ETHICAL ISSUE

TOPIC 1 (FINAL)
Ethical issue - refers to a situation, problem, or dilemma that involves moral principles, values,
and judgments about what is right or wrong. These issues often arise when there are conflicting
interests, and individuals or groups must make decisions that have ethical implications. Ethical
issues can emerge in various contexts, including personal, professional, social, and
organizational settings.

Key characteristics of ethical issues include:

1. Moral Considerations: Ethical issues involve questions of morality and principles,

requiring individuals to assess actions based on concepts of right and wrong.
2. Conflict of Values: Ethical issues often arise when there are conflicting values or
interests, making it challenging to find a resolution that satisfies all parties.
3. Decision-Making Dilemmas: Individuals faced with ethical issues may experience moral
dilemmas, where they must weigh competing principles and make decisions that align
with their ethical beliefs.
4. Consequences and Impact: Ethical decisions can have significant consequences, not
only for individuals involved but also for broader communities or society as a whole.
5. Subjectivity: Ethical issues can be subjective, with different individuals or groups holding
diverse perspectives on what are morally acceptable in a given situation.

Examples of ethical issues can be found in various fields:

1. Business Ethics:
 Unfair Labour Practices: Exploitation of workers through low wages, long hours,
or unsafe working conditions.
 Corporate Fraud: Deceptive financial practices, misrepresentation of
information, or insider trading.
2. Technology Ethics:
 Privacy Concerns: Unauthorized collection and use of personal data by tech
companies.
3. Healthcare Ethics:
 Patient Confidentiality: Breach of patient privacy and disclosure of confidential
medical information.
 End-of-life Decisions: Ethical dilemmas surrounding decisions to withdraw life
support or assisted suicide.
4. Environmental Ethics:
 Pollution: Release of harmful substances into the air, water, or soil, causing
environmental damage.
 Deforestation: Clearing large areas of forests without sustainable practices.
5. Social Media Ethics:
 Fake News: Dissemination of false information, leading to misinformation and
public confusion.
 Cyber bullying: Harassment and intimidation of individuals online.
6. Education Ethics:
 Cheating and Plagiarism: Academic dishonesty among students.
 Unequal Access to Education: Disparities in educational opportunities based on
socio-economic factors.
7. Legal Ethics:
  Conflict of Interest: Lawyers or judges acting in a way that compromises their
professional integrity.
 Selective Prosecution: Unfairly targeting individuals based on personal or
political motives.
8. Medical Research Ethics:
 Informed Consent Violations: Conducting research without proper and informed
consent from participants.
 Animal Testing: Ethical concerns related to the treatment of animals in scientific
experiments.
9. Political Ethics:
 Corruption: Bribery, embezzlement, or other forms of corrupt practices within
political systems.
 Voter Suppression: Restricting access to voting rights for certain groups.
10. Global Ethics:
 Human Rights Violations: Systematic abuses of basic human rights in various
regions.
 Genocide: Deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, ethnic, racial,
or religious group.

Addressing ethical issues often requires thoughtful consideration, ethical reasoning, and a
balance between conflicting values. Many professions and organizations have codes of ethics to
guide individuals in navigating ethical challenges within their specific fields. Moreover, ethical
discussions contribute to the development of norms and standards that shape societal
expectations and behaviour.

Some example of ethical issues is:

A. Abortion is the termination of a pregnancy before the fetus can survive independently
outside the uterus. The termination can occur spontaneously, known as a miscarriage,
or it can be induced through medical or surgical procedures.
B. The death penalty, or capital punishment, is the practice of executing individuals as a
form of punishment for certain crimes, typically those deemed as the most serious
offenses.
C. Same-sex marriage, also known as gay marriage, is the legally recognized union
between two individuals of the same gender. The recognition and acceptance of same-
sex marriage have evolved over time and vary across different countries and regions.
D. Euthanasia, often referred to as "mercy killing" or "assisted suicide," is the intentional
act of ending the life of a person who is suffering from a severe illness or medical
condition, typically with the goal of relieving their pain and suffering. Euthanasia can
take various forms, including active euthanasia, where a person takes a direct action to
cause death, and passive euthanasia, where medical treatment or life support is
withheld or withdrawn, allowing the person to die naturally.
E. Pornography refers to sexually explicit materials, including images, videos, literature, or
any other media that is intended to sexually arouse its audience. The production,
distribution, and consumption of pornography have been subjects of significant debate
and controversy. Different individuals and cultures hold diverse perspectives on the
nature, impact, and acceptability of pornography.
F. Divorce is the legal dissolution or termination of a marriage, allowing spouses to end
their marital relationship and regain their status as single individuals. The reasons for
 divorce are diverse and can range from irreconcilable differences to issues such as
infidelity, financial problems, or communication breakdowns. Divorce is a complex and
emotional process that involves legal, financial, and personal considerations.
G. Violence and war are complex and multifaceted phenomena that have profound
impacts on individuals, societies, and global dynamics. Both are characterized by the use
of force to achieve political, social, or ideological objectives, and they often result in
significant human suffering, loss of life, and long-lasting consequences.

