Ubuntu Moral Theory Flashcards
why African ethics?
we can start from the plausibility of an “African Moral Weltanschauung”as reason for why ethicists would want to study ethics exclusively
What is an African Weltanschauung?
-how African people cognitively relate to African cultural beliefs, social institutions, other African people, practices and moral values
-an African way of life defined through experiencing the world primarily through African culture and community
-aspect of social reality shaped differently for Africans as it is for European or Asian people
what are the claims made by Kwame Gyekye when speaking of an African Ethics?
he asserts that Africa has its own Moral Worldview:
-there are many common trends in the moral traditions and moral practices of African people
-there is a possibility that they can be synthesized or prominently held enough to be considered unified and representative of an African morality
what worldview or Weltanschauung would we consider Ubuntu to be?
South African Moral Weltschauung
-from this the commonsense moral beliefs in South Africa can be unified and represented in a moral theory or principle that all South(ern) Africans ought to follow given that it emerges from their moral worldview
what are the common understandings of Ubuntu?
a person is a person through other people
what are the two meanings that Ubuntu can have?
- Metaphysical meaning
- Normative meaning
Metaphysical meaning
Your identity or ontological status as a person is dependent on your community
Normative meaning
one ought to maintain a certain kind of relationship with ones community to be considered a good person
what is problematic about the normative meaning?
The vague normative meaning is insufficient to guide human action, which is why we need a more explicit moral principle of Ubuntu
what is reflective equilibrium?
Reflective Equilibrium is the rational process of matching out background assumptions, considered moral judgments(moral intuitions) and the proposed moral principles.
-we attempt to make these coherent with each other, reworking the elements that need to be revised to achieve coherence between the moral intuitions, the moral principle under consideration and background assumptions about morality
what must be consistent when developing the Ubuntu Moral Principle?
- Considered Judgments
- Moral Principle- the central ethical claim taken to make up Ubuntu/ Proposed Ubuntu Moral Principle
- Background assumptions about morality
Building an Ubuntu Moral Principle
In building the Ubuntu Moral Theory we are developing an UM principle that can account for the moral intuitions and commonly held understanding of Ubuntu, and out background assumptions about morality
what are some of the moral intuitions that Ubuntu has to account for?
what are the 4 attempts at producing an Ubuntu Moral Principle
- An action is right insofar as it promotes the well-being of others without violating the rights of others
- An action is right just insofar as it helps you perfect your nature as a social being
- An action is right insofar as it is aimed at the support of the most vulnerable in the community
- An action is right if it produces harmony and reduces discord in the community and an act is wrong if it fails to develop community
Explain option 1
An action is right insofar as it promotes the well-being of others without violating the rights of others; an action is wrong to the extent that it either violates rights or fails to enhance the welfare of ones fellows without violating rights
critique of option 1
-many duties of communal welfare will conflict with individual rights meaning that duties would trump individual rights
-the focus on well being might be problematic because unanimity, cooperation, tradition, while being morally desirable by people who share the Southern African Weltanschauung, might not be good at maximizing well being
Explain Option 2 for the UMP
An act is right just insofar as it positively relates to others and helps one realize oneself as a social being; an act is wrong if it does not help perfect one nature as a social being
Does this achieve Reflective equilibrium?
no it does not
-this version of Ubuntu suggest that you should help someone because it is good and helps you become a better person through community
- self realization as a motive displaces the importance of being motivated to act for the sake of community which is particularly important
Explain option 3
An act is right in so far that it is in solidarity with vulnerable groups, an act is wrong if it fails to support a vulnerable community
-some consider that we ought to prioritize collective unity to ensure that we care for the most vulnerable in our society
critique of option 3
-this understanding of Ubuntu is too narrow to be an acceptable moral principle (contra Background Assumptions)
-it only says that we should focus on the destitute as opposed to everyone we are in community with
-there is more to morality than ensuring survival
-this will not not account for the moral importance of other values like unanimity, cooperation or tradition
which option does Metz consider to be the most promising formulation of the Ubuntu Moral Principle
Option 4
Option 4
An action is morally right if it produces harmony or togetherness and reduces discord in the community. An action is morally wrong if it fails to develop community
-One ought to act in ways that promote harmony and reduce discord in the community
what type of principle of UMP according to Metz?
