Ethical and Civic Education. M.C Serrano.

IES Los Sauces 2012

UNIT 3. ETHICAL THEORIES

1. ETHICAL THEORIES 2. ARISTOTLE AND EPICURUS. EUDONISM AND HEDONISM 3. CONSEQUENTIALIST THEORIES: HUME, BENTHAM AN STUART MILL 4. DUTY-BASED OR DEONTOLOGICAL THEORIES: KANT AND SARTRE 5. DISCOURSE ETHICS AND A THEORY OF JUSTICE 6. CURRENT THEORIES THEORIES: APPLIED ETHICS AND POSTMODERN

Ethical and Civic Education. M.C Serrano. IES Los Sauces 2012

1. ETHICAL THEORIES The field of ethics (or moral philosophy) involves systematising, defending, and recommending concepts of right and wrong behaviour. Philosophers today usually divide ethical theories into three general subject areas: metaethics, normative ethics, and applied ethics. Metaethics investigates where our ethical principles come from, and what they mean. Are they merely social inventions? Do they involve more than expressions of our individual emotions? Metaethical answers to these questions focus on the issues of universal truths, the will of God, the role of reason in ethical judgements, and the meaning of ethical terms themselves. Normative ethics takes on a more practical task, which is to arrive at moral standards that regulate right and wrong conduct. This may involve articulating the good habits that we should acquire, the duties that we should follow, or the consequences of our behaviour on others. Finally, applied ethics involves examining specific controversial issues, such as abortion, animal rights, environmental concerns , capital punishment, or nuclear war.

2. ARISTOTLE AND EPICURUS. EUDONISM AND HEDONISM Ethics as a subject begins with the works of Aristotle (384-322 B.C). In its original form, this subject is concerned with the question of virtue (Greek aret) of character (thos), or in other words having excellent and wellchosen habits. The acquisition of an excellent character is in turn aimed at living well and eudaimonia, a Greek word often translated as well-being or happiness. Happiness must be based on human nature, and must begin from the facts of personal experience. It must be something practical and human. It must then be found in the work and life which is unique to humans. But this is neither the vegetative life we share with plants nor the sensitive existence which we share with animals. It follows therefore that true happiness lies in the active life of a rational being. Aristotle expands his notion of happiness through an analysis of the human soul which structures and animates a living human organism. The parts of the soul are divided as follows: Calculative Virtue Rational Appetitive Moral Virtue 8 Intellectual

Ethical and Civic Education. M.C Serrano. IES Los Sauces 2012

Irrational Vegetative Virtue Nutritional

The human soul has an irrational element which is shared with the animals, and a rational element which is distinctly human. The most primitive irrational element is the vegetative faculty which is responsible for nutrition and growth. An organism which does this well may be said to have a nutritional virtue. The second element of the soul is the appetitive faculty which is responsible for our emotions and desires (such as joy, grief, hope and fear). This faculty is both rational and irrational. It is irrational since even animals experience desires. However, it is also rational since humans have the distinct ability to control these desires with the help of reason. The human ability to properly control these desires is called moral virtue, and is the focus of morality. Aristotle notes that there is a purely rational part of the soul, the calculative, which is responsible for the human ability to contemplate, reason logically, and formulate scientific principles. The mastery of these abilities is called intellectual virtue. The core of Aristotles account of moral virtue is his doctrine of the mean. According to this doctrine, moral virtues are desire-regulating character traits which are at a mean between more extreme character traits (or vices). For example, in response to the natural emotion of fear, we should develop the virtuous character trait of courage. If we develop an excessive character trait by curbing fear too much, then we are said to be rash, which is a vice. If, on the other extreme, we develop a deficient character trait by curbing fear too little, then we are said to be cowardly, which is also a vice. The virtue of courage, then, lies at the mean between the excessive extreme of rashness, and the deficient extreme of cowardice. Aristotle is quick to point out that the virtuous mean is not a strict mathematical mean between two extremes. For example, if eating 100 apples is too many, and eating zero apples is too little, this does not imply that we should eat 50 apples, which is the mathematical mean. Instead, the mean is rationally determined, based on the relative merits of the situation. That is, it is as a prudent man would determine it. He concludes that it is difficult to live the virtuous life primarily because it is often difficult to find the mean between the extremes. Vice of Deficiency Virtuous Mean Cowardice Courage Vice of Excess Rashness

