law 483 moral n ethics

OUTLINE

•Why study ethics?•What is ethics?•Different approaches to ethics -Ethics and Religion -Ethics and Reason•Ethical reasoning and arguments -Fallacious Arguments -Arguments•Ethical theories -Objective source of morality -Subjective source of morality•Why be moral?•Conclusion

Why study ethics? How can we decide what is the right thing to do in any given

situation? Some decision are not ethical or moral-e.g. move left foot after right foot when walking-Walking away from an injured person-ethical Faced with many ethical decision everyday-Rarely question why we do certain things Contemporary ethics teaches:-what the most important philosopher have said on the subject-Evaluate and debate ethical statements If a person cannot feel pain,how do you persuade them to stop

hurting someone?

What is ethics? A branch of philosophy,also called moral

philosophy

-Greek:philia=love or friendship,sophia=wisdom-’love of wisdom’-critical examination of the grounds for fundamental

beliefs and an analysis of the basic concepts employed in the expression of such beliefs

Branches of philosophy:-Epistemology:philosophy of knowledge-Metaphysics:nature of reality-Ethics:determining what is right or wrong-philosophy of sciencePhilosophy of law-Aesthetics:philosophy of art

Ethics:a set of normative values that determine whether any particular action is good or bad

What is ethics? Ethical and moral frequently interchangeable -ethos(Greek):meaning character

Relates to individual characteristics of a person -moralis(Latin) :meaning custom or manners

Relates to relationships between people Ethical/moral associated with ‘good’, ‘right’ -Good:pleasure or happiness

Malicious pleasure:e.g.sadism-consent issues -Bad : unhappiness or pain Nonmoral:-e.g. a light bulb

Sadism:a sadist derives pleasure from hurting others

Nonmoral:does not involve morality.

Immoral:goes agaist morality

What is ethics?

Excellence:most good things involve excellence -e.g. 1-0 win is good, 5-0 is excellent -displaying superior skills in a particular areaHarmony : -Stopping a war is good: harmony -Starting a war is bad: discordAmoral - Sociopath:no remorse

Amoral:having no sense of what is moral

Excellence:the quality of displaying superior skills in a particular area.

Different approaches to ethics

• Normative/Perscriptive ethics:– “should”,”ought”…telling you what to do – Deciding what is preferable in any give situation

• Used in medicine, law, politics…

• Metaetchics: older approach, exploring the meaning of ethical terms– E.g. what does “good” mean? What does fair mean?

What does “fair” mean?

Normative: conforming to or based on valuesPrescriptive: that which defines what ought to be done

Different approaches to ethics

• Overlaps with other specialisations:– Epistemology: knowledge – how do we know something is good or bad

• Scientific/Descriptive– No value judment: e.g. crime statistics

• Combination of approaches possible– E.g. Capital punishment:

• Crime rate does not fall, therefore not a deterrent• Therefore it should not be practiced• It is not ‘good’

Different approaches to ethics

• Not all evaluation are moral– Manners/ etiquette close but not the same

• Moral judgements overide other normative values– Civil disobedience: morality over law– Public nudity: morality over aesthetics

Etiquette: the proper conduct in social or official life.

Objective sources of morality• Supernatural– Impossible to prove, depends on faith

• Natural laws– Scientific natural laws are descriptive and always

hold true– Naturalistic moral laws are prescriptive and have

many example of exceptions• Anthropocentric value– How can politics or art have value without the

humans who created them?

Anthropocentrism: assessing everything in relation to humans.

Subjective sources of morality

• Moral value derives from humans alone– No external sources

• Three variables for subjective and values– The thing being valued, the thing of value – The valuer, the conscious being who values– The context where the valuing takes place

MoralityCustomary morality

• From evolution of society and collective historical experiences– Religious, legal– “That’s the way we’ve always done it”

Reflective morality• Applying reason and interpretation of events to

decide upon morality• Can be used to re-evaluate customary morality

– E.g. Slavery

“ All evil is ignorance- Plato

What does this mean?

What does ‘evil’ mean? Does it exist? in itself it is a value-laden term Are some things or people

intrinsically evil? Plato is suggesting that ignorance is intrinsically evil, but it can be overcome Therefore evil itself is not

intrinsically evil?

Intrinsic: belonging to the essential nature or constitution of something Evil: that

which is extremely

morally reprehens

ible

ETHICS AND RELIGION

Most ethical/ moral systems derive from religions E.g: Thou shalt not kill; respect your eldest… Religion probably existed before separate moral and legal systems – more than an ethical system

Divine command theory:

A moral system is right because it was ordained by divine powers Arbitrary, should we kill in the name of a (non-existent) God?

