Theories of Morality (Types of Ethical System)

Intro: How do we know if our actions are moral or immoral, good or bad, right or wrong?

Trans: There ethical theories employ in order to gauge human acts as such. This is our focus.

Consequentialist (Teleological) - human beings ought to behave in ways that will bring about
good consequences.

Issue on the Beneficiary of Consequence:

Two Major Consequentialists: They differ on who should benefit (beneficiaries) from these
consequence.

Ethical Egoism - the benefit should redound to his own self-interest. (Psychological Egoism
not ethical theory and different from ethical egoism.)

Individual Ethical Egoism - everyone ought to act in my own best interest.

Personal Ethical Egoism - I ought to act in my own self-interest.
Universal Ethical Egoism - everyone should always act in his or her own interest.

Utilitarianism - the benefits should be in the interest of all concerned or others. (Jeremy
Betham and John Stuart Mill). It derives its name from utility, whichh means “usefulness.”
The act is right or moral if it is useful In bringing about a desirable or good end. (p209)

Act Utilitarianism - everyone should perform that act which will bring about the
greatest amount of good over bad for everyone affected by the act (majority
benefit of involved peoople).

Rule Utilitarianism - everyone should always establish and follow the rule or those
rules (proven effective) that will bring about the greatest good for all concerned.

Trans: Related question to the beneficiary or repcepient of good outcomes under utilitarianism is
it’s justice and fairness.

Issue of the Nature of Good:

Monist - there is only one thing that is intrinsically good.

Hedonism - pleasure or happiness is the chief good and goal of human life.
Jeremy Betham - quantitative hedonist, quality of pleasure is unimportant. It being
good as fas as it promoted pleasure, and bad as far ast it promoted pain.

J.S. Mill - it is not the bodily pleasure that is important but quality e.g. intellectual
pleasure (qualitative pleasure). It distinguishes kinds of pleasures based on their
quality, so that some kinds of pleasure are higher or superior and others lower or
inferior (Epicurus is also a qualitative hedonist in away).

Pluralist - believes that there is more than one intrinsic good (it says that pleasure is not
the only intrinsic good but many things are.
 Plato believes that good life Is a mixed life, a balance of many elements: beauty,
intelligence, wisdom, science, soul, etc., are necessary to make up the good.

W.D. Ross believes that 4 things are intrinsically good: virtous disposition,
knowledge, pleasure, and just propotion of pleasure.

Epicurus (Epicureanism) - moderation in all things (defines abstaining from bodily

desires, living a virtuous life, and personal friendship as the greatest pleasures).
Emphasis was placed on pleasure of the mind rather than on physical pleasures.

Hastings Rashdall (Ideal Utilitarianism) actions are right or wrong accordingly as

they tend to produce for mankind an ideal end or good, which is not limited to
pleasure.

Trans: There is a claim that consequences do not, and in fact should not, enter into judging
whether actions or people are moral or immoral.

Nonconsequentialist (Deontological) - actions are to be judged solely on whether they are right
and people solely on whether they are good, base on some other higher standard or standards
of morality.

Two Major Categories:

Act Nonconsequentialist Theory — an assumption that there are no general moral rules or
theories at all, but only particular actions, situations, and people about whichh we cannot
generalize. It must be approach each situation individually as one of a kind and somehow
decide what is the right action to take in that situation.
(NOTE: Decisions for the act nonconsequentialist are “intuitionistic,” i.e., what a person
decides in a particular situaltion, because he cannot use any rules or standard, is based
upon what he feels or believes or intuits to be the right action to take.)

Rule Nonconsequentialist Theory — believes that there are or can be rules that are the only
basis for morality and that consequences do not matter.

Divine Command Theory — morality is something “higher” than these mundane

events of the imperfect human or natural worlds. It is based upon the existence of an all-
good being or beings who are supernatural and who have communicated human beings
what they should and should not do in a moral sense. In order to be moral, then, human
beings must follow the commands and prohibitions of such a being or beings to the letter
without concerning themselves with consequences, self-interest, or anything else.
Immanuel Kant’s Duty Ethics — it is possible to set up valid absolute moral rules not
by reference to any supernatural being, but on basis of duty alone which is rationally
perceived as good-in-themselves (known as Goodwill), through his Categorical Imperative
(formulated by: Principle of Autonomy, Principle of Humanity, and Principle of
Universality).