Epicurus (341-270 B. C). Epicurus ethics starts from the Aristotelian commonplace that the highest good is what is valued for its own sake, and not for the sake of anything else, and Epicurus agrees with Aristotle that happiness is the highest good. However, he disagrees with Aristotle by identifying happiness with pleasure. Epicurus gives two reasons for this. The main reason is that pleasure is the only thing that people value for its own sake; that is, Epicurus ethical hedonism is based upon his psychological hedonism. Everything we do, claims Epicurus, we do to get pleasure for ourselves. This is supposedly confirmed by observing the behaviour of infants, who instinctively pursue pleasure and shun pain. This is also true of adults, thinks Epicurus, but in adults it is more difficult to see that this is 8

Ethical and Civic Education. M.C Serrano. IES Los Sauces 2012

true, since adults have much more complicated beliefs about what will bring them pleasure. But the Epicureans did spend a great deal of energy trying to make plausible the contention that all activity, even apparently selfsacrificing activity or activity done solely for the sake of virtue or what is noble, is in fact directed toward obtaining pleasure for oneself. The second proof, which fits in well with Epicurus empiricism, supposedly lies in ones introspective experience. One immediately perceives that pleasure is good and that pain is bad, in the same way that one immediately perceives that fire is hot; no further argument is needed to show the goodness of pleasure or the badness of pain. (Of course, this does not establish Epicurus further contention that only pleasure is intrinsically valuable and only pain is intrinsically bad.) Although all pleasures are good and all pains evil, Epicurus says that not all pleasures are choiceworthy or all pains to be avoided. Instead, one should calculate what is in ones long-term self-interest, and forgo what will bring pleasure in the short-term if doing so will ultimately lead to greater pleasure in the long-term. For Epicurus, pleasure is tied closely to satisfying ones desires. He distinguishes between two different types of pleasure: moving pleasures and static pleasures. Moving pleasures occur when one is in the process of satisfying a desire, e.g., eating a hamburger when one is hungry. These pleasures involve an active titillation of the senses, and these feelings are what most people call pleasure. However, Epicurus says that after ones desires have been satisfied, (e.g., when one is full after eating), the state of satiety, of no longer being in need or want, is itself pleasurable. Epicurus calls this a static pleasure, and says that these static pleasures are the best pleasures. Because of this, Epicurus denies that there is any intermediate state between pleasure and pain. When one has unfulfilled desires, this is painful, and when one no longer has unfulfilled desires, this steady state is the most pleasurable of all, not merely some intermediate state between pleasure and pain. Epicurus also distinguishes between physical and mental pleasures and pains. Physical pleasures and pains concern only the present, whereas mental pleasures and pains also encompass the past (fond memories of past pleasure or regret over past pain or mistakes) and the future (confidence or fear about what will occur). The greatest destroyer of happiness, thinks Epicurus, is anxiety about the future, especially fear of the gods and fear of death. If one can banish fear about the future, and face the future with confidence that ones desires will be satisfied, then one will attain tranquility (ataraxia), the most exalted state. In fact, given Epicurus conception of pleasure, it might be less misleading to call him a tranquillist instead of a hedonist. 3. CONSEQUENTIALIST THEORIES: HUME, BENTHAM AN STUART MILL