Who determines what the divine wants? How to reconcile different believers?

Reason and experience to develop ethical systems

Not exclude religious moral systems, but has to be sustainable for other reasons that for faith alone Non-religious people have morals too.Most satisfactory ethical system incorporates all people of all persuasions.

ETHICS AND REASONS

Ethics demands reasons for particular standpoints “Why did you steal that bread?”

Ethical arguments develop through reason But not need ‘objective rationality’ Subjective feelings of pleasure may support a reasonable argument But not sufficient: E.g: need to explain why pleasure is always good

Give reasons for argument

Objective: objective knowledge is based on evidence that can be observed through the senses and

independently verified.

Rational: That which is developed through reason and is not influenced by emotions, prejudices, etc.

Ethical reasoning and arguments

Sound arguments vs. false/ weak arguments Premise:

“Lying is wrong…” can be a value judgement, an empirical statement…

Argument: “…because if everyone lied all the time then society would break down…”

Based on supporting and conflicting empirical and/ or logical evidence

Uses value judgements and evidence

But you can’t use your original premise to prove your argument E.g: the red dress doesn’t suit you because it’s red

Conclusion:

“…so you should not have lied to the policeman.”

There should be one logical conclusion There can be more

Which is similar to having none in a way Depends on how you weigh up the different conclusions.

FALLACIOUS ARGUMENTS

Ad hominem reasoning “Whatever the Pope

says must be wrong!”

“ Women are stupid because they are not clever”

Circulus in probando

Circular Argument

FALLACIOUS ARGUMENTS

RATIONALISM

It was right to gamble because I won money!!

Post hoc ergo propter hoc

“After the sun came up it rained; therefore the sun caused the rain”

Conceptual matters“Did he mean to kill

the man?”Intention

An explanation is not a

justification

Analogy

“Killing animals is as bad as killing people because

they all feel pain

Factual assertionSupported by

Verifiable evidence

Arguments• Analogy -using a similar case to argue for similar conclusions * if things are alike in some respects then they are likely to be in other

respects• Concept -Abstract and systemised idea generalised from particular instances• Factual assertions Statements that are empirically verifiable• Ad hominem - Rejecting an argument because of the person saying it• Circular argument -using a conclusion to support itself• Rationalisation -reasons given after the event that are not the true reasons• Post hoc ergo propter hoc -coincidental correlation

Ethical TheoriesDeductive

Theory principles judgements Decide on basic ethical values

Derives principles Conclusion: Such-and-such an action is wrong

InductiveJudgements principles theory

Lots of people kill other people Why? Can I kill others? What does killing serve? Theory: Killing is OK when done for good reasons

Motive, act, or consequences

ResponsibilityOnly human can be held to be normally responsible

Consequentialist• a.k.a Teleological

• Ends justifies the means Judge actions by their outcome

• e.g. Utilitarianism

Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832 “greatest happiness of the greatest number”

Non-consequentialist• a.k.a Deontological• Judge the actual action, regardless of the consequences - e.g. Pacifism• Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) - judged actions by whether they conform to requirements of rationality and human dignity

Naturalistic ethical theories

• Human nature as the source of what is right of wrong - The instinct to survival is the strongest, therefore it is wrong to commit suicide.

• Either teleological (similar to consequentialist- judged by the end result) or deontological (similar to non-consequentialist- the act is judged in itself, not according to the result)

- E.g: ‘shallow ecology’ vs. ‘deep ecology’For example: # Shallow ecology evaluates the results of pollution# Deep ecology tries to assign value to nature itself

Theories of Care

Feminism -Classic ethics is patriarchal worldwide -But also criticised by feminists – said to imply that women should always do the caringEmphasize contingency, consensus and care -As opposed to generalised impersonal theories -” he stole the bread to feed his family “

Why be moral?• Ethical egoisme -It’s in my interest to be ethical, because it will help me to get what I want ‘Enlightened self-interest’ -I won’t steal because if everyone stole there would be too many

problems,and I’ll be punished if I do.

• Because everyone else will be happier -Difficult to persuade someone not to do something that they want to do

it

• “Because that’s the way your mother did it” Encourages blind obedience

• Moral laws help to ensure everyone’s needs are met

‘

Conclusions

• A branch of philosophy - About human relationships - Trying to identify what is ‘good’ *A dynamic social force that promotes human well being• Uses argument to determine moral valiues - Based on theories *Consequentialist,deontological,naturalist,feminist -Observations,reason,logic• Religion needs morality,but moral system doesn’t need

religion