1. Definition of Violence:
 Violence refers to the use of force, either physical or psychological, to cause
harm, injury, or death to individuals or groups. It can manifest in various
forms, including interpersonal violence, domestic violence, and structural
violence.
2. Definition of War:
 War is a state of conflict between different countries or different groups
within a country, involving armed confrontations and often resulting in
widespread destruction, displacement, and loss of life.
3. Causes of Violence:
 Violence can have various root causes, including political, economic, social,
and cultural factors. Injustice, inequality, discrimination, and political
instability can contribute to the emergence of violent behaviors.
4. Causes of War:
 The causes of war are diverse and complex. They can include territorial
disputes, resource competition, ideological differences, nationalism, and
historical grievances. Wars can be triggered by a combination of political,
economic, and social factors.
5. Humanitarian Consequences:
 Both violence and war have severe humanitarian consequences, including
loss of life, displacement, injuries, trauma, and long-term psychological
effects on individuals and communities.
6. International Law and Conflict Resolution:
 International law seeks to regulate armed conflicts and prevent the use of
excessive force. Efforts in conflict resolution and diplomacy aim to address
the root causes of conflicts and find peaceful solutions.
7. Human Rights Violations:
 Violence and war often lead to widespread human rights violations, including
the targeting of civilians, displacement, sexual violence, and the recruitment
of child soldiers.
8. Military Intervention:
 The international community sometimes engages in military interventions,
either through peacekeeping missions or interventions to prevent or stop
atrocities. However, the effectiveness and ethical considerations of such
interventions are subjects of debate.
9. Post-Conflict Reconstruction:
 After conflicts, post-conflict reconstruction efforts focus on rebuilding
infrastructure, restoring governance, and addressing the social and economic
consequences of war.
10. Preventing Violence and War:
 Efforts to prevent violence and war include diplomacy, conflict resolution,
peacebuilding, addressing root causes, and promoting human rights and
social justice.
 11. Role of Media:
 Media plays a crucial role in shaping public perceptions of violence and war.
Responsible reporting is essential for providing accurate information and
fostering understanding.

MORAL THEORIES
TOPIC 2 ( FINAL)

Natural law
-developed by St. Thomas Aquinas during medieval period.
-also called “THOMISTIC Ethics”
-the idea of natural law is that “reason is the source of moral law and directs us towards the “GOOD”
“Good”- is the ultimate goals of person actions. It is also discoverable within the person’s
nature.
-Basic goal of Natural law “to do good and avoid evil”
- Latin: jus naturale, lex naturalis) is a system of law based on a close observation of human nature, and
based on values intrinsic to human nature that can be deduced and applied independently of positive
law (the express enacted laws of a state or society).

Q:How do we know of a person is acting rightly or wrongly?

An act is morally right if it is done in accordance with the moral law.
Q:What is moral law?
Reason is source of natural law; hence moral law is the dictates of reason.

According to St. Thomas Aquinas, Natural law comes from God eternal law, indeed for Aquinas the
moral law is divine law which expressed in human nature which reads “to do good and avoid evil”

Moral Law- is doing good and avoiding evil.

Q: How do we know that one is acting in accordance with the good?

Good is suitable to human nature or which is proper to human nature. If it is good it is done in
accordance with conscience.
Q: How do we know that one’s actions obey conscience?
Action obeys conscience if it is satisfies the three fold natural inclination of human person.

