Ethics And Political Philosophy

Question 0

Ethics- a Definition

Answer 0

Ethics
Is a set of moral principles (a moral principle is a statement about how people should act, how they should take decisions and how they should lead their lives)

Says something about our rights and duties

Tries to give the answer to the question : what is good ? And what is bad?

Applies the language of right and wrong

Has implications for our personal lives and the way how societies are organized

Comes from the Greek word ethos (habit, custom)

Question 1

The two different meaning of the word good

Answer 1

A good car
Quality, related to intended objective
An instrument is good, if it contributed something to effectively reaching a defined goal
An instrument is good, if it fulfills its function in an adequate way

Examples:
Ice cream is good if it tastes good
A car is good if it is reliable and fast
A teacher is good if students learn something in his lectures

Instrumental meaning of good

A good man
Quality, not related to intended objective
An action is good if it is in line with moral values/ principles
A human being is good if he/ she acts in line with moral values/principles

Examples:
It is good to help the weak and poor
It is good to avoid killing and stealing
Mahatma Gandhi was a good person

Absolute /moral meaning of good

George Edward Moore in principia ethica,1903: ethics is the general analysis of everything that is morally good

Question 2

Some questions for discussions

Answer 2

Group a

Is it possible to judge someone’s action morally, if this person could not act differently?

Is the freedom of choice a precondition for ethics?

Group b
Do ethical statements provide information about anything other than human opinions and attitudes?

Can moral statements be true?

Question 3

Can moral statements be true?

Answer 3

Ethical realism
Human beings discover ethical truths that already have an independent existence. Moral qualities such as wrongness (moral facts) exist. Saying that something is wrong means saying that there existed, somehow, somewhere, this quality of wrongness, and that it had to exist there if that act were to be wrong.

But:
People follow many different moral belief. So if there are real ethicL truths out there (wherever) then human beings don’t seem to be very good at discovering them.

Ethical nom-realism
Human beings invent ethical truths

Question 4

Metaethics: the science of normative statements

Answer 4

Good - obligations
Morally indifferent - allowed
Bad - prohibitions

Normative statements - meta ethics: theories in normative statements

Is concerned with the content of moral judgements
Defines criteria for what is right or wrong

-
Deals with the nature of moral judgements
Looks at the origins and meaning of ethical principles

Applied ethics looks at controversial topics like war, animal rights and capital punishment

Question 5

Murder is bad or three metaethical theories

Answer 5

It is wrong to murder (statement about an ethical fact)
Cognitivism/ ethical realism

Normative statements similar to describe statements (an action is good - a chair is white) hey are true/false (correspondence with normative facts)
But Hume’s law : impossible to conclude from facts to norms (because facts do not imply norms)
Possibility to acquire knowledge about normative facts?

I disapprove of murder
(Statement about my personal feeling)
Emotivism/ subjectivism

Normative statements are descriptions of one’s own emotions
Since emotions are different with different actors, emotivism implies moral relativism

Don’t murder people
(Statement about a rule)
Institutionalism/ prescriptism

Normative statements are statements about social norms, sanctions, generally accepted behavior
Murder is bad means: in our society, we agree on certain sanctions that are meant to prevent murder

Question 6

Two (and a half) basic positions in normative ethics

Answer 6

Virtue ethics
An action is good if it is in line with a virtuous life that makes people happy

Basic concept: virtue
Example : Aristotelian ethics
Famous thinkers: Aristotle, Plato

1. Consequentialist ethics
   An action is good if it is useful and has good consequences (happiness)

Basic concept: usefulness, happiness
Example: utilitarianism
Famous thinkers: Bentham, mill

2. Deontological ethics
   An action is good if it is in line with a set of basic principles

Basic concept: rule
Examples: categorical imperative
Famous thinkers: Kant

Question 7

Consequentialism

Answer 7

Good is what has useful consequences
(Consequentialist ethics: problem of the ideal observer)

Useful for whom? For mankind
(How to measure the happiness of many/ mankind?)

Useful in which way? Supporting the happy life (pleasure and not pain) of many
( eudaimonistic ethics: eudaimonia: happiness
Hedonistic ethics: hedone pleasure)

Most prominent examples for a consequentialist, eudaimonistic ethics: utilitarianism)

Question 8

Act and rule: two variants of utilitarianism (smart, Brandt, Urmson)

Answer 8

Act utilitarianism
“It is the greatest good to the greatest number of people which is the measure of right and wrong” (Jeremy Bentham)
Whether an act is good or bad depends on the consequences of this act
Act utilitarianism is an extreme form of utilitarianism, because every single action has to be evaluated
However, practically impossible to calculate the benefits of every consequence of every action

Rule utilitarianism (Urmson)
An individual act is right, if it is in line with a moral rule, it is wrong if it contradicts a moral rule
A moral rule is correct, if it can be shown that following this rule every ally increases pleasure
The rule increases the probability that the consequences of such acts that do not contradict this rule, will be beneficial

Question 9

Four principles of utilitarianism

Answer 9

1. Consequences
   Consequences of an action determine their moral quality
   Actions with positive consequences are good
   Intentions of actors are irrelevant
2. Utility
   Criterion for the evaluation of consequences: utility
   Actions are good if their consequences are useful for.. (For whom?!)
3. Hedonism
   What is utility?
   Increase of happiness, decrease of suffering
   Bentham: no differentiation between levels of happiness
   Mill: differentiation between different levels of happiness (creativity, social, mental happiness; food, sexuality)
4. Universality
   Consequences on all people have to be taken into account
   Everybody to count for one, and nobody for more than one (Bentham)

