Ethics 1

Introduction to Ethics
Prof. Bernard Caslib | July 21, 2021
TRANS NO. 1
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
● Created a space for and on ethics, questioning
OUTLINE what it means to have/live a good life

I. INTRODUCTION C. ETHICS AS THE SCIENCE OF CONDUCT

A. CHANGE AND DIVERSITY
B. ETHICS AS AN EXAMINATION OF ● “It is a science because it is an intellectual enterprise,
LIFE a rational inquiry into its subject matter”
C. ETHICS AS THE SCIENCE OF ● “Conduct is a behaviour in which persons make
CONDUCT voluntary choices between alternative courses of
II. MORAL DILEMMA action because they have decided that they ought to
A. HOW A DILEMMA TRANSPIRES choose one of the alternatives rather than the other”
B. VALUES ○ Something done out of own volition
III. MORALITY AND ETHICS ● It uses the tools of reason and logic to advance
IV. MORAL MINIMALISM ethical theories on what is wrong and right and to
A. CULTURAL RELATIVISM solve issue on conduct
B. SUBJECTIVISM ● Someone who engages in conduct is deemed as
C. RELIGION blameworthy because the act was done by the
D. EGOISM moral agent himself
V. TOPIC 5
Act of Humans
I. INTRODUCTION ● Any act emanating from the human

Human Acts
A. CHANGE AND DIVERSITY
● Freely and consciously chosen by the human
person
Change
● When something changes across time, does it II. MORAL DILEMMA
mean that the thing cannot be discovered?

Diversity A. HOW A DILEMMA TRANSPIRES

● When something has diverse interpretations
across people, does it mean that it cannot be
pinned down?
Change and diversity pose problems to ethics as what is
wrong and right changes across time, geography, cultures,
etc.
● A dilemma transpires when there are competing
values, either across time or among people, which
seem equally important
● Confounds, perplexes, and confuses an individual
between two particular options which are
typically equally important

B. ETHICS AS AN EXAMINATION OF LIFE B. VALUE

Socrates ● Value is the bedrock of reason

● “The unexamined life is not worth living” (Plato, ● Reason is the basis of action
Apology) ● The things we place value on becomes the reason
● Ethics is an examination of life of our actions
● Socrates devoted his life to the examination of life
(pursuit of ethics) for which he was willing to die III. MORALITY AND ETHICS
in 399BC
Morality

