – wisdom, intellectual reason – practical reason Virtues of character – an ability to choose the golden mean between two vices

TASK How different of similar was Aristotle’s conception of human telos and related virtues compared to your own?

TASK Aristotle presumes that the human telos is more or less universal – do we have a universal human telos? – can we have at least some virtues that are universally accepted?

TASK What kind of basic capabilities humans have? – form groups and make a list of human capabilities Compare your list to Martha Nussbaum’s list of The central human capabilities

1.2. Modern Virtue Ethics Martha Nussbaum (1947–) – societies should be organized in a way that enables citizens to use their basic human capabilities in a best possible way

2. Deontology Concentrates on moral rules and principles – is NOT concerned with the consequences of our actions Can be divided into duty based and rights based deontology

2.1. Kantian Duty Ethics Sets reason as a foundation to morality Through reason one can reach categorical imperative which functions as a universal moral principle, duty

2.1. Kantian Duty Ethics REASON MORAL LAW DUTY RIGHT ACTION

2.1. Kantian Duty Ethics First formulation of categorical imperative: – ”Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law without contradiction.” Second formulation of categorical imperative: – ”Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never merely as a means to an end, but always at the same time as an end.”

2.1. Kantian Duty Ethics Kant’s categorical imperatives in brief: – we should be able to universalize the principle guiding our action without contradiction – we should not treat humanity as an instruments

2.1. Kantian Duty Ethics Only those actions that are rationally based on categorical imperative are moral – emotions and consequences are NOT part of morality

TASK According to categorical imperative, is it right: – (1) to lie? – (2) to save a human from drowning? – (3) to collect edible food from supermarket’s trash cans? – (4) not to give money to charity while knowing that you are doing well and some others miserably? – (5) to lend money to a friend knowing that he/she can never pay it back? – (6) to commit suicide because life contains more suffering than pleasure?

TASK Evaluate kantian ethics – what are the problems in kantian duty ethics? – is it applicable in everyday life? – does it lead to good life?

2.2. Rights Based Deonthology Discards kantian duties, but accepts reason as a universal foundation to morality

2.2. Rights Based Deonthology General formulation: – (P1) It is a part of humanity to reach towards a goal that leads to ones welfare – (P2) If A wants to reach for goal x, he/she cannot deny the same from others – (P3) Everyone has the right to pursue one’s goals, if it doesn’t contradict with other’s equal right – (CON) Always act according to your own rights and others rights

2.2. Rights Based Deonthology We should have rights that are fulfilled regardless of consequences

TASK What rights should we have absolutely? Can rights contradict one another? How can we solve the possible conflicts between rights? To what are the rights based on?

3. Utilitarianism Concentrates on the consequences of our actions There is only one moral value: experienced well-being, utility There is only one moral principle: maximizing experienced well-being

TASK Try to define utility values for different actions – how much utility do certain actions cause? Try to place actions in order according to their utility values

TASK Compile rules and try to evaluate their consequences – what kind of rules produce maximum amount of well-being? Try place rules in order according to their utility value

3. Utilitarianism Act utilitarianism – compares individual actions in certain situations – which action causes the biggest amount of well- being? Rule utilitarianism – compares which rule causes the biggest amount well-being

TASK What is the difference between rule utilitarianism and deontology?

TASK Evaluate utilitarian ethics – what are the problems in utilitarianism? – is it applicable in everyday life? – does it lead to good life?

Summary Virtue Ethics – Does our action promote the human telos? => moral evaluation focuses on life as a whole Deontology – Is our action in accordance with a moral principle? => moral evaluation focuses on the act itself and the principle guiding the act Utilitarianism – Are the consequences of our actions good? => moral evaluation focuses on the consequences

TASK How do we know what is right and what is wrong? – try to answer the question through different WOK’s What kind of AOK’s are related to ethics?

Picture sources ere-do-morals-come-from.html at-is-the-big-deal-about-intrinsic-value/ om sys/suspendedpage.cgi

Picture sources be-good-and-other-ineffective-rules.html /06/11/dignity-something-owned-by- everybody/ join-online-and-yearbook-information/

Picture sources en.svg html word-cloud-for-meta-ethics-with-related-tags- and-terms.html

Picture sources /2013/09/10/fact-or-whacked-painted-drop- cloth-curtains/ m/2015/03/11/the-dangers-of-moral-relativism/ 05/problems-of-moral-relativism.html tivism_Is_Unintelligible

Picture sources communication-model/ annotated mediocritas/

Picture sources an-ethics/ ontologist_225_button, and-ethical-theory.html

Picture sources CLUB/events/ / kantiano/kantian_hero/ kasinopelurin-miljoonat-taman-vuoksi-syyte-jai- nostamatta/

Picture sources vector/download/balance_scale_clip_art_ html ve.html deontology-different-from-utilitarianism.html disciplinary_ethics_applied_centre