exam 2 Flashcards
consequentialism
individuals ought to behave in ways that will bring about good consequences, different theories differ on who should benefit from these consequences
Utilitarianism
individuals ought to act in the interest of all concerned
Ethical egoist approach to embezzling money from work
Should John embezzle money from work?
- no because I‛ll get caught or have to move away from my family to a non-extradition
country.
Utilitarian approach to embezzling money from work
Should John embezzle money from work?
- no because I will harm the company, its employees, and its stockholders
Psychological Egoism
is a theory about how humans behave psychologically, this means the theory attempts to describe how human nature is, i.e. it is a descriptive theory
scientific/descriptive approach to egoism.
not an ethical theory.
strong form of psychological egoism
people always act in their own self-interest, we are psychologically predisposed to do so
weak form of psychological egoism
people often, but not always, act in their own self-interest
falsification
the scientific mandate that you must try to disprove a theory, and if you cannot do so, then it must be (more or less) true (Karl Popper)
Karl Popper
man of falsification
Naturalistic Fallacy/ weak form of psychological egoism
trying to get an ought (prescriptive) from an is (descriptive).
* There is no logical argument that conclusively proves that because people are behaving in
certain ways, they ought to do so or continue to do so. ex. am cheating wife, should continue cheating on wife
3 drawbacks of strong form of psychological egoism
- It is not falsifiable.
- They are theorizing if those are not indeed my (and your) motives. It is presumptuous for psychological egoists to argue that I always act in my own self-
interest, especially if I can find one counterexample of not having done so. - When all else fails, they often retreat to the position, that people always do what they
really want to do. If people “want” to perform a so-called unselfish act, then they are not really being
unselfish because they are doing what they actually want to do.
ethical egoism
normative ethical theory, we ought to behave selfishly. selfish as [1] self-preservation and [2] self-gratification.
e.g. Thomas Hobbes.
ethical egosim guy
Thomas hobbes
individual egoism
claims that everyone else ought to act in MY own best self-interest.
personal ethical egoism
claims that I ought to act in my own self-interest, but that I make no claims
about what anyone else ought to do.
Universal ethical egoism
claims as its basic principle that everyone should always act in his/her own
best self-interest, regardless of the interests of others, unless their
interests also serve his/hers.
problems with personal and individual ethical egoism
- There are serious problems with both, in that they apply only to one individual and cannot
be laid down for humanity in general.
- This is a real drawback since morality (or moral systems) should be applied to all human
beings. - There are problems associated with promulgating (laying out or setting forth) either of
these forms of ethical egoism.
- It probably would not be in the interest of the Individual or Personal egoists to state
their theory at all, because that might anger other people and thus thwart their own self-
interest. - Shouldn‛t a moral system be consistent?
* If a person has to propound one moral theory while knowingly and purposely operating
under another, then they are being inconsistent.
* How moral can this system be if it cannot be laid out for others to see? - Another moral problem with such individualistic systems is that they fail to take into
account the fact that humans are not isolated from each other, and that the moral and
immoral actions of all persons affect other people around them.
* These 2 versions of egoism are good only for 1 person and may not even be beneficial for
that individual, especially if anyone else finds out that they are really operating under
such a system.
* So these views of egoism are not impossible to hold, but they are highly suspect as valid
moral theories.
universal ethical egoism people
All individuals should always act in their own self-interest (i.e. universal egoism).
ex) Epicurus, Ayn Rand, Jesse Kalin, John Hospers.
Advantages of universal ethical egoism
1) It‛s Easier to Determine Self-Interest
- It is much easier for individuals to know what their own interests are then it is for them
to know what is in the best interest of others.
2) It Encourages Individual Freedom and Responsibility
- Egoists need only to consider their own self-interest and then take responsibility for
their actions.
3) Limitations To These Advantages
- Ethical egoism can work successfully, but it has severe limitations.
– Limit 1= the theory will work best as long as people are operating under relative isolation,
thereby minimizing the occasions for conflict among their self-interests.
– Limit 2= some principle of justice or compromise must be brought in, and it would probably
not be in everyone‛s self-interest. At this point egoists must become:
[1] utilitarians, or
[2] play their nonmoral game by telling people what they should do while hoping they
won‛t in fact do it.
* The real and immediate problem with egoism is that we do not live in self-sufficient
communities.
man defending universal ethical egoism
Jesse Kalin‛s In Defense of Egoism
man hating on universal ethical egoism
Brian Medlin‛s Ultimate Principles and Ethical Egoism
problems with universal ethical egoism
- Inconsistency
- Universal is inconsistent because you cannot state your position (as a universal ethical
egoist), since it is not in your self-interest to do so. You are acting in your own self-interest, which is not acting in my self-interest.
* It would not be in my interest to tell you that you should act in your own self-interest. - What is Meant by Everyone
- What do egoists mean when they state that everyone ought to act in their own self-
interest?