Three-fold natural inclination namely:

1. Self-preservation – take care of his/her health or not to kill or not to put herself in danger.
2. Dealing with others – urges treat others with the same respect that we accord ourselves.
3. Propagation of human species – reproduction organ is by nature designed to reproduce and
propagate human species

Note: at least one of these inclinations of the human person is violated, and then an act does not obey
conscience. Therefore immoral.

In addition to the threefold inclination three determinants of moral actions was introduced namely:

1. Object of human act –which the will intends primarily and directly.
2. Circumstance – condition which affects morality of an action.
Classification:
1. Quality of person (WHO)
2. Quality/quantity of moral object (what)
 3. Circumstance of place (where)
4. Circumstance of means (by what means)
5. Circumstance of end (why)
6. Manner of which action is clear (how)
7. Time element involve in the performance of the action (when)
3. End – refers to purpose of the doer or the agent of human act itself.

NOTE: all the determinants of human act must be all good for an act to be considered good or morally
right.

Sometimes, human act may produce two conflicting results

1. Good
2. Evil

To address this Dilemma Aquinas formulated four principles of double effect.

1. The action intended must be good in itself or at least morally indifferent, otherwise the act is
evil at the very outset.
2. The good effect must follow the action at least as immediately as the evil effect or the good and
evil effect must occur simultaneously.
3. The foreseen evil effect should not be intended or approved but merely permitted to occur.
4. There must be a proportionate and sufficient reason for allowing the evil effect to occur while
performing the action.

According to Aquinas, all of the four principle must be satisfied for an action to be considered morally
right.

This Lesson deals with the Natural Law Theory of St. Thomas Aquinas. It defines law and
discusses the different kinds of law. The Lesson clarifies the difference between Natural Law
from Eternal Law, Divine Law, and Human Law.

1. What is natural law?

2. What is Eternal law?
- is the Divine Wisdom of God which oversees the common good and governs
everything. Eternal law is God’s plan to lead all creation towards God’s eternal salvific
plan to be holy and blameless before Him through Jesus Christ (Ephesians 1:4–5)[1].
God, as “Being-itself”, is able to promulgate such a law as God the Creator’s reason is
also perfect wisdom. Everything in nature reflects the Eternal Law in their own natures
(S.T. I-IIae, 91, 2)[2]. Things act according to their nature, so they derive their proper
ends (final cause) according to the law written into their nature.

3. What is Divine law?

-refers to a set of principles or rules believed to be derived from a higher, supernatural source,
such as a deity or a cosmic order. It is often contrasted with human-made laws or legal systems.
The concept of divine law is prevalent in various religious and philosophical traditions, and its
nature and content can vary significantly depending on the specific beliefs of a particular faith.
In monotheistic religions like Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, divine law is often
associated with the commandments or teachings believed to have been directly
revealed by God.

4. What is Human law

 -Human law refers to legal systems and rules created and established by human
societies to regulate behaviour, maintain order, and administer justice within a specific
community or jurisdiction. Human laws are the product of legislative processes, judicial
decisions, and social agreements, and they vary widely across different cultures,
countries, and historical periods.

-Human laws are subject to change through amendments, revisions, or entirely new
legislation. They are enforced through various mechanisms, including law enforcement
agencies, courts, and legal institutions. The purpose of human law is to maintain social
order, protect individual rights, and provide a framework for resolving disputes within a
given society.

ORDER OF THE PRECEPTS OF NATURAL LAW

According to Thomas Aquinas, God created the world according to natural law. It is a
goal driven system whereby life is sustained and everything function smoothly. God created a
good thing for His creatures. Like meat that is good for dogs and cats or water that is good for
plants. God being the creator, Thomas Aquinas argues that God instils in creatures an intuitive
desire or inclination to seek what is best for them. We, creatures, are designed to seek basic
goods.

There are seven basic goods:

1. Self-preservation - refers to the instinctive drive or set of behaviours that organism’s

exhibit to ensure their own survival and well-being.
2. procreation or reproduction - refers to the process of producing offspring or generating
new individuals of the same species
3. Educate offspring - refers to the process of providing knowledge, skills, values, and
guidance to one's children or young members of a species.
4. Seek God - refers to the intentional and personal pursuit of a connection with the
divine, a higher power, or a transcendent force. this quest is often driven by a desire for
spiritual understanding, meaning, guidance, and a deeper connection to something
beyond the material aspects of life.
5. Live in society - Living in society means residing within a community or group of
individuals who share common norms, values, and often, geographic proximity.
6. Avoid offense - means taking steps to prevent causing hurt, discomfort, or distress to
others through words, actions, or behaviours. It involves being mindful of the potential
impact of one's words or actions on individuals or groups and making an effort to
communicate or behave in a way that is considerate and respectful
7. Shun ignorance - means to actively avoid and reject ignorance, which is the lack of
knowledge, understanding, or awareness about a particular subject or the world in
general. Shunning ignorance involves a commitment to seeking knowledge, fostering
understanding, and being open-minded.