Question 10

Five critiques against utilitarianism

Answer 10

Measuring happiness
Pleasure and happiness are impossible to measure

Knowledge of consequences
We cannot know all the consequences of our actions, so we can only make probabilistic judgements about the rightness of actions

Counterintuitive implications
Utilitarianism has counterintuitive implications ( e.g. Sacrificing one to save many)

Focus on bottom line
Utilitarianism’ snot sensitive to facts about how goodies are distributed, only the bottom line matters

Reductionism
Utilitarianism reduces moral values to happiness, utility, pleasure . g.E. Moore : everything is what it is and not another thing.” Moral values are morL values and nothing else.

Question 11

Jeremy Bentham

Answer 11

Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) seen as the founder of modern utilitarianism

Advocated individual freedom, the separation of church and state , equal rights for women, animal rights, legality of homosexual acts, abolition of slavery,the death penalty and physical punishment of children

Teacher of James mill (father of j. S. Mill)

Often described as a strange kid, started studying Latin at the age of three

Corresponded with many influential people: Adam smith, French revolutionaries, Latin American independence movement

Strongly believed in hedonistic foundation of ethics
Human beings are characterized by two states: pleasure and suffering
Human being always try to maximize pleasure and to minimize suffering
Therefore an action is good, if it increases pleasure and decreases suffering

Question 12

John Stuart mill

Answer 12

John Stuart mill (1806-1873) was one of the most prominent english philosopher and an active politician (liberal party)
He focused on liberty, the right of opposition, utilitarian ethics, and the theory of science
With eight years he had already read a large part of Classical Greek philosophers

Influenced by Jeremy Bentham, and his wife Harriet Taylor (advocacy of women’s rights), mill influenced Bertrand Russell

Political fight for the proportional electoral system, women’s rights, labor unions, social reforms and the easing of the burdens on Ireland, and the extension of suffrage
Most important writings: on liberty, utilitarianism

Question 13

Deontological ethics

Answer 13

Good is what is in accordance with a principle that has been recognized as right
(Deontological ethics: where does this principle come from? Which rules:principles could that be?)

Do consequences matter? No!
(What about actions with negative consequences? “One has to be good and for the rest await”)

We shod act according to our duty!
( duty ethics: deontological ethics)

Most prominent example for deontological ethics: Kantian categorical imperative

Question 14

The categorical imperative

Answer 14

Imperative
An imperative is a command. So, pay your taxes! Is an imperative, as are “stop kicking me “ and “don’t kill animals”

Hypothetical imperatives
These imperatives command conditionally on your having a relevant desire. E.g. If you want to go to medical school, study biology in college.” If you don’t want to go to medical school, this command doesn’t apply to you.

Categorical imperatives
These command unconditionally. E. G. “Don’t cheat on your taxes” even if you want to cheat and doing so would serve your interests, you may not cheat.

Maxime
Individual / subjective principle (the rule on which I act). Therefore: one should act according to one’s own subjective principles, but those should be generalizable, without resulting in a situation where I actually want something that I cannot want.

Right action
Right actions are those that are in accordance with the duty to act according to the categorical imperative.

Question 15

Kantian ethics- a short overview

Answer 15

Consequences are not relevant : certain types of actions (murder, theft, lying) are absolutely prohibited, even in cases where the action would bring about more happiness than the alternative.

Two basic questions: for kantians, there are two questions that we must ask ourselves whenever we decide to act:
Can I rationally will that everyone act as I propose to act? If the answer is no, then we must not perform the action.
Does my action respect the goals of human beings rather than merely using them for my own purposes? (Kant believes that these questions were equivalent)

Categorical imperative
Kant believes that there was a supreme principle of morality, and he referred to it as the categorical imperative, that determines what our moral duties are

Question 16

Kant’s categorical imperative

Answer 16

The categorical imperative is this only a single one, and specifically this: act only in accordance with that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it become a universal law.

You are not allowed to do anything that you would not be willing to allow everyone else to do as well.

Example; if I wanted to lie to get something I wanted, I would have to be willing to make it the case that everyone lied to get what they wanted but if this were to happen no one would ever believe you, so the lie would not work and you would not get what you wanted. So, if you willed that such a maxim (for lying) should become a universal law, then you would thwart your goal- this it is impermissible to lie, it is impermissible because the only way to lie it to make an exception for yourself.

Question 17

The procedure of the categorical imperative

Answer 17

Maxim
For any action you are considering, formulate its maxim where a maxim is simply a sentence expressing your intention (let me make this promise, intending not to keep it)

Universality
Put that maxim in a universal form (eg let everyone make promises, intending not to keep them)

no contradiction
See if, as a rational being, you can will that maxim. (In this case you can’t, because Trying to will this Maxim is like Trying to will a contradiction. You are trying to will that true promising continues (else your false promise oils not be advantageous) and that true promising ceases(everyone is to make promises intending not to keep them.)

Question 18

The right intention

Answer 18

Suppose we evaluate a person as morally good for performing a good act (saving a drowning child)

Suppose we did not know that the person did what he/she did out of self-interest (to get publicity or money)

Is this like to change our evaluation of the act or of the person?

Kant: an action is right only if actor acts with right intention (taking into account Cl and not personal wellbeing)