-deontological
- it tells us what the moral rule or maxim we ought to act by
what is the Ubuntu Moral Principle
An action is morally right if it promotes harmony or togetherness and reduces discord between people in community
An action is morally wrong if it goes against harmony in the community
What does the Ubuntu Moral Principle mean?
-final version puts social harmony to the forefront
-we are morally required to do everything we can to promote community and togetherness amongst a people
What are the moral duties the arise from Ubuntu according to the UMP
-one ought to hold morally sacrosanct the relations between people they are in community in
-one ought to do that which nurtures or is consistent with the relations of interdepedence between people in community with each other
According to Metz what does harmony or togetherness consist of?
it is a combination of two things:
1. Shared identity
2. Good will
How does shared identity contribute to the moral imperative of harmony or togetherness
togetherness in a community requires that you see yourself and others see you as part of the same community
-this involves partaking in a common identity
what moral value does shared identity have?
To consider your shared identity to have moral value you think of yourself in terms of your relation to that group and adopt its collective ends (common goals) as your own
-these collective ends become the most important ends for the moral agent such that they will see it as their moral duty to achieve these community ends
other moral qualities of shared identity
- a shared identity by itself cannot be an inherent moral good (Nazis)
- However shared identity by itself is insufficient to inform a moral duty to promote harmony or togetherness
How does Goodwill contribute to the moral imperative of promoting harmony or togetherness
-promoting harmony also involves acting in Goodwill which is about nurturing a caring and supportive relationship between people
What moral value does Goodwill involve
- wishing others well, believing others are deserving of help, intending to help others and act for the sake of others
-harmony or togetherness, incorporating goodwill, involves putting the needs of those you are in community with at the forefront to ensure collective flourishing
-promoting harmony also means investing in caring for the community you are a part of which is in the form of taking care of the needs of the community
the Ubuntu moral principle as the balanced promotion of shared identity and Goodwill
harmony promoted requires a combination of shared identity and goodwill:
- UMP therefore morally requires adopting collective ends of people you are in community with as your own (SI)
- UMP also puts forward a moral duty toward altruism geared toward collective flourishing (GW)
substantive version of Ubuntu Moral Principle which includes shared identity and goodwill
An action is morally right if it promotes a shared identity grounded in goodwill and discourages divisions and ill-will amongst people who are in shared identity with each other
example of intuitiveness of UMP
Black tax explained by the Ubuntu Moral Principle in the following ways:
-strong sense of investing in the ends of those you have a shared identity with
-strong sense of care(GW). An obligation to help others out and act in the communal interest especially those you are related to
-sense that it is morally right to invest in the flourishing of the community by ensuring that you maintain the collective dignity and welfare of the community
full definition of Ubuntu Moral Principle
an action is morally right if it produces harmony and reduces discord between people in community.That is an action is morally right if it promotes a shared identity and goodwill; and discourages divisions and ill will amongst people who are in shared identity with each other
Does UMP cohere with the key considered moral judgment about Ubuntu
yes:
-generosity, hospitability and friendliness are all moral goods that promote harmony
-a duty to promote the goodwill of your fellows is a significant component which explains why people should act generously, be hospitable and caring toward others
-inextricably bound humanity seems to suggest that there is a shared identity grounding a moral duty which fosters togetherness amongst people
does UMP match the moral intuitions of the Southern African Weltanschauung?
