Ethics and Morality Review

Ethics and Morality Review Chapter 1: Conventional morality: the system of widely accepted rules and principles that members of a culture or society use to govern their own lives and to assess the actions and motivations of others (status quo morality) ● Conventional morality can be different from society to society; like tipping a waiter. Critical morality: a set of moral norms that does not have its origins in social agreements, (2) is untainted by mistaken beliefs, irrationality, or popular prejudices, and (3) can serve as the true standard for when conventional morality has got it right and when it has fallen into error - Requires us to: - Break with tradition: tradition is a good guide, but the longevity of a practice is not a foolproof test of its morality (slavery, voting rights, sexism, etc.). - Break with the law & recognize its limits: sometimes, perhaps not often, law are immoral; Laws also don’t define all moral issues (as outlined in your textbook, cheating on a spouse is not illegal, but it is immoral). - Social etiquette or mores: conventional morality is a decent guide for the most part, but sometimes we’re required to stand up and not always be polite or gracious (someone tells a sexist or racist joke, for instance). - Break from and/or redefine one’s own self-interest: we can’t always act in our own self-interest, although there are many times when doing so is ethical Norms: a standard of evaluation, norms tell us how we should or ought to behave, they represent a measure that we are to live up to Metaethics: the area of ethical theory that asks about the status of normative ethical claims. It asks about whether such claims can be true and if so, whether personal, cultural, or divine opinion makes them true (or none of the above). It also considers issues about how to gain moral knowledge and whether moral requirements give us reasons to obey them - Metaethics explores, for example - where moral values originate, - what it means to say something is right or good - whether there are any objective moral facts, - whether morality is (culturally) relative, - and whether there is a psychological basis for moral practices and value judgements. - Critical Thinking: the ability to appreciate the value of thinking about thinking, develop well-reasoned perspectives, communicate to others effectively and respectfully, actively listen to the opinions of others, especially those who think differently than you Relativism - The view that an act is morally right just because it is allowed by the guiding ideas of the society in which it is performed and immoral just because it is forbidden by those ideals.

- Two categories: Individual level (individual is the sole author of right and wrong) and Group level (one’s group- culture, religion, subculture, linguistic, etc. is the arbiter of right and wrong) - Moral and Non-moral Issues: what makes an issue a moral one is as follows: it involves unnecessary harm either to oneself or another and does not take into consideration the dignity of those involved (physical and psychological harm) - Canadian example: any actions or practices that do not align with the Charter is deemed illegal - The Appeal of Relativism: ethical relativism is attractive for several reasons: - 1. Tolerance of difference : recognition that identity is rooted in culture and that its intrinsically valuable and worth preserving - 2. Not repeat egregious historical wrongdoings (i.e. Colonialism, imperialism, eurocentrism) - Challenges of Relativism: unethical individual/cultural practices target groups who are the least able to secure legal protection, no ability to criticize or praise ideas (moral infallibility). More equivalence of positions, the relativist upholds an objective moral claim that tolerance should always be preferred to interference/judgement from the “outside” (makes tolerance an objective standard) Problems associated with Relativism 1. Relativism does not allow for disagreement with one’s own culture(s) ( Think about the term iconoclast) 2. Poor basis for defending tolerance. Need to respect intolerant views in the name of tolerance 3. Promotes conformity. Cannot be critical of one’s own societal norms. 4. We identify with multiple cultures. Cultures, in other words, do not exist in silos (Given this fact, how do we resolve inevitable conflict that arises both within and between cultures ?) Self-Quiz 1. The area of moral philosophy known as “value theory” includes questions such as What kind of life is most worth living? 2. The claim that morality is a human invention and therefore not objective is a claim about metaethics . 3. Skepticism about morality is deeply controversial . 4. The conclusion of a sound argument will always be true. 5. It is impossible for a valid argument to have true premises and a false conclusion. 6. Which of the following questions falls within the domain of metaethics? The answer is What is the status of moral claims and advice? 7. What area of moral philosophy deals with questions about what our moral obligations are? The answer is normative ethics 8. An argument in philosophy is a set of claims, including a conclusion and reasons given in support of the conclusion.