Ethical and Civic Education. M.C Serrano. IES Los Sauces 2012

According to consequentialism, correct moral conduct is determined solely by a cost-benefit analysis of an actions consequences. Consequentialism: an action is morally right if the consequences of that action are more favorable than unfavorable. 3.1. Hume, Bentham and Mills. Ethical philosophy which finds its standard of goodness in the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of persons is what we call utilitarianism. David Hume (1711-1776) does appear to have much in common with utilitarianism, but he differs from it in one important respect: while he agrees with them in recognizing happiness as one of the things that are good, he does not admit that it is the only thing that is good. Human beings are complex organisms, and their total welfare includes more than the satisfaction of the need for happiness. Hume insisted that moral judgments are based on feelings rather than the intellect. People act as a result of their feelings and desires, and while it is true that these may be influenced by the facts, it is not the knowledge alone that moves the will or restrains it from acting. Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) presented one of the earliest fully developed systems of utilitarianism. Two features of his theory are important. First, Bentham proposed that we tally the consequences of each action we perform and determine whether an action is morally right or wrong. This aspect of Benthams theory is known as act-utilitiarianism. Second, Bentham also proposed that we tally the pleasure and pain which results from our actions. For Bentham, pleasure and pain are the only consequences that matter in determining whether our conduct is moral. This aspect of Benthams theory is known as hedonistic utilitarianism. John Stuart Mill (1806-1873). Mill's major contribution to utilitarianism is his argument for the qualitative separation of pleasures. Bentham treats all forms of happiness as equal, whereas Mill argues that intellectual and moral pleasures are superior to more physical forms of pleasure. His view on liberty is that the individual ought to be free to do as he wishes unless he harms others. Individuals are rational enough to make decisions about their good being and choose any religion they want to. Government should interfere when it is for the protection of society. Society progresses from lower to higher stages and this progress culminates in the emergence of a system of representative democracy. 4. DUTY-BASED OR DEONTOLOGICAL THEORIES: KANT AND SARTRE 4.1. DUTY-BASED OR DEONTOLOGICAL ETHICS Deontological (duty-based) ethics are concerned with what people do, not with the consequences of their actions.

Ethical and Civic Education. M.C Serrano. IES Los Sauces 2012

Under this form of ethics you can't justify an action by showing that it produced good consequences, which is why it's sometimes called 'nonconsequentialist'. The word 'deontological' comes from the Greek word deon, which means 'duty'. Duty-based ethics teaches that some acts are right or wrong because of the sorts of things they are, and people have a duty to act accordingly, regardless of the good or bad consequences that may be produced. Some kinds of action are wrong or right in themselves, regardless of the consequences. Deontologists live in a universe of moral rules, such as:

It It It It

is is is is

wrong to kill innocent people wrong to steal wrong to tell lies right to keep promises

Someone who follows Duty-based ethics should do the right thing, even if that produces more harm (or less good) than doing the wrong thing. 4.2. KANT Kantian duty-based ethics Immanuel Kant (1724-1804). Kant thought that it was possible to develop a consistent moral system by using reason. If people were to think about this seriously and in a philosophically rigorous manner, Kant taught, they would realise that there were some moral laws that all rational beings had to obey simply because they were rational beings, and this would apply to any rational beings in any universe that might ever exist. Kant taught (rather optimistically) that every rational human being could work this out for themselves and so did not need to depend on God or their community or anything else to discover what was right and what was wrong. Nor did they need to look at the consequences of an act, or who was doing the action. What is good? Kant asked if there was anything that everybody could rationally agree was always good. The only thing that he thought satisfied this test was a good will. It is impossible to conceive anything in the world, or even out of it, which can be taken as good without limitation, save only a good will.