* Your self-interest and my self-interest are in conflict. How do we resolve this conflict? Great compromise is not the in the best interests of slaves
3) Difficulty in Giving Moral Advice
- Such advice is inconsistent, in that I should do what is in my own self-interest but must
advise you to act either in mine interest or in your‛s.
4) Blurring the Moral and Nonmoral Uses of Ought and Should
- “Ought” vs. “is” distinction.
* “Ought” and “should” are not always moral, there is a nonmoral sense.
ex) Instructions.
You should insert A into slot B.
* For Jesse Kalin: Should and ought mean no more than they would mean when applied to a
game or the directions for assembling something.
ex) Jesse says to Brian:
“You should kill me because I stand in the way of your having my wife, and it is in your
self-interest for you to do so, but because it is not in my self-interest for you to do so, I
hope you don‛t.”
* It is not incompatible with what Jesse says he thinks ought to be, but it is a strange
moral system that actually states what its advocate really does not want.
5) Inconsistent with Helping Professions
- Being inconsistent with helping professions is a criticism of ethical egoism in any of its
forms.
* It does not provide the proper ethical basis for people who are in the helping professions.
* They are in it for their own self-interest to some point.
jesse kailin’s response to difficulty in giving moral advice vs brain medlin’s critiques
- I should act in my own best interest.
You should act in your own best interest. - I should advise you to act in your own self-interest.
- But I need not want you to act in your own self-interest.
ex) Jesse and Brian are playing chess:
Jesse seeing that Brian could move his (Brian‛s) bishop and put Jesse‛s king in check,
believes that Brian ought to move his (Brian‛s) bishop but doesn‛t want him to, need not
persuade him to, and indeed “ought to sit there quietly, hoping he (Brian) does not move as
he (Brian) ought”. - Then Universal suffers the same problems as Individual and Personal, that what people
ought to do cannot be promulgated (i.e. presented for all to see). - That is, we have an ethical system that has to be secret, otherwise it will violate its own
major tenet: self-interest.
Brian Medlin:
[1] “But is not to believe that someone should act in a certain way, to try to persuade
him to do so? Does it make sense to say, ‘Of course you should do this, but… don‛t?‛”
[2] Without this logic, ethical systems amount to no more than mere abstract ideals
that their proponents hope will not actually be carried out.
[3] If Kalin is correct, Universal ethical egoism claims to be a moral system that is
based on the nonmoral- its rules actually have no more moral import than the rules
of a chess game or the directions for assembling a toy.
another name for universal ethical egoism
Rational ethical egoism
Ayn Rand
claims that the self-interests of rational human beings, by virtue of their being rational, will never conflict.
act utilitarianism
everyone should perform that act which will bring about the greatest
amount of good over bad for everyone affected by the act.
strength of act utilitarianism
Supplemental Strengths of Act Utilitarianism:
1. It has benevolence as a foundational principle.
2. It is rational (survey, predict, calculate).
3. It utilizes situational decision-making.
Weaknesses of Act Utilitarianism:
Supplemental Weaknesses of Act Utilitarianism:
1. It is incommensurable values.
2. It fails to recognize special obligations.
3. It fails to recognize supererogation.
4. It is inconsist.
5. It is unjust.
6. It over utilizes a cost-benefit analysis (or the end-justifies-the-means approach).
criticisms of act utilitarianism
1) Difficulty of Determining Consequences for Others (i.e. Predicting the Future)
- It is very difficult to ascertain what will turn out to be good consequences for others.
2) Impracticality of Beginning Anew
- There is a certain impracticality in having to begin anew with each situation.
* Is each act and each person so unique? ex. Don’t kill, except in self defense.
3) Difficulty of Educating the Young or Uninitiated
- How is one to educate the young or uninitiated to act morally if there are no rules or
guides to follow.
Rule utilitarianism
everyone should always establish and follow that rule, or those rules,
that will bring about the greatest good for all concerned.
strenghts of rule Ulit
- It is benevolent (like Act Utilitarianism).
- It is rational (survey, predict, calculate) [like Act Utilitarianism].
- It is consistent (like Duty Ethics).
- It is just/fair (like Duty Ethics).
- It can recognize special obligations (like Duty Ethics).
weaknesses of rule uliti
- It does not utilize situational decision-making (but it can be flexible w/ exception clause).
- It suffers from incommensurable values (like Act Utilitarianism).
- It fails to recognize supererogation (like Act Utilitarianism).
- It suffers from conflicting rules (like Duty Ethics).
rule ulitiraims cricques
1) Difficulty of Determining Consequences for Others (i.e Predicting the Future)
2. The Cost-Benefit Analysis Approach- A Problem for Utilitarianism
triage
doctors focus on who they can save, cost benefit
ethics
he branch of philosophy concerned with principles that allow us to make decisions
about what is right (and wrong).
= also known as moral philosophy.
bioethics
is specifically concerned with moral principles and decisions in the context of
medical practice, policy, and research.
