WEEK 8

Consequences of the Fundamental Principle of Impartiality

1. It establishes one of its key values: non-discrimination, which is one of the most important elements
of all aspects of the protection of the human being: human rights law, humanitarian law, refugee law.

2. Impartiality in its true sense requires that subjective distinctions be set aside. Impartiality is one of the
more commonly recognized aspects of the role of the mediator. Although the need to “enjoy the
confidence of all” is mentioned about the principle of Neutrality, this also applies to the principle of
impartiality. Only an impartial action can give the image of an organization that can be trusted by people
to be assisted or protected.

-therefore, systems have to be put in place to ensure that the people benefiting from the action of the
Red Cross and Red Crescent are those whose vulnerability is the highest.

3. Impartiality in its true sense requires that subjective distinctions be set aside. Impartiality is one of the
more commonly recognized aspects of the role of the mediator.

- This is an important distinction to make. No one can genuinely claim to be impartial, but he/ she can
continually review his/ her own feelings and thoughts about someone or a situation in order to
acknowledge this and then monitor, and adjust where necessary, his/her practice as a mediator in the
light of this awareness.

Reason and Impartiality as Requirement of Ethics

- ​In the Euthyphro,​ ​Socrates expresses astonishment that a young man would prosecute his own father
for murder. The conventional assumption he seems to be making is that filial relationship impose special
constraints that may override other considerations, even in the gravest matter.

For Euthyphro, by contrast, a murder is a murder. The fact that it was committed by his father has no
bearing upon what he is required to do about it. He must prosecute his father just as he would a
stranger.

Three Distinct Elements

1. We grant the powerful and persistent force of self-interest in our lives, and assume that morality must
somehow give us reason for constraining such motives.

2. We grant that rules and principles of conduct will be useless or counter productive in purely local or
short-range terms, and assume that morality must give reason for acting in principle inspite of it.

3. We grant that our favorites and friends have special claims on our attention, and assume that
morality must give us reasons for occasionally denying such claims.
WEEK 9
Reason and Feelings
-BROADLY STATED ETHICS IS “CONCERNED WITH MAKING SENSE OF INTUITIONS” ABOUT WHAT IS RIGHT
AND GOOD. WE DO THIS BY REASONING ABOUT OUR FEELINGS.
-BIOLOGIST VERIFY THAT “EMOTION” IS NEVER TRULY DIVORCED FROM DECISION MAKING, EVEN WHEN
IT IS CHANNELED ASIDE BY AN EFFORT OF WILL”
-PHYSICISTS NOW CONFIRM THAT SEEING THE WORLD WITH COMPLETE OBJECTIVITY IS NOT POSSIBLE,
AS OUR OBSERVATIONS AFFECT WHAT WE PERCEIVED.
-MORAL PHILOSOPHER MARY MIDGLEY (1983) WRITES “ SENSITIVITY REQUIRES RATIONALITY TO
COMPLETE IT, AND VICE VERSA. THERE IS NO SIDING ONTO WHICH EMOTIONS CAN BE SHUNTED SO AS
NOT IMPINGE ON THOUGHT”

- We rely on our reason to guard against feelings that may reflect a bias, or a sense of inadequacy,
or a desire simply to win an argument, and also to refine and explain a felt convictions that passes
the test critical reflection and discussion.

- We rely on feelings to move us to act morally, and to ensure that our reasoning is not only logical
but also humane.

- Scientific evidence supports this approach to ethics. As children, we manifest empathy before
developing in the evolution of the human brain.

- “empathy is unique form of intentionality in which we directed toward the other’s experience”

- This involves feelings, at least to some extent, what another person is feeling.

- “empathy we experience another human being directly as a person – that is an intentional being
whose bodily gestures and actions are expressive of his her experiences or states of mind”

- Empathy enables us to identify with others, and may generate a “perception of the other as being
who deserves concerns and respect
Ethics vs. Feelings
► Many times, there’s a conflict between what we naturally feel and what is considered to be
ethical. Our subconscious reaction to a news event might be hatred, jealousy or other negative
feelings, but we might not be able to morally argue why we feel that way.

► My guess is that the human race developed those subconscious reactions as an evolutionary
mechanism to survive. Our ancestors wouldn’t have been able to find and obtain food if they
hadn’t fought for it. Arguing about ethics would’ve meant that you’ll have to stay hungry and die.

