Q1: What Makes People's Actions Right or Wrong? Flashcards
Introduction
- Understanding the moral fabric of human behaviour is a complex matter which many theorists argue differently about
- Ethics & morality is a branch of philosophy that addresses questions about ideas - e.g. right and wrong
- e.g. Deontologists (Kant, Rawls) and Consequentialists (Bentham, Mill)
- many theories such as Haidt’s theory of moral judgement and the role of mirror neurons in empathy
- this essay aims to explore these theories …
Deontologists
Kant & Rawls:
* ends do not justify the means
* Kant’s ‘categorical imperitive’:
-always tell the truth despite the consequences
-ethics should be based on moral principles & reason
Evaluation of Deontologists:
-theories are rigid / lack flexibility
-do not address moral dilemmas involving conflicting duties
Consequentialists:
Bentham & Mill:
* ends do justify the means
* emphasises the consequences of actions
* evaluates actions based on their outcomes
* can lie (if good outcomes)
* importance of utility (maximise utility/happiness)
-prioritise actions that have the most benefits
-use cost-benefit analysis
Evaluation of Consequentialists:
+theories offer adaptability
-may justify morally questionable actions if they lead to good outcomes for the majority
-challenge of comparing diff outcomes - e.g. could lead to biases or oversights
Transcendentalists:
Plato & Kant:
* morality is independent of human minds
* metaphysical underpinnings of morality
* universal truths governing ethical conduct
* Plato: morality derive from an abstract realm of ideal forms
* Kant’s transcendental idealism underscores reason’s role in discerning moral duties
Evaluation of Transcendentalists:
- lack of evidence
- lack of accessibility of such ‘truths’
- lack of capacity of reason to resolve moral conflicts effectively
Humanism:
Democritus, Hume, Dennett:
-
Democritus: morality comes from humans
-e.g. social norms, imitation, moral relativism - don’t want to be harmed, so don’t harm other
-morality comes partly from human nature - Hume’s moral sentimentalism: moral judgements come from sentiments like sympathy
Evaluation of Humanists:
-lack objective criteria for evaluating moral claims
-can be susceptible to cultural relativism (what is right in one culture, may be wrong in another)
Support for Humanist Approach:
Haidt’s (2001) Theory of Moral Judgement: (social intuitionist model)
* moral judgements are causeed by intuitive emotional responses which are shaped by evo & cultural factors
* supports Hume’s moral sentimentalism (MJs come from sentiments like sympathy)
* both theories challenge the traditional view of morality as solely rational & deliberative
Evaluation of Haidt’s (2001) theory
+offer valuable framework for understanding psych roots of morality
+Smith’s (1759) Theory of Moral Sentiments argue the same point
+Hume (1751): “morality is determined by sentiment”
-lacks evidence that certain moral attitudes are universal due to genetics (Tziporah & Saltzstein, 2008)
Biological evidence for morality:
Mirror neurons:
* evidence for empathy & social cognition
* activate during behaviour and observing others doing same behaviour
* neurons facilitate perspective-taking & emotional resonance
-therefore, influence moral decision making
Support for Mirror Neurons:
Iacoboni (2006):
* film clips & fMRI evidence
* MN activity in right posterior inferior frontal gyrus
* indicating identification & empathy
One Way to Improve Morality & Decision Making:
Virtue Ethics:
* emphasises virtues or moral character
* Hume (1739): artificial virtues (e.g. conform to social norms) vs natural virtues (e.g. innate & universal)
* Peterson & Seligman (2004): can identify your ‘‘signature’’ strengths & develop them
Evaluation of Virtue Ethics:
-Vitues alone are not enough:
* virtues should not be treated in isolation
* must decide which virtues apply in a given situation