Challenging Altruism A. What’s the point of holding this view? B. Selfish applies to a wide range of human motivations: all actions are extension of one’s selfishness C. Is this position testable? 1. What is wrong with the Self-Reliance Argument? a. It is not true that all would be better off if everyone tended to his or her own needs and The egoist cannot endorse the claim that we ought to do what benefits everyone. 2. Psychological egoism is the theory that everything people do is fundamentally motivated by self-interest. 3. If psychological egoism is true, it can’t be our duty to be altruistic because altruism would be impossible and we aren’t morally required to do the impossible. 4. Which of the following accurately describes the relationship between ethical egoism and psychological egoism? a. If psychological egoism is true, this supports ethical egoism. 5. Which of the following would a relativist not accept? a. Some societies have better moral codes than others. 6. Which of the following would a relative accept? a. Different societies have different moral codes b. Individuals can be mistaken about what is morally required of them c. There are no objective moral standards 7. If relativism does not generate contradictions between the moral beliefs of different cultures, then cross-cultural moral disagreement is impossible. Chapter 7: Absolute: a rule that is never permissibly broken; violating an absolute moral rule is always wrong Categorical imperative: a command of reason that requires a person’s obedience regardless of whether such obedience gets him anything he wants. Ex: Don’t kill. Don’t steal. Do X. You ought to do X. Golden rule: the normative ethical principle that says that your treatment of others is morally acceptable if you would be willing to be treated in exactly the same way. Hypothetical Imperative: A command of reason that requires a person to take the needed means to getting what she wants Ex: Conditional so “Keep your promises but only if it’s worth it” or “if you want to be rich, you should steal whenever you can get away with it” Maxim: A principle of action that you give to yourself. It contains your intended action and the reason you are doing it. Paternalism: the policy of treating mature people as if they were children. More specifically, it is a policy of limiting someone’s liberty, against his will, for his own good

Principle of Humanity: Kant’s thesis that one must always treat a human being (and themselves) as an end, and never as a means Principle of Universalizability: Kant’s thesis that an act is morally acceptable is its maxim is universalizable Universalizable: the feature of a maxim that indicates that every rational person can consistently act on it. Three part test for a maxim’s universalizability: 1. Pick a maxim 2. Imagine a world in which everyone shares and acts on that maxim 3. Determine whether the goal within the maxim can be achieved in such a world. If so, the maxim is universalizable. If not, it isn't. 1. In Kant’s theory, a maxim is a principle of action that one gives to oneself. Correct 2. Kant claims that the morality of one’s actions depends on one’s intentions 3. Kant claimed that acting immorally is always irrational 4. According to Kant, all moral duties are categorical imperatives. 5. The principle of universalizability does not account for the immorality of principled fanatics. 6. What is a categorical imperative, according to Kant? a. a command of reason that does not depend on what we care about 7. The principle of humanity states to always treat a human being as an end, and never as a mere means. 8. Kant believed that humans have dignity by virtue of their rationality and autonomy. 9. To treat someone as an end is to treat her with the respect she deserves. 10. To treat someone as a means is to treat her as a way to help you achieve your goals Chapter 8: Proceduralism: the view that says that we must follow a certain procedure in order to determine which actions are morally right, or which moral claims are true Ex: the golden rule, rule consequentialism, and Kant's principle of universality. Each of these ethical approaches “explain and justify” whether an act or action is morally right or wrong. Contractarianism (a form of proceduralism): Laws are just if, and only if, they reflect the terms of a social contract that free, equal, and rational people would accept as the basis of a cooperative life together Prisoner’s Dilemma: A situation in which everyone involved would be better off by reducing his or her pursuit of self-interest and make the optimal choice that best advantages the group; remaining silent is a cooperative strategy, confessing best serves one’s own interest. Social Contract Theory: a view in political philosophy that says that governmental power is legitimate if it only would be accepted by free, equal, and rational people intent on selecting principles of cooperative living. Also, a view in normative ethical theory that says that actions are morally right if they are only permitted by rules that free, equal and rational people would agree to live by, on the condition that others obey these rules as well. State of Nature: A situation in which there is no central authority with the exclusive power to enforce its will on others

4. Protestors are often clearly motivated by furthering the cause of justice, not by the promise of personal gain Contractarianism and Criminal Justice - Justifies legal punishment and state’s role in criminal law - Those who break the law, and thus the trust that exists within society, they rightfully deserved to be punished. - Criminal punishment is best left a state affair, not a private affair, because we want to avoid entering back into a state of nature Contractarianism and The Objectivity of Morality - According to this ethical tradition: - Opinion is not the final authority in ethics - Relativism is wrong in this view - Law or conventional morality is not always the final authority – in fact, entire societies can be mistaken about what is right or wrong. - Again, relativism is wrong in this view - Morality – objective values or principles - are the mutually beneficial rules that equal, fully rational and free people create on the foundation of reason 1. Contractarianism originated as a political theory. 2. Contractarianism states that actions are morally right if and only if they are permitted by rules that free, equal, and rational people would agree to live by. 3. According to contractarianism, we are best off when we agree to limit the direct pursuit of self-interest. 4. A prisoner’s dilemma is a situation in which everyone is better off is everyone refrains from pursuing their short-term interests. 5. The purpose of Rawls’s “veil of ignorance” is to ensure that the choices of the contractors are fair. 6. What did Hobbes think is the only way to escape from the state of nature? a. to mutually agree on a set of rules for social cooperation correct 7. Contractarians seek to justify basic moral rules by showing that free, equal, and rational people would agree to such rules. 8. According to contractarianism, what motivates the contractors to select the rules they do? a. rational self-interest 9. The social contract that fixes our basic moral duties is one we would consent to under ideal conditions. 10.Which of the following is a problem for contractarianism discussed in the text?

a. Contractarianism breaks down when contractors disagree about moral rules.