Thomas Aquinas believes that from these seven basic goods, the natural law is derived.
Our inclination shows us basic good and reason allows us to derive natural law from them.
This brings us to the understanding that the right acts are in accordance with natural law. How
thus this system of Natural law works? Let us take the obvious inclination, self-preservation. We
all see that our lives are valuable. It is the reason why we do not do stupid or dumb acts that
will put our lives in danger. However, we cannot deny the fact that others’ lives are also
valuable the same as ours. The reason will tell us that killing is wrong because it is a violation of
natural law. From here, we will be able to create prohibition: “do not kill”. In turn, it will bring
to a positive injunction which promotes life.

UTILITARIANISM
TOPIC 3 (FINALS)

Utilitarianism is a normative ethical theory that places the focus of right and wrong solely on
the outcomes (consequences) of choosing one action/policy over other actions/policies. As
such, it moves beyond the scope of one's own interests and takes into account the interests of
others. It is about the “the greatest happiness for the greatest number”. When we talk of
utilitarianism, two names will appear instantly, Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mills.

Utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism. For consequentialism, the moral rightness or

wrongness of an act depends on the consequences it produces. On consequentialist grounds,
actions and inactions whose negative consequences outweigh the positive consequences will be
deemed morally wrong while actions and inactions whose positive consequences outweigh the
negative consequences will be deemed morally right. On utilitarian grounds, actions and
inactions which benefit few people and harm more people will be deemed morally wrong while
actions and inactions which harm fewer people and benefit more people will be deemed
morally right.

JEREMY BENTHAM is an English philosopher who introduces the principle of utility. He

recognizes the fundamental role of pain and pleasure in human life. He argues that the
approval or disapproval of an action is based on the amount of pain or pleasure brought
about by the consequences. Bentham equates good with pleasure and evil with
pain, and asserts that pleasure and pain are capable of quantification (and hence
'measure'). In measuring pleasure and pain, Bentham introduces the following criteria:
INTENSITY, DURATION, CERTAINTY (or UNCERTAINTY), and its NEARNESS (or FARNESS). He also
includes its "fecundity" (will more of the same follow?) and its “purity" (its pleasure won't be
followed by pain & vice versa). In considering actions that affect numbers of people, we must
also account for its EXTENT.

Criteria in measuring pleasure and pain according to Bentham,

The pleasure derived from drinking a pint of beer is more intense than the pleasure derived
from reading Hamlet (intensity).

The pleasure of drinking the beer lasts longer than that of reading Hamlet (duration).

We are confident that drinking the beer is more pleasurable than reading Hamlet
(certainty/uncertainty).

The beer is closer to us than the play, and therefore it is easier for us to access the former
than the latter (proximity).

Drinking the beer is more likely to promote more pleasure in the future while reading
Hamlet is less likely to promote more pleasure in the future (fecundity).
 Drinking the beer is pure pleasure while reading Hamlet is mixed with something else
(purity).
Finally, drinking the beer affects both me and my friends in the bar and so has a greater
extent than my solitary reading of Hamlet (extent).

Since, on all of these measures, drinking a pint of beer is more pleasurable than reading
Hamlet, it follows according to Bentham that it is objectively better for you to drink the
pint of beer and forget about reading Hamlet, and so you should. Of course, it is up to
each individual to make such a calculation based on the intensity, duration, certainty, etc.
of the pleasure resulting from each possible choice they may make in their eyes, but
Bentham at least claims that such a comparison is possible.

