Applied ethics Flashcards
Utilitarianism: Lying
(all 3)
ACT
-> Bentham’s quantitative hedonistic calculus
-> most pleasure, least pain for most amount of people
-> No rule against lying
-> If it created more pleasure than paint, it is not morally wrong
-> example: a white lie to make someone feel better
RULE
-> Mill’s qualitative hedonistic calculus
-> Higher and lower pleasures
-> Should avoid tyranny of majority
-> Generally a strong rule not to lie
-> But lying could be permissible if it is a weak rule (okay to break under certain circumstances)
-> example: keeping quiet about an affair to avoid family splitting up
PREFERENCE
-> Singer and Hare’s non-hedonistic theory
-> A good act fulfills the greatest amount of preferences
-> There may be a strong preference for a secret to be kept
-> Telling the truth could go against many people’s wishes
-> example: not telling a child santa is fake
Deontology: Lying
(2 forms of CI)
FIRST FORMULATION
-> Universal law
-> Only follow rules you can imagine everyone doing with no contradiction
-> ‘Always lie’ is a contradiction in conception as there is no truth
-> ‘Always lie’ is a contradiction in will because you would not want to be lied to
-> Not lying is a perfect duty that should always be followed
SECOND FORMULATION
-> Humanity formulation
-> Always treat humanity as an end and never merely as a means
-> Lying to a serial killer is wrong as we are only responsible for our own decisions
-> Lying to a serial killer is wrong as they can’t make a rational choice based on all factors
-> BUT perhaps the axe man has given up his right to be treated with full autonomy as he is undermining the autonomy of someone else.
Virtue ethics: Lying
DECISION MAKING PROCESS
-> find mean between excess and deficiency of an act
-> truthfulness is a virtue
-> the virtue is habitually practiced until it becomes a stable trait
-> practical wisdom is developed to know when to implement that virtue
-> you make the decision to be the correct amount o f truth; lying is okay as long as it doesn’t develop into a habit
WHAT ARISTOTLE THINKS
-> telling the truth should be prioritized in all situations
-> when there is a clash you should evaluate which virtue is more important
-> to do this, uses practical wisdom and rational thinking
-> truthfulness can be combined with virtues like being friednly
-> a conflict can be resolved without lying
Meta ethics: Lying
EMOTIVISM
-> ‘lying is wrong’ is a subjective opinion
-> ‘boo’ lying is an emotional stance
-> we cannot say lying is objectively moral or immoral
-> a non-cognitivist view: ‘lying is wrong’ is not factual
PRESCRIPTIVISM
-> ‘you should not lie’ is a recommendation
-> Hume: you ought not to lie
-> Hare: instructs you not to lie
-> You are not obligated to tell the truth
ERROR THEORY
-> ‘lying is wrong’ is false as there are no moral properties
-> Mackie says there are no moral truths
-> It does not matter if you lie
-> It is an error to assume lying is objectively wrong
Utilitarianism : Lying (3)
ACT
-> Bentham’s qualitative hedonistic calculus
-> there is no happiness or suffering gained ; morally neutral (from characters)
-> positives: cathartic, develop motor skills, supplies jobs, pleasure
-> negative: causal link to violence, disapproval causes sadness, sedentary lifestyle
RULE
-> simulated killing is a lower pleasure and therefore a wrong act
PREFERENCE
-> Okay, as there is no suffering and no real opposing preference to the people gaining pleasure from it
Deontology: Simulated killing
(2 forms)
FIRST FORMULATION
-> does not lead to a contradiction in will or conception, so we have neither a perfect nor imperfect duty to not participate.
-> However, Kant claims we have a duty to develop morally and this could go against it
-> Could lead to a contradiction will, if it causes us to act violently in real life, but a little evidence, as it’s only correlational, could be cathartic instead
SECOND FORMULATION
-> Using humanity as a means to your end of pleasure
-> At face value no autonomy is restricted so it could be excused as the humans are not real
-> BUT being entertained by this is not in harmony with the humanity formulation as it may make us more inclined to be less compassionate
AVE: stimulated killing
DECESION MAKING PROCESS
-> Being a good person is not just about developing your virtues, it is about practicing then until it becomes a habit
-> Long term play : immoral as it erodes ones character meaning they cannot reach eudaimonia (becomes an excess).
WHAT ARISTOTLE THINKS
-> Context is important! A vp may partake for entertainment ony. But if someone partakes as they like killing and leads to a bad habit = immoral
Meta ethics: Stimulated killing
EMOTIVISM
-> expression of positive/negative sentiment towards stimulated killing
-> no truth value
PRESCRIPTIVISM
-> instructions/recommendations to not do stimulated killing
-> no truth value
ERROR THEORY
->statements that try to justify killing as moral objects are always false as they refer to objects that do not exist
Utilitarianism: Stealing (3)
ACT
-> Only justified if it maximisies happiness and minimises pain
RULE
-> ‘stealing is wrong’ is a strong rule (rule worship) so is never justified
PREFERENCE
-> The preference of someone not to starve is greater than the preference of someone not to be stolen from - stealing can be justified
Deontology: Stealing
(2 forms)
FIRST FORMULATION
-> stealing if universalised leads to a contradiction in conception as there would be no property rights.
-> we have a perfect duty not to steal
SECOND FORMULATION
-> cannot treat people merely as a means
-> stealing is taking away someones choice and does not give them consent so therefore you are treating the as a means not as an end.
AVE : stealing
DECISION MAKING PROCES
-> stealing is an injustice as it deprives a person from what is justly and fairly theirs
WHAT ARISTOTLE THINKS
-> Face value: should not steal as theft is never a mean
-> BUT: ROBIN HOOD -> stelas from rich to give to poor = PW assessed options and chose the right one
-> LONG TERM: stealing cannot develop into a habit/trait (excess)
Meta ethics: stealing
EMOTIVISM
-> more of an opinion
-> BOO! STEALING!
PRESCRIPTIVISM
-> An instruction/ recommendation to not steal so everyone in a similar situation should not steal
ERROR THEORY
-> every moral statement is false so ‘do not steal’ is false.
Utilitarianism: Eating animals
(3)
ACT
-> gain pleasure eating animals
-> BUT if pain is produced through the process of slaughtering them = immoral , if not it’s okay
-> person gains pleasure slaughtering them its okay, if they are made to and dont like it its immoral
RULE
-> Depends on maximising pleasure and preference
PREFERENCE
-> Animals have no moral value as they have no preference, so it is justifiable
Deontology: Eating animals
(2 forms)
FIRST FORMULATION
-> no contradiction in will nor conception
-> It is permissible as long as it doesn’t poison humans
SECOND FORMULATION
-> Animals have no moral significance so it is okay to treat them as a means to and end (they lack autonomy/act out of instincts
BUT some humans lack the ability to reason eg severe mental impairments
-> If provider of meat has given meat that will poison - immoral
AVE: Eating animals
DECISION MAKING PROCESS
-> If it is out of greed, selfishness it is wrong
-> If it is done in a virtuous way it is good
WHAT ARISTOTLE THINKS
-> Function arg; we can reason, animals cannot so are not morally significant
-> However, caring and showing compassion for them is virtuous