► The problem is most of our feelings today world are unethical, politically incorrect or even outright
harmful. It takes a great deal of effort to respect and self-analyze our feelings to judge whether
they are ethical or not.
Conclusion
► It is easy to give our feelings. An analogy would be with unhealthy foods. It is easy to choose
unhealthy foods because they are tasty and easy to prepare. But we hit the gym, avoid those
foods and exercise because we want to become better individuals. Similarly, we can take the
ethical route, avoid negative feelings and exercise those reactions because we want to become
better individuals.
WEEK 10
Step in Moral Reasoning Model
ETHICAL REASONING IS HOW TO THINK ABOUT ISSUES OF RIGHT OR WRONG. PROCESS OF REASONING
CAN BE TAUGHT, AND THE COLLEGE OR UNIVERSITY IS AN APPROPRIATE PLACE TO TEACH THESE
PROCESSES BECAUSE SO OFTEN IT IS TAUGHT NO PLACE ELSE, AND BECAUSE IT IS ESSENTIAL FOR A
SUCCESSFUL ADULTHOOD. ALTHOUGH PARENTS AND ESPECIAL RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS MAY TEACH
ETHICS, THEY DO NOT ALWAYS TEACH ETHICAL REASONING. ACADEMIC COURSES ARE LOGICAL PLACE
TO TEACH THE COGNITIVE PROCESS OF REASONING ESPECIALLY AS ETHICAL ISSUES RELATE TO THE
CONTENT OF A PARTICULAR DISCIPLINE. NO MATTER HOW KNOWLEDGEABLE ONE IS ABOUT HIS/HER
PROFESSION, IF THE KNOWLEDGE IS NOT BACKED BY ETHICAL REASONING, LONG TERM SUCCESS IN THE
CAREER IS LIKELY TO BE SEVERELY COMPROMISED.

► Ethical reasoning ​is hard because there are so many ways to fail. Ethical behavior is far harder
to display than one would expect simply on the basis of what we learn from our parents, from
school, and from our religious training.

- Given the fact that ethical dilemmas may not always be readily resolved through the use of codes of
ethics, it might be useful to have a framework in which to analyze and make ethical decisions.

1. Identify the problem.​ What facts make this an ethical situation?

2. Identify the potential issues involved. What level of ethical issues are we dealing with:
systematic, corporate, or individual?

3. Review relevant ethical guidelines. ​Given the facts and the ethical issues, what alternative
actions are possible in this situation?

4. Know relevant laws and regulations. Who will be affected by the alternatives and to what
degree?

5. Obtain consultation​. Use ethical principles to decide on the best alternative is assessed using
ethical principles or rules.

6. Consider possible and probable courses of action. Can the best alternatives be put into
effect? Having decided on one alternative, we need to see whether there are any practical constraints
which might prevent that alternative from being acted upon.

7. List the consequences of the probable courses of action.

8. Decide on what appears to be the best course of action. Implementing the best
alternative. Having

- It is extremely important that you keep your immediate supervisor and all involved parties informed
during this process. After you made your decision, take some time to reflect on the process and to
review what you have learned with a trusted supervisor or colleague.

WEEK 11
The Difference Between Reason and Will

- Will generally, is that faculty of the mind which selects, at the moment of decision, the strongest
desire from among the various desires present.

- Will does not refer to any particular desires, but rather to the mechanism for choosing from
among one’s desire. Within philosophy the will is important as one of the distinct parts of the
mind – along the reason and understanding.

- It is considered central to the field of ethics because of its role enabling deliberate action.

- When we become conscious of ourselves, we realize that our essential qualities are endless
urging, craving, striving, wanting, and desiring. These characteristics of that which we call our will.

- Schopenhauer affirmed that we can legitimately think that all other phenomena are also essential
and basically will. According to him, will “is the innermost essence, the core of every particular
thing and also in the deliberate conduct of man.

- Schopenhauer said that his predecessor mistakenly thought that the will depends on knowledge.
According to him, though, the will is primary and uses knowledge in order to find an object that
will satisfy its craving.
- Schopenhauer’s philosophy holds that all nature, including man, is the expression of an insatiable
will to life. It is through the will that mankind finds all their suffering. Desire for more is what
causes this suffering. He argues that only aesthetic pleasure creates momentary escape from the
will.