2 Kinds of Imperative or Command (Distinctions of Duty):

Categorical Imperative (Perfect Duty) — are strict and stated in negative. These
duties must be fulfilled under any circumstances or absolutely enforceable and
must specify a particular action (e.g., “Thou shall not kill.”).
 Hypothetical Imperative (Imperfect Duty) — are positive duties. These duties are
needed to be done and pose multiple ways of doing. They are not to be done on
regular basis, hence, they are not constantly obligatory but remain as objections
to a person (e.g., study to get a high grade).

Formulations of Categorical Imperative (considerations to be as such):

Principle of Autonomy — asserts that an act is immoral if the rule that would
authorize it can not be made into rule for all human beings to follow (i.e., an act is
not contradicting to ontological truth or a self-rule correct and can be applicable
to all).
Principle of Humanity — asserts no human being should be thought of or used
merely as a means for someone else’s end, that each human being is a unique end
in himself or herself (e.g., human being for experimental purposes is immoral, but
human operation for the sake of the same person cure is not, since it not used as
a means to an end but considered an end in himself).

Principle of Universality — asserts that act only on the maxim through which you
can at the same time will that it should become a universal law (thisprinciple
summarizes a procedure for deciding whether an act is morally permissible).

Ross’ Prima Facie Duties (spearheaded by Sir William David Ross) it is believed that
there are certain prima facie (i.e. self-evident) duties that must always adhere to unless
serious circumstances or reasons tell us to do otherwise. In such execptional circumstances
an individual’s actual duty might be different from one’s prima facie duty. In other words,
it is necessary to consider consequence when one is making moral choices in exceptional
cases. (Prima Facie Duties: Fidelity, Reparation, Gratitude, Justice, Beneficence or Doing
good, Self-Improvement, Nonmaleficence or Not Injuring).

Two Principles to Resolve Conflicting Duties: (1) Always do that act in accord with
the stonger prima facie duty; (2) always do that act that has the greatest degree of
prima facie rightness over prima facie wrongness.

Virtue Ethics (Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethic’s - named for his son, Nicomachus) - the emphasis is
on the good or virtuous character of human beings themselves (which is naturally implanted in
human beings), rather than on their acts or the consequences of their acts, or feelings (intuition),
or rules.
In other words, it is the development of the good or virtuous person that is important in this moral
theory, not the abstract rules or consequences of acts or rules except as they derive from a good
or virtuous person or cause that person to be good or virtuous. Virtue is defined as “moral
excellence, righteousness, reponsibility, or other exemplary qualities considered meritorious.”

Virtue ethics states that character matters above else. A good character is desired because it leads
to the attainment of contentment and the highest good.
 Aristole states that humans begin with a capacity for goodness, which has to be
developed by practice. He says we start by doing acts that are objectively virtuous, without
a knowledge (i.e., human reason or intellect) that the acts are good and without actively
or rationally choosing them ourselves. As we practise these acts, we come to realize that
the virtue is good in and of itself. The development within human beings of moral or
vituous character by means of doing what a good or virtuous person would do.

Accordingly, reasons provides us the opportunities to live a better life only if we allow
ourselves to be guided by this capacity. So if we use reason well, we also live well
(Eudaimonia). In doing so, we recognize that the highest good (happiness) is attained
through the activity of the rational soul in accordance with virtue.

Thomas Aquinas is similar to that of Aristotle in terms of whether a good (it contributes)
or bad (it deters) act contributes or deters us in the attainment of human ends - happiness.
The notion of happines for Aquinas is understood in the light of completion, perfection,
or well-being (know as beatitudo or beatitutes).

NB: Perfect happiness is a communion with God.

For him, happiness requires a range of intellectual and moral virtues that enable us to
understand its nature and motivate us to see it in a reliable and consistent way (through
habit). However, in Aquinas’ ethical theory, we can never achieve complete or final
happiness consists in a supernatural union with God (beatitude - a state of utmost bliss).
This should be the single-end of every individual for God is the only means to which our
deepest longing could be fulfilled and the fulfillment of perfection to whichh all actions
and desires are aimed could be realized.

There are 4 cardinal virtues necessary or important for the determination of moral
decisions and actions: prudence (commanding action); justice (giving what is due);
temperance (curbing or restraining the passions); and courage (strengthening the
passions against fear).

In addition, laws are improtant mechanisms that regulate human actions: eternal law
(universal law - source of law or rule is the Divine Providence); natural law (moral law -
imbedded conscience); positive law (human law - the statutes of the land); and divine law
(scripture law - the sacred writings).

Kantian Ethics is also aligned with the virtue ethics by way of his goodwill (i.e. the duty [or
reasonable duty] to do the morally right thing) is the highest that is good without qualification.