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
| ALIPOSA, P.J.G. 1 of 4
| Lecture Title*
________________________________________________________________________________
● Realm of practice
● Standards of right and wrong
● Minimum conception: the effort to guide one’s
conduct by reason
Ethics
● Focuses on theories on morality
● Studies on standards of right and wrong
Morally Good Person
● Person is good in living out the standards of right
and wrong
Ethicist
● Person who is well educated on ethics (theories of
right and wrong)
“None has attained the final truth, but that contributions have
been made to that truth”
IV. MORAL MINIMALISM
● Reduces all ethical questions to John Stuart Mill’s
principle that one can live one’s life as one likes so
long as no harm is done to others (Callehan, 2012)
● "Not stepping on other people" : bare minimum;
minimalist and escapes the responsibility of a
genuine moral agent
● Implies basic consideration of a limited
perspective in morality without having a fuller
grasp of the many shades and angles of a moral
dispute or issue
● Transcendence of the individual over the
community, the need to tolerate all viewpoints,
the autonomy of the self as the highest human
good, the informed consent contract as the model
of human relationships
● Beyond minimal standards of morality, we are
free to do as we like, guided by nothing other than
our private standards of good and evil
● Consent and autonomy are necessary but not
sufficient for a moral action to ensue
“Ethics is more than just what you feel is right”
Moral Minimalism arises when the interlocutors
● Come from different cultural backgrounds
● Have strong feelings about the issue
● Carry a deep religious conviction with them
● Always looking after their own good
Responsible ethical thinker
● Demands a holistic sense of an issue at hand,
rather than a narrow, limited perspective
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
| ALIPOSA, P.J.G.
● Does not impose rightness or wrongness of an
action, goodness or badness of character, on the
sheer basis of one's bias, identity, or culture.
A. CULTURAL RELATIVISM
Cultural Differences Argument / Simple Cultural
Relativism
● By Sumner, Benedict, Westermarck, and Mead
● Different cultures have different moral codes
● Therefore, there is no objective “truth” in morality
Rachels in Response to Cultural Differences Argument
● The conclusion of the Cultural Differences
Argument does not follow the premise.
● Case-in-point: earth being flat
● Difference in beliefs does not dictate what
actually is right or wrong
Evaluative Perspective
● Perspective of the person living in the culture
who is stating and thinking about moral truths
Transcendental standpoint
● Perspective of someone who evaluates,
questions, or reflects upon a moral issue by
consciously examining the issue from an objective
perspective
Sophisticated Cultural Relativism by Bernard Williams
● Make use of evaluative perspective and states
that the transcendental standpoint destroys
knowledge
● Non-objectivist truths are used to state moral
truths from within our own evaluative
perspective
○ Non-objectivist truths are part of a way
of living that belongs to a particular
culture within that “evaluative
perspective”
○ Non-objectivist truths are non-reflective
and are not in any way argued for or
thought out
● Non-objectivist truths are non-reflective and are
not in any way argued for or thought out
○ Reflection destroys knowledge
○ Non-objectivist moral truths cease to be
truths for someone within the culture as
soon as s/he reflects upon them or calls
them in question
2 of 4
| Lecture Title*
________________________________________________________________________________
Sophisticated Cultural Relativism by Alasdair MacIntyre
● Similar to Williams
● Morality is embedded in culture and one cannot
arrive at any moral conclusions by attempting to
take a position outside all living moralities
● Moral Judgements, however, can be defended
rationally
○ Moral judgments can only be defended or
justified from within a particular living
tradition
● There can be no external justification for moral
judgements and hence no universal morality
● Morality develops over time within a culture
● MacIntyre believes that there is so much
disagreement on moral questions in our own
culture because of the clash of different
traditions, from different times and places in our
history, now mixed together
● To be practically rational is to act wisely on one’s
own interest
○ On one perspective of tradition,
impartiality does not favor one’s own
interest
○ On another perspective of tradition,
acting so as to bring about the final good
for humanity in general
Consequences of Taking Cultural Relativism Seriously
● We could no longer say that the customs of other
societies are morally inferior to our own (What
about War practices? Anti-semitism?)
● We could decide what is morally right or wrong
just by consulting the standards of our society
(What about racism? Apartheid?)
● The idea of moral progress is called into doubt
(what about reform? feminism?)
● What happens if you are a part of more than one
group or society and was implored to choose
between two stances of morality (i.e.
Filipino-American)
● Should you tolerate something if intolerance is
the ethics of your society?
Why there is less disagreement that it seems
● The difference is in our beliefs systems, not our
values
● If we look closely, there are more similarities than
our differences
● Other values must be more-or-less universal (i.e.
truth telling, reverence for life)
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
| ALIPOSA, P.J.G.
● There are some moral rules that all societies must
have in common, because those rules are
necessary for society to exist
Why are people reluctant to criticize other cultures
● There is a difference between judging a cultural
practice to be deficient and thinking that we
should announce the said fact, conduct a
campaign, apply diplomatic pressure, or send in
the army
● People may be reluctant to judge because they do
not want to express contempt for the society
being criticized
○ To condemn a particular practice is not to
say the the culture is on the whole
contemptible nor is it generally inferior
to any other culture
What can be learned from Cultural Relativism
● Warns us about the danger of assuming that all
your preferences are based on some absolute
rational standard
○ Many of our practices are merely peculiar
to our society
● Teaches us to have an open mind
○ By stressing our moral views, it can
reflect the prejudices of ur society and
provides an antidote for dogmatism
B. SUBJECTIVISM
● People have different opinions but where
morality is concerned, there are no facts and one
is right. People just feel differently and thats that.
● What is morally right depends on individual
subjects
● According to Hume, simple subjectivism has
something to do with asserting feelings
○ Moral statement should be rendered
always true
○ Does not account for our fallibility (how
can we account for disagreement?)
● Emotivism (Charles Stevenson)
○ Moral statements are not for stating but
for conveying emotions and influencing
behaviour
○ Carries the weakness of figuring out the
corresponding statement that the moral
action implies
● There is a difference between fact and
exclamation however Stevenson blurs the line
3 of 4
| Lecture Title*
________________________________________________________________________________
between the two when talking about moral ○ In many instances, the scriptures and
judgements church traditions are ambiguous
○ When uttering propositions involving
morality, we are making an exclamation D. EGOISM
○ “Shakespeare is the author of Hamlet” vs
“Damn Hamlet” ● Theory that states that every human action is
motivated by self-interest (We are not able to go
Are there moral facts in Subjectivism? beyond our own selfish desires and motives)
● Moral judgement must be supported by good ● All good actions emanate from motives that are
reasons ultimately selfish (e.g. charity, pity)
○ Emotions cannot replace reasons ● Maximization of profit
○ Our values are nothing more than the ○ The only kind of goodness or virtue is
expression of our subjective feelings being smart in getting the most we can
● A truth of ethics is a conclusion that is backed by for ourselves , regardless of its
reasons consequences for other people (Bond)
○ The correct answer to a moral question is
simply the answer that has the weight of Arguments in Favor of Psychological Egoism
reason on its side ● We always do what we most want to do
● Science as a paradigm in proving? ● We do what makes us feel good
○ Science is replete with complicated
examples too (i.e. abortion) Why Psychological Egoism is Problematic
● There is a difference between proving an opinion ● Selfishness is different from Self-interestedness
to be correct and persuading someone to accept ○ Self-interestedness is not about pursuing
the proof pleasure all the time
○ Just because I want or desire to do
C. RELIGION something, does not mean that that
desire to do something is for my benefit
Popular thinking or my benefit alone
● Morality and religion are inseparable ● Concern for one’s welfare is compatible with
● People commonly believe that morality can be genuine concern for others
understood only in the context of religion ○ False dichotomy that doing something is
(Clergymen as moral experts) either good for you or others
● Psychological Egoism is not falsifiable
Why religion should not be a basis for ethics
● While religion is one way of viewing ethics, it
should not be the sole basis for it
● Divine Command Theory is faulty
○ States that “morally right” is commanded
by God and “morally wrong” is forbidden
by God
○ Problem arises with the verification and
interpretation of God’s commands
○ Is right conduct right because God
commands it? Are the commands
arbitrary?
○ Does God command us to do certain
things because they are right? Is the right
independent of God’s will? (Euthyphro)
● It is often difficult to find specific moral guidance
in the scriptures (contemporary issues that were
not relevant to early Christians)

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
| ALIPOSA, P.J.G. 4 of 4