- The derivation of actions from laws requires reason, the will is nothing but practical reasoning.

- To explain, the will is guided by reason, where, as determined by reason, action is performed
according to rational requirements, or laws of reason.

- Reason directs actions by “determination of the will” – as long as the will is guided by reason.

- Where the will is determined by reason in accordance with which action is performed, reason is
practical.

- Reason has, in other words, the capacity to directs action. Further, where the will is guided by
reason, it is free.
WEEK 13
The Early Philosopher
- While ,oral theory does not invent morality, or even reflection on it, it does not try to bring systematic
thinking to bear on the phenomenon. Ancient moral theory, however does not attempt to be a
comprehensive account of all the phenomena that fall under the heading of morality. Rather, assuming
piecemeal opinions and practices, it tries to capture its underlying.

Aristotle on Ethics
- The most famous and thorough of Aristotle’s ethical works is his ​Nicomachean Ethics​. ​This work
is an inquiry into the best life for human beings to live.

- The life of human flourishing or happiness (​eudaimonia​) ​is the best life. It is important to note
that what we translate as “happiness” is quite different for Aristotle than it is for you.

- Happiness is the practice of virtue or excellence (arête), and so it is important to know the types of
virtue:

- 1. Character Virtue
- 2. Intellectual Virtue

- He arrives at the idea that “the activity of the soul in accordance with virtue” is the best
life for human beings through the​ “human function”​ argument.

- The happiest life is a practice of virtue, and this practiced under the guidance of reason. Examples of
character virtues would be courage, temperance, liberty, and magnanimity.

- Friendship is also a necessary part of the happy life. There are three types of friendship, none of which
is exclusive of the other.

Three Types of Friendship

1. Friendship of excellence – is based on virtue, and each friend enjoys, and each friend enjoys
and contemplates the excellence of his/her friend. Since friend is like another self,
contemplating a friend’s virtue will help us in the practice of virtue of ourselves. A mark of good
friendship is that friends “live together” that is that friends spend a substantial amount of time
together, since a substantial time apart will likely weaken the bond of friendship.

2. Friendship of Pleasure – are the most changeable forms of friendship since the things we
find pleasurable or useful tend to change over a lifetime.

3. Friendship of Utility ​- if a friend is merely one of utility, then that friendship will likely
dissolve when it is no longer useful.

- Aristotle also made mention of ​telos.​ A ​telos is derived from the Greek word for “end”, “purpose”,
or “goal”. It is an end or purpose, in fairly constrained sense used by philosophers such as Aristotle.
- It is the root of the term “teleogy” roughly the study of purposiveness, or the study of objects with a
view to their aims, purposes, or intentions.
St. Thomas Aquinas on Virtue
- Thomas’ broad account of virtues as excellences or perfections of the various human powers
formally echoes Aristotle, both with regard to the nature of a virtue and many specific virtues.

- The moral philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas (1225 – 1274) involves the merger of at least
two apparently disparate traditions:​ Aristotelian eudaimonism and Christian theology.

- On the other hand, Aquinas follows Aristotle in thinking that an act is good or bad depending on
whether it contributes to or deters us from our proper human end – the ​telos or final goal at
which all human actions aim.

- That ​telos i​ s ​eudaimonia , or happiness, where “happiness​” is understood in terms of

completion, perfection, or well-being.
- Achieving happiness, however, requires a range of intellectual and moral virtues that enable us to
understand the nature of happiness and motivate us to seek it in a reliable and consistent way.
- On the other hand Aquinas believes that we can never achieve complete or final happiness in this
life. For him, final happiness consists in beatitude or supernatural union with God.

- Such an end lies far beyond what we through our natural human capacities can attain.

Two Fold of Happiness

1. Natural virtues ​– are virtues that pertain to the happiness of this life that is proportionate to
human nature.

2. Theological Virtues​ - pertain to the​ ​beatitudo​ that is not proportionate to human

nature, the supernatural good of life with God.

Two Division of Natural Virtues

1. Intellectual virtues –​ perfect the intellect and confer an aptness for the good work of the
intellect which is the apprehension of truth.