5 major ethical theories vs 3 with no principles
There are 5 major ethical theories: [1] Utilitarianism,
[2] Duty Ethics,
[3] Prima Facie Duties,
[4] Rawls‛ theory of justice, and
[5] Natural Law Ethics and Moral Theology.
the three
1] Virtue Ethics,
[2] Care Ethics, and
[3] Feminist ethics.
classical ulit
hapiness is the sole value
calculus of pressure
when surveying, predicting, and calculating a means (or methodology)
of conducting said calculation is required.
= uses the characteristics of (1) intensity, (2) duration, (3) certainty,
(4) propinquity, (5) fecundity, (6) purity, (7) extent, and (8) number
of people affected to measure and assign numerical values to each
predict (or alternative) option (within the prediction).
propinquity
the state of being close to someone (or something); proximity.
Fecundity
the ability to produce an abundance new growth, or the ability to produce
many new ideas.
Teleology
from the Greek telos which means “end” or “goal”.
= a teleological ethical theory judges the rightness of an action in terms of an
external goal or purpose. catholic: the universe is structured in such a way that each thing in it has a goal or purpose.
Pluralistic ultut
critiques classical utilitarianism by claiming that we recognize
more things as being intrinsically valuable; things like
(1) knowledge, (2) beauty, (3) love, (4) friendship, (5) liberty,
and (6) health.
preference ulity=
a moral theory in which the good consists in the satisfaction of
people‛s preferences.
= it values actions that fulfill the greatest amount of personal
interests, as opposed to classical utilitarianism that values
actions that generated the greatest amount of pleasure.
= also known as preferentialism, which is a distinct form of
utilitarianism in contemporary philosophy.
utilitarianism difficulties
One fatal flaw (in the structure of the entire theory) is that the principle of utility
appears to justify the imposition of great suffering on a few people for the benefit of
many people.
* Clearly, what is missing from utilitarianism is the concept of justice.
deontological theories
are based on motives or the act itself; not on consequences.
= there are 2 categories: [1] act deontological.
[2] rule deontological.
act deontology
makes the major assumption that there are no general moral values or theories at all.
= there are only particular actions, situations, and people about which we cannot generalize.
= i.e., this approach is non-cognitive!
= we must approach each situation individually as a 1 of a kind and somehow
decide what is the right action to take in that situation.
emotive theory
also called [1] emotivism, [2] prescriptivism, or [3] boo-hurrah theory.
= states that ethical words and sentences really do only 2 things:
[1] Express people‛s feelings and attitudes.
[2] Evoke or generate certain feelings and attitudes in others.
= claims that moral utterances do not have a truth value, but expresses
the feelings of the speaker.
rule deontological
claims that there are or can be rules that are the only basis for
morality, and that consequences do not matter.
The (human) good
what is suitable (or proper) to human nature or our natural inclinations.
* (That is, according to Aquinas) the human good is that which is suitable (or proper) to
human nature.
natural inclinations
in human being, they are made up of (1) self-preservation, (2) that
others are valuable (or ends), (3) requires that our society achieves
development, so that we must support that goal, (4) the
propagation of our species, (5) procedural principles, and (6) we are
inclined to seek the truth.
double effect
when an act produces both a good and bad effect, this principle claims
that the act should be performed only for the intention to bring about the
good effect, and the bad effect will be an unintended (or indirect)
consequence.
= there are 4 conditions that must be satisfied:
1. the action itself must be morally indifferent or morally good.
2. the bad effect must not be the means by which the good effect is
achieved.
3. the motive must be the achievement of the good effect only.
4. the good effect must be (at least) equivalent in importance to the bad
effect.
totality
an individual has a right to dispose of their organs, or to destroy their capacity
to function, only to the extent that the general well-being of the whole body
demands it. For example, even cosmetic surgery is morally right only when it is required to maintain
(or ensure) the normal functioning of the rest of the body. More important, procedures
that are typically employed for contraceptive purposes (e.g. vasectomies and tubal
ligations) are ruled out. Thus, the totality principle forbids the sterilization of the
mentally retarded.
kan’t duty ethics
a type of rule deontological theory formulated by Immanuel Kant.
= defines the moral rightness or wrongness of an act in terms of the intrinsic
value of the act.
= our duty to perform an act (or to refrain from doing it) is based on the
nature of the act itself and not on its consequences.
= an ethical theory stating that one should act in accordance with one‛s duties
and obligations.
= i.e., Kantian duty-based ethics claims that some things should never be done,
no matter what good consequences they produce.
requirements of absolute moral truths kant
- must be logically consistent
- must be universal
kant categorial impreative
act is immoral if it cannot be made into a universal rule or law, must act universally
hypothetical imperative kant
also called the practical imperative.
= never treat anyone as merely a means.
= no individual should be thought of or used merely as a means for
someone else‛s end.
= each individual is a unique end in themself, and is worthy of
respect and dignity.
critereon of reversibility
if an action were reversed, would a person want it to be done for them?
