Ethical Theories Flashcards
What are morality and ethics, and what exactly is the difference?
Morality is the whole of opinions, decisions and actions with which people, individually or collectively, express what they think is good or right.
Ethics is the systematic reflection of what is moral.
Which two types of ethics are there?
Descriptive ethics describes existing morality, including customs and habits, opinions about good and evil, responsible and irresponsible behavior and acceptable and unacceptable action.
Normative ethics judges morality and tries to formulate normative recommendations about how to act or live.
What types of judgements do we make in normative ethics, and why are they needed?
To answer questions like “what is the right opinion, decision or action” we need to make a judgement about the opinion, decision or action in question.
Descriptive judgements are related to what is actually the case, what was the case or what will be the case. These assertions are true or false.
A normative judgement is a value judgement. Value judgements indicate whether something is good or bad, desirable or undesirable; they often refer to how the world should be instead of how it is.
What is meant with values, and which two types are there?
Values help determine which goals or states of affairs are worth striving for.
An intrinsic value is an objective in and of itself.
An instrumental value is a means to realizing an intrinsic value (intermediate).
What are norms, and how do they differ from values?
Norms are rules that prescribe what concrete actions are required, permitted or forbidden. These are rules and agreements about how people are supposed to treat each other. Moral norms are indications for responsible action.
Values are abstract or global ideas or objectives that are strived for through certain types of behavior; it is what people eventually wish to achieve. Norms, however, are the means to realize these values. They are concrete, specified rules that limit action.
What are virtues and how do they relate to values?
Virtues are certain type of human characteristics or qualities. Moral virtues are the desirable characteristics of people, the characteristics that make people good.
Many of the characteristics that we qualify as moral virtues are also values, such as integrity and being just. The difference is that the notion of virtue mainly refers to the character development someone has to have gone through to truly realize those values.
What are two extreme theories of normative ethics, and what are their issues?
Normative relativism argues that all moral points of view - all values, norms and virtues - are equally valid. What is good or responsible for one person is not necessarily so for another.
1. The first problem is that is seems to involve an inherent contradiction. The theory states that there are no universal norms, but at the same time it uses a universal norm: “Everybody has to respect the moral opinions of others.”.
2. It makes any meaningful moral discussion totally impossible, because you can always appeal to your freedom of opinion, which by definition is neither better not worse than other opinions.
3. Finally, normative relativism can lead to unworkable or intolerable situations.
The other extreme position is absolutism, which is a rigid form of universalism in which no exceptions to rules are possible. Universalism states that there is a system of norms and values that is universally applicable to everyone, independent of time, place or culture.
1. The first problem is that we cannot work with the notion that a universal norm prescribed the best action in all situations. (killing in self-defense is justifiable)
2. Absolutism gives no answers for conflicting norms. (whistleblowers: confidentiality vs societal risk)
3. Absolutism offers no room for an independent moral judgement, since it often stems from dogmatism.
What are three primary ethical theories next to the extremes of absolutism and normative relativism? Give a concise summary and a representation for each of these theories.
Deontology: It is your moral obligation to ensure that your actions agree with an applicable norm. Kant’s Duty ethics is a representation of a Deontological approach.
Virtue ethics: It is the quality of the person acting that makes the action morally right or not. It’s neither the incidental action that counts nor the consequences. An example of this is Aristotle’s virtues doctrine.
Consequentialism: you should choose the action with the best outcome. A popular representation is Utilitarianism.
Explain utilitarianism, and give a hypothetical situation where you could make a decision based on the utilitarian approach.
Utilitarianism is a monistic type of consequentialism where the consequence of an action is measured against one value: human pleasure, happiness or welfare. Consequentialism states that an action itself is not morally relevant, only the consequences that the actions lead to are morally relevant.
Example: A company is considering whether to move its manufacturing facility to a new location. The current location is in an urban area and employs many people from the surrounding community. The new location is in a rural area and would be cheaper for the company to operate, but would result in the loss of jobs for the urban community. Using the utilitarian approach, the company would weigh the overall happiness or well-being of the affected parties and make a decision that results in the greatest overall benefit for the most people. In this case, the company may decide to stay in the urban area to avoid causing harm to the community by losing jobs.
What are some advantages of the utilitarian approach?
- It’s easy to understand
- It invites us to operationalize goodness in terms of happiness or money for example
- It allows for moral progress. If new information comes up, we can re-calculate our decision.
- It is universal: Everyone can be counted equally.
What are some disadvantages of the utilitarian approach?
- Consequences can be difficult to predict or measured
- The chosen metric for operationalization might be inadequate
- Sacrificing the good of the few for the good of the many may be unjust (exploitation)
- It may conflict with moral intuitions (stealing is good when giving to the poor)
- It ignores the moral relevance of personal relationships between people.
Explain deontological ethics, and give an example where it can be used to reason about morality.
According to duty ethics, an action is morally right if it is in agreement with a moral rule that is applicable in itself, independent of the consequences of that action. The best known system of duty ethics is that of Kantian Theory. According to Kant, moral laws or normative ethics cannot be based on happiness. Happiness is in individual matter and changes for each person during his/her lifetime.
When i think about breaking a promise to someone, because it is convenient. I would ask myself it is a desirable that everyone would do this. I would not like that, as it would make trusting other people impossible, as well as promises would lose their meaning. Therefore I will not break the promise.
What are the two formulations of Kant’s categorical imperative?
The first formulation states: Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become universal law.
The second formulation states: Act as to treat humanity, whether in your own person or in that of any other, in every case as an end, never as means only. Other people are not instruments or objects to be used for your own gain by misleading their rationality.
What are the advantages of deontological ethics?
- It naturally captures many moral intuitions of justice and fairness
- It explains why you should not make exceptions for yourself
- It codifies the idea that doing good is not only about acting in a particular way, but acting in that way for the right reasons.
- It explains the relevance of existing moral guidelines.
What are some disadvantages of Deontological ethics?
- Individual duties or rules might conflict with one another.
- There is no room for exceptions, even if some situations may seem to require them
- Little attention is paid to social and emotional dimensions of morality that might yield conflicts or justify exceptions.
- Not everyone is capable of following abstract rules (children, or individuals with cognitive limitations.
