Test 2 Flashcards
A consequentialist ethic.
The ends (consequences) justify the means.
The greatest good for the greatest number.
A hedonistic calculus. Pleasure is good. Pain is bad.
Any action where the good outweighs the bad is morally defensible.
The good action is the most useful action.
Utilitarianism
Identify the possible action. Identify the goods (pleasures) produced. Identify the harms (pains) produced. Sum each side of the equation. Hence the action is justified the good consequences outweigh the bad.
Strict Utilitarian Calculus
An 18th and 19th century Englishman.
The father of Utilitarianism.
Jeremy Bentham
“Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is from them alone to point out what we ought to do…”
Bentham
19th century English philosopher.
Tries to deepen the meaning of pleasure beyond the “crude”, pleasure pain calculus of Bentham.
It is not mere decadence that should enter the calculus nor mere quantity, but also quality. (Different kinds of pleasure should be weighed more heavily.)
John Stuart Mill
“It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates satisfied than a fool satisfied.”
Although the pig is completely happy the quality of his happiness pales in comparison to that of even a dissatisfied human being.
Mill
There is something intuitive about considering the consequences of action.
We expect that right action will produce good results.
Flexible to the situation.
Hedonism seems plausible.
We do seem to enjoy/pursue pleasure and avoid pain.
Utilitarianism Appeals
How are we to quantify the good?
Limits to knowledge; how could we ever know enough to decide what the “greatest good” really is?
Implies that the line between cause and effect is clear, but that may not always be the case.
There is no intrinsically wrong actions, only good or bad results; can justify all kinds of evil, as long as the good produced outweighs the evil required.
Utilitarianism Criticized
Once one adopts a consequentialist attitude it may be very tempting to adopt an “ends justify the means” position but only apply it to yourself. (The greatest pleasure for me…by any means necessary)
Human beings will easily rationalize their own selfish behavior under the guise of utilitarianism.
If it Feels Good…Do It?
Far too pessimistic.
People can, with sound education and an emphasis on reason, learn to think about the greater good.
People are basically good. Many alleged moral problems are just “traditionalist hang-ups”.
Demands the greater good. Not mere pleasure for the self, but maximized pleasure.
Utilitarian Response to Criticism
Ethics is matter of rules or duties that flow from the rational recognition of intrinsic moral goods. (Tell the truth, don’t steal, etc.)
These truths can be either absolutely binding or conditionally binding. (A more pressing principle may usurp a lower principle.)
Deontological Ethics
18th Century German philosopher.
Categorical Imperative
Immanuel Kant
“Act only on that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it would become a universal law”
Translation: Any individual action - that could be defended if every one else followed suit - is defensible. (This is a product of reason not emotion)
If I can not recommend that everyone lie then I cannot defend my own lying.
1st Formulation of Categorical Imperative (Kant)
“So act as to treat humanity, whether in your own person or in that of any other, in every case as an end and never as a means only.”
Translation: Human being have inherent worth and should therefore never be used as a means to further some other ends.
2nd Formulation of Categorical Imperative (Kant)
Not wishy-washy.
Based on reason not emotion. (Principles matter not situations or outcomes)
Takes human beings seriously. (Human beings are ends in themselves not servants of the greatest good for the greatest number)
Strengths of Kant (Deontology)
Based of reason not emotion. (Should ethics be so cold? Shouldn’t feeling play a role? Why is duty supreme?)
Seems rigid and inflexible. (Is it alway wrong (categorically wrong) to lie? i.e. Telling your grandma her dress is ugly, Telling Nazis your hiding Jews in your basement, etc.)
Weaknesses of Kant (Deontology)
Intuitionism (We are intuitively aware of moral principles).
Our duties are prima facie duties that can be over-ridden in certain circumstances by other prima facie duties. (“Intrinsic value not dependent on circumstances, but application is” i.e. what are my relevant duties in this situation?)
Running the red light to get to the Hospital.
Is this moving us towards virtue ethics?
Modification of Kant
“Do unto other as you would have them do unto you”
Golden Rule
Not focused on rules or duties.
Not focused on outcomes or consequences.
Focused on the good, the excellent, the noble.
Character and maturity are the goals.
Sometimes called aretaic ethics from the Greek Arete meaning the “embodiment of excellence”
Virtue Ethics
Two different types of questions.
What should I do? What are my duties? vs. What sort of person should I be? What sort of character does the good person have?
Difference between Deontology and Virtue
Subordinates rules to human judgment without discounting the importance of rules.
“the law was made for man, not man for the law” (The rules are tools that help us see and understand the good. They are not themselves that good. People need to evaluate, understand, and embody the spirit of the rules not merely follow its letter.)
Emphasizes the importance of action, practice, and habit. (To understand the good and to be good are two different things.)
Strengths of Virtue Ethics
Doesn’t the abdication of rules and duties lend it to relativism?
How does one identify virtues? Aren’t all virtues derivative of duties (honesty: Tell the Truth).
Deontological Criticisms of Virtue Ethics
