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?
Ethics:a set of normative
values that determine  A branch of philosophy,also called moral
philosophy
whether any particular
action is good or bad -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 science
Philosophy of law
-Aesthetics:philosophy of art
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: Sadism:a sadist derives
pleasure from hurting others
-e.g. a light bulb Nonmoral:does not involve
morality.
Immoral:goes agaist morality
 Amoral:having no sense of what is
moral
WHAT IS ETHICS? Excellence:the quality of displaying
superior skills in a particular area.

 Excellence:most good things involve

excellence
-e.g. 1-0 win is good, 5-0 is excellent
-displaying superior skills in a particular
area
 Harmony :
-Stopping a war is good: harmony
-Starting a war is bad: discord
 Amoral
- Sociopath:no remorse
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 values

Prescriptive: 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
 Civildisobedience: 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
 Scientificnatural laws are descriptive and
always hold true
 Naturalistic moral laws are prescriptive and
have many example of exceptions
 Anthropocentric value (human
centredness)
 How can politics or art have value without the
humans who
Anthropocentrism: created
assessing them? in relation to humans.
everything
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

MORALITY
Customary 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, lying, fine/punishment during
elementary school
“ All evil is ignorance ”- Plato
What does this mean?
"Evil actions are the result of
ignorance.“
 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
reprehensible
 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 differen
conclusions.
 F A
A R
L G Circulus in probando
L U
Ad hominem A M “ Women are stupid becaus
reasoning C E they are not clever”
“Whatever the Pope I N
says must be wrong!” O T
U S Circular Argument
S
 RATIONALISM

It was right to gamble because I won

money!!

FALLACIOUS ARGUMENTS

Post hoc ergo propter hoc

“After the sun came up it rained; therefore the sun caused th

 Conceptual matters
“Did he mean to kill the An explanation is not a
man?” justification
Intention

Analogy
“Killing animals is as bad
as killing people because
they all feel pain
Factual assertion
Supported 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
ETHICAL THEORIES -- HOMEWORK
Deductive
Theory principles judgements
 Decide on basic ethical values
 Derives principles
 Conclusion: Such-and-such an action is wrong

Inductive
Judgements 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

 Responsibility
Only 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”

-- HOMEWORK --
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 caring
Emphasize 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