JOHN STUART MILLS is also an English philosopher. He adjusted to the more hedonistic
tendencies in Bentham's philosophy by emphasizing. According to Mills, it is not the
quantity of pleasure, but the quality of happiness that is central to utilitarianism,
He would add that the calculus is unreasonable and qualities cannot be quantified (there is a
distinction between 'higher' and 'lower' pleasures). Mills argues that utilitarianism refers to
"the Greatest Happiness Principle" -- it seeks to promote the capability of achieving
happiness (higher pleasures) for the most amounts of people (this is its "extent") Mill
justifies this claim by saying that between two pleasures, although one pleasure requires a
greater amount of difficulty to attain than the other pleasure, if those who are competently
acquainted with both pleasures prefer (or value) one over the other, then the one is a higher
pleasure while the other is a lower pleasure.

Benefit and harm can be characterized in more than one way; for classical utilitarian such as
Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) and John Stuart Mill (1806-1873), they are defined in terms of
happiness/unhappiness and pleasure/pain. On this view, actions and inactions that cause less
pain or unhappiness and more pleasure or happiness than available alternative actions and
inactions will be deemed morally right, while actions and inactions that cause more pain or
unhappiness and less pleasure or happiness than available alternative actions and inactions will
be deemed morally wrong. Although pleasure and happiness can have different meanings, in
the context of this chapter they will be treated as synonymous.

SOME VARIETIES (OR TYPES) OF UTILITARIANISM

1. actual consequence utilitarians

-Base the evaluation of the moral rightness and moral wrongness of actions on
the actual consequences of actions
2. foreseeable consequence utilitarians
-Base the evaluation of the moral rightness and moral wrongness of actions on
the foreseeable consequences of actions
3. Act-utilitarianism
-The principle of utility is applied directly to each alternative actin a situation of
choice. The right act is then defined as the one which brings about the best
results (or the least amount of bad results).
4. Rule-utilitarianism
-The principle of utility is used to determine the validity of rules of conduct
(moral principles). A rule like promise-keeping is established by looking
at the consequences of a world in which people broke promises at will and a
 world in which promises were binding. Right and wrong are then defined as
following or breaking those rules.

IS UTILITARIANISM PERSUASIVE AND REASONABLE?

The principle of utility as the foundational principle of morality, that is, about the claim that
what is morally right is just what leads to the better outcome. John Stuart Mill’s argument that
it is based on his claim that “each person, so far as he believes it to be attainable, desires his
own happiness” (Mill [1861] 1879, Ch. 4). Mill derives the principle of utility from this claim
based on three considerations, namely desirability, exhaustiveness, and impartiality. That is,
happiness is desirable as an end in itself; it is the only thing that is so desirable
(exhaustiveness); and no one person’s happiness is really any more desirable or less desirable
than that of any other person (impartiality) (see Macleod 2017)

Three considerations namely,

1. Desirability - Mill argues, The only proof capable of being given that an object is visible
is that people actually see it

2. Exhaustiveness - Mill does not argue that other things, apart from happiness, are not
desired as such; but while other things appear to be desired, happiness is the only thing
that is really desired since whatever else we may desire, we do so because attaining that
thing would make us happy.

3. Impartiality - Mill argues that equal amounts of happiness are equally desirable,
whether the happiness is felt by the same person or by different persons. In Mill’s
words, “each person’s happiness is a good to that person, and the general happiness,
therefore, a good to the aggregate of all persons.

DEONTOLOGY

Relative to most other philosophers, Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) was a late

bloomer, publishing his first significant work, The Critique of Pure Reason, in 1781 at age
57. But this didn’t slow him down, as through his 50s, 60s, and 70s, he published
numerous large and influential works in many areas of philosophy, including ethics. He
published two large works on ethics, The Critique of Practical Reason and The
Metaphysics of Morals, but it’s his first short work of ethics, Groundwork of the
Metaphysics of Morals that is his most important because it provides a succinct and
relatively readable account of his ethics.

DEONTOLOGY

One of the distinctive features of Kant’s ethics is that it focuses on duties, defined by
right and wrong. Right and wrong (which are the primary deontic categories, along with
obligatory, optional, supererogatory, and others) are distinct from good and bad (which are
value categories) in that they directly prescribe actions: right actions are ones we ought to
do (are morally required to do) and wrong actions we ought not to do (are morally
forbidden from doing). This style of ethics is referred to as deontology. The name comes
from the Greek word deon, meaning duty or obligation. In deontology, the deontic
categories are primary, while value determinations are derived from them. As we’ll see,
Kant believes all our duties can be derived from the categorical imperative. We’ll first need
to explain what Kant means by the phrase “categorical imperative” and then we’ll look at
the content of this rule.