2. Moral Virtues – are the habits that perfect the various powers concerned with human
appetites, including rational appetite, conferring upon them an aptness for the right use of
those appetites.

Kant on Good Will

- To act out of a ​“good will” ​for Kant means to act out of a sense of moral obligations or ​“duty”.
- In other words, the moral agent does a particular action not because of what it produces in terms of
human experience, but because he or she recognizes by reasoning that it is morally the right thing to
do and thus regards him or herself as having a moral duty or obligation to do that action.
- Kant's view towards morality parallels the Christian’s view concerning obedience to God’s
commandments, according to which the Christian obeys God’s commandments simple because God
commands them, not for the sake of rewards in heaven after death or from fear of punishment in
hell
- Kant’s analysis of common sense ideas begins with the thought that the only thing good without
qualification is a good will. The idea of good will is closer to the idea of a good person, or more
archaically, a person of good will.
 - In Kant’s term, a good will is a will whose decisions are wholly determined by moral demands or, as
he often refers to this, by Moral Law.
- Kant pointed out that to be universally and absolutely good, something must be good in every
instance of its occurrence.

Kant on Rights
- Immanuel Kant (1724 – 1804) ​– examined the idea of human rights within politics in such a
way that it is only a legitimate government that guarantees our natural right to freedom, and from
this freedom we derive other rights.

- Kant’ s stresses that a society can only function politically in relation to the state if fundamental
rights, laws, and entitlements are given and enhanced by the state.

Kant Three Rational Principles

1. The liberty of every member of the society.
2. The equality of every member of the society with every other, as a subject.
3. The independence of every member of the commonwealth as a citizen.

Three Conditions of Right

1. Right concerns only actions that have influence on other persons​, directly or
indirectly, meaning duties to the self are excluded.

2. Right does not concern the wish but only the choice of others​, meaning that not
mere desires but only decisions which bring about actions are a stake; and

3. Right does not concern matters of the other’s act but only the form​, meaning no
particular desires or ends are assumed on the part of the agents. As an exam[le of the latter he
considers trade, which for right must have the form of being freely agreed by both parties but
can have any matter or purpose the agents want.

Cosmopolitan Rights
- Relations among the states of the world, covered above, are not the same as relations among the
peoples of the world.
- Individuals can relate to states of which they are not members and to other individuals who are
members of the states.

- In this they are considered citizens of a universal state of human beings with corresponding rights of
citizens of the world.
- Cosmopolitan rights are an important component of perpetual peace. Interaction among the
peoples of the world, Kant notes, has increased in recent times.

- Now a violation of right on one place of the earth is felt in all as people depend upon one another
and know about one another more and more.
- Violations of cosmopolitan rights would make more difficult the trust and cooperation necessary for
perpetual peace among states.
Rights
- Is described as an entitlement or justified claim to a certain kind of positive and negative treatment
from others, to support from others or non-interference from others.

- In other words, a right is something to which every individual in the community is morally
permitted, and for which that community is entitled to disrespect or compulsorily remove anything
that stands in the way of even a single individual getting it.
- Right belongs to individuals, and no organization has any rights not directly derived from those of its
members as individuals; and just, as individual rights cannot extend to where they will intrude on
another individual's rights, similarly the rights of any organization whatever must yield to those of
single individual, whether outside or inside the organization.
- Rights are those important conditions of social life without which no person can generally realize his
best self.

Kinds of Rights
1. Natural Rights – many researchers have faith in natural rights. They stated that people inherit
several rights from nature. Before they came to live in society and state, they used to live in a
state of nature. In it, they appreciated natural rights, like the right to life, right to liberty and
right to property. Natural rights are parts of human nature and reason. Political theory
maintains that an individual enters into society with certain basic rights and that no government
can deny these rights.

2. Moral Rights – are based on human consciousness . They are supported by moral force of
human mind. These based on human sense of goodness and justice. These are not assisted by
the force of law. Sense of goodness and public opinion are the sanctions behind moral rights.

3. Legal Rights – are those rights which are accepted and enforced by the state. Any defilement
of any legal rights is punished by law. Law courts of the state enforced legal rights. These rights
can be enforced against individuals and also against the government. In this way, legal rights are
different moral rights. Legal rights are equally available to all the citizens. All citizens follow legal
rights without discrimination. They can go to the courts for getting their legal rights enforced.