Ethical and Civic Education. M.C Serrano. IES Los Sauces 2012

All Kant means is that a good will alone must be good in whatever context it may be found. Kant then pondered what this meant for human conduct. He concluded that only an action done for 'a good will' was a right action, regardless of the consequences. But what sort of action would this be? Kant taught that an action could only count as the action of a good will if it satisfied the test of the Categorical Imperative. Kant's Categorical Imperative Kant's version of duty-based ethics was based on something that he called 'the categorical imperative' which he intended to be the basis of all other rules (a 'categorical imperative' is a rule that is true in all circumstances.) Moral rules must be universalisable Always act in such a way that the maxim of your action should become a universal law. To put this more simply: Always act in such a way that you would be willing for it to become a general law that everyone else should do the same in the same situation. This means at least two things:

if you aren't willing for the ethical rule you claim to be following to be applied equally to everyone - including you - then that rule is not a valid moral rule. I can't claim that something is a valid moral rule and make an exception to it for myself and my family and friends.

So, for example, if I wonder whether I should break a promise, I can test whether this is right by asking myself whether I would want there to be a universal rule that says 'it's OK to break promises'. Since I don't want people to break promises they make to me, I can conclude that it would be wrong for me to break the promise I have made.

if the ethical rule you claim to be following cannot logically be made a universal rule, then it is not a valid moral rule. 4.3. SARTRE

Existentialism is a term applied to a school of 20th-century philosophers who shared the belief that philosophical thinking begins with the human subjectnot merely the thinking subject, but the acting, feeling, living human individual. In existentialism, the individual's starting point is characterized by what has been called "the existential attitude", or a sense of disorientation and confusion in the face of an apparently meaningless or absurd world. 8

Ethical and Civic Education. M.C Serrano. IES Los Sauces 2012

Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980). The main idea of Jean-Paul Sartre is that we are, as humans, "condemned to be free." Sartre did consider values and ethics important to freedom: we must respect each other if we, as individuals, want to be as free as possible within a social order. Sartre explains that existentialists can judge others, based on truth and honesty. Sartre reminds us that actions and statements, most choices, are made within the view of others and others will determine if we are liars or being authentic. 5. DISCOURSE ETHICS AND A THEORY OF JUSTICE: HABERMAS AND RAWLS 5.1. DISCOURSE ETHICS The basic idea in discourse ethics is that the validity of a moral norm cannot be justified in the mind of an isolated individual reflecting on the world. The validity of a norm is justified only in processes of argumentation between individuals. The validity of a claim to normative rightness depends upon the mutual understanding achieved by individuals in argument. The philosopher Jrgen Habermas (1929) studied the necessary conditions for reaching an understanding through communication. For Habermas the underlying goal of coming to an understanding would help to foster the consensus necessary for establishing socially beneficial norms. 5.2. RAWLS THEORY OF JUSTICE Justice as Fairness is the political philosopher John Rawls(1921-2002) conception of justice. It includes two main principles of Liberty and Equality; the second is subdivided into Fair Equality of Opportunity and the Difference Principle. The first and most important principle states that every individual has an equal right to basic liberties. For example, Rawls believes that "personal property" - personal belongings, a home - constitutes a basic liberty, but an absolute right to unlimited private property is not. As basic liberties, they are inalienable. The principle of fair equality of opportunity maintains that "offices and positions" should be open to any individual, regardless of his or her social background, ethnicity or sex. The Difference Principle regulates inequalities: it only permits inequalities that work to the advantage of the worst-off. By guaranteeing the worst-off in society a fair deal, Rawls compensates for naturally-occurring inequalities (talents that one is born with, such as a capacity for sport). Rawls theory of justice as fairness results in a society of free citizens holding equal basic rights cooperating within an egalitarian economic system. 8

Ethical and Civic Education. M.C Serrano. IES Los Sauces 2012

6. CURRENT THEORIES: APPLIED ETHICS Applied ethics is a term used to describe attempts to use philosophical methods to identify the morally correct course of action in various fields of human life. Bioethics, for example, is concerned with identifying the correct approach to matters such as euthanasia, or the allocation of scarce health resources, or the use of human embryos in research. Environmental ethics is concerned with questions such as the duties of humans towards landscapes or species. Business ethics concerns questions such as the limits on managers in the pursuit of profit.