First, Kant believes that morality must be rational. He models his morality on science,
which seeks to discover universal laws that govern the natural world. Similarly, morality will
be a system of universal rules that govern action. In Kant’s view, as we will see, right action
is ultimately a rational action. As an ethics of duty, Kant believes that ethics consists of
commands about what we ought to do. The word “imperative” in his categorical imperative
means a command or order. However, unlike most other commands, which usually come
from some authority, these commands come from within, from our own reason. Still, they
function the same way: they are commands to do certain actions.

Kant’s two types of imperatives:

1. Hypothetical - A hypothetical imperative is a contingent command. It’s conditional

on a person’s wants, needs, or desires
2. Categorical - A genuinely moral imperative would not be contingent on wants,
desires, or needs, and this is what is meant by a categorical imperative. A categorical
imperative, instead of taking an if-then form, is an absolute command.

FORMULATION OF THE CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE

1. “act only in accordance with that maxim through which you can at the same time
will that it become a universal law” (Groundwork 4:421).[1]
2. “So act that you use humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of
any other, always at the same time as an end, never merely as a means”
(Groundwork 4:429).
 EGOISM AND SOCIAL CONTRACT THEORY

Egoist- is known for their big ego. They are self-centred and care little about others. If you
google the phrase “egoist,” almost all web pages that pop up teach you how to deal with
them if you are so unfortunate as to encounter one. Given such negative connotations, it
might surprise you to learn that some philosophers who are called “ethical egoists” argue
that to act morally is to maximize one’s self-interest. At least on the surface, being ethical is
not all about seeking self-interest. Morality requires us, for example, to keep promises, to
treat others fairly, and to benefit those in need. It demands that we act not in our self-
interest even if we can get advantages by breaking promises, treating others unfairly, or not
helping the needy.

We will see how three different views, known as psychological egoism, ethical egoism, and
social contract theory, address this question. Before we dive into details about each theory,
here is a rough picture: Psychological egoism claims that true altruistic behaviour is nothing
more than wishful thinking because everything we do is by definition self-serving. Ethical
egoism goes a step further, arguing that even if we could be unselfish, we can ignore any
demand that ethics makes on us because we should put ourselves first. Finally, social
contract theory claims that ethics itself is rooted in self-interest, that is, that we should
really take others into account but only, ultimately, because doing so is in accord with what
we want and need for ourselves.

PSYCHOLOGICAL EGOISM

Psychological egoists argue that everything we do is self-serving even if we might think it is

not. Self-sacrificial behaviours, such as using oneself as a human shield to protect others in
a mass shooting, cannot disprove psychological egoism, because people who sacrifice
themselves are not motivated by altruistic concern. Rather, they simply do what they most
want to do. Sacrificing one’s life happens to be what one most wanted to do in those
circumstances. Given that doing what one most wants to do is in one’s self-interest, one’s
“self-sacrificing” behaviour is again egoistic. Altruism is nothing but an illusion.

ETHICAL EGOISM

While psychological egoism claims that the ultimate goal of one’s action is one’s own self-
interest, ethical egoism claims that one should pursue one’s own best interest. The basic
idea of ethical egoism is this: promoting one’s own best interest is in accord with morality.
In its strongest form, ethical egoism claims that one acts morally if and only if one promotes
one’s own best interest. In this section, we will discuss and evaluate Adam Smith’s and Ayn
Rand’s ethical egoistic claims. We will end up with learning the biggest problem.

SOCIAL CONTRACT THEORY

The basic idea of social contract theory in ethics is that ethical rules are sets of
conventionally established limits we impose on ourselves in keeping with our own longer-
term interests. This answers two fundamental questions about morality, namely, what is
required and why we should obey. What is morally required is what we, as rational and self-
interested agents, do or would agree upon. The reason why we should obey is because we
have agreed, or would do so if we were being fully rational. Social contract theory shares
the core assumption of egoism that we are self-interested and rational agents. However,
realizing that living together in a society requires a set of rules for social cooperation; social
contract theory provides a justification for why we should coordinate with others. Unlike
egoism which cannot provide an impartial regulation of interpersonal conflicts of interest,
social contract theory not only provides a way to handle conflicts of interest but also
provides a justification for it.