- it is immoral to make decisions for a community without first seeking consensus
-Unanimity can be morally required because of the moral demand of promoting togetherness
- It is immoral to seek retribution for crimes done as opposed to reconciliation
retribution can be explained as morally bad because it fosters resentment and divisions within the community
- it isolates members of the community which are contrary the duty to develop the community through harmony
- It is immoral to seek welfare for your own sake alone as opposed to seeking welfare cooperatively with your community
Black tax example:
Goodwill is an important moral good individuals ought to promote to ensure that the community, its interests and its ends are taken on as ones own
- it is immoral to ignore others and violate communal norms as opposed to acknowledging others, upholding tradition and partaking in rituals
We can explain the obligation to participate because it preserves a shared identity and is a way of acting in the morally good way of promoting ones community and its values
- It is immoral not to invest in the family unit
Investing in the family is a form of goodwill towards those you primarily share identity with
Lecture 3
Critiquing the Ubuntu Moral Principle
list the critiques of the Ubuntu Moral Principle
- The Extent Problem
- Are Moral Agents necessarily bound to act according to the UMP
- The Purity Problem
- The Focus Problem
- Agent Related Partiality Objection
The Extent Problem
-critiques shared identity aspect of UMP
- it asked “how far reaching is the UMP?”
-it worries about putting limitations on people we owe moral duties
- UMP as intra-community moral principle however, we are not in community with everyone we interact with
-do we then not owe others that we do not share an identity with moral duties of some kind
formalized Extent Problem
if UMP morally binds us only to the people e have a shared identity with then how do we account for moral duties the South African might have outside their community? Do we have any moral obligations towards those we are not in community with
response to the Extent Problem critique
An advocate of the UMP could expand UMP and argue that we are all in community as a human race. So the UMP ought to be applied universally. This would mean we are obligated to promote the GW of everyone
counter argument toward the response
The human race is too thin a relation to ground morality based on shared identity
-the universality undermines the intuition that Ubuntu applies strongly to those who are in close relation with
- Prioritization issues: promoting the goodwill of everyone in general might come at the expense of promoting the goodwill of a closer community with
- the promotion of the goodwill of all seems more supererogatory than morally required
- Are Moral agents necessarily bound to act according to the UMP?
The critique takes form of Reductio ad Absurdum argument:
1. The UMP is said to bind only those who share in the Southern African Weltanschauung
2. However, the Southern African Weltanschauung cannot plausibility exist given that people have more of a globalized Weltanschauung
3. Therefore, the sharing of a globalized worldview undermines the claim that South African moral agents have a special duty to act in accordance to the UMP
-This undercuts the deontological ‘necessary binding’ nature of the theory because why should one follow a moral principle that does apply to them given that you are a South African but share a globalized worldview
Response to the necessarily binding critique
We could abandon talk of a Southern African Worldview and maintain that Ubuntu is a moral principle arising from a general (universal) Worldview
Problems arise when claiming that UMP arises from a Global Weltanschauung
-undermines the basis of an African moral principle or theory
- it would consider many practices and norms Western societies consider morally permissible to be morally wrong (eg, individualism)
-saying that UMP emerges from a global worldview would essentially make it incompatible with some(non African) considered moral judgments that inform its conception and it may not even pass the reflective equilibrium anymore
- The Purity Problem
-challenge to the internal consistency of the UMP
-asks what if a bit of disharmony now will bring about more harmony later?
UMP can take one of two options:
1. we ought not to do a bit of disharmony, we then end up not promoting harmony(this undermines the purpose of UMP)
2. we ought to do a bit of disharmony, we would be doing the morally wrong thing for morally good reasons
-the pursuing or refraining from initial disharmony for the sake of latter harmony is in contradiction with the demands of UMP
-If we ought to promote harmony even if it results in disharmony, it makes Ubuntu a self defeating moral principle because there is no point to following a moral principle that is geared towards promoting harmony if following it ends up not promoting harmony
- The Focus Problem
-challenges the notion of close identity relation(shared identity)
-it asks is the fact of a close identity relation enough to justify making moral choices?
for example:
case of your drowning child
-what reasons ought to justify or inform why you should prioritize your daughters life over another child’s
-should your reasons be informed by considerations about her as an individual, like her soul or welfare or rights or should you be drawn merely by the fact that she is my daughter (parent-child relationship)
The Focus Problem formalized
According to Motsamal Molefe, UMP makes you act because of the relationship not because of that individuals interests or welfare
-UMP focuses on using wrong moral motivations for our actions
Responses to The Focus Problem
-Focusing on the individuals interests will not help us decide in the case of who to save in the case of two people drowning
-they could say that at least Ubuntu gives us a way to decide what to do, it gives us a moral reason to prioritize one person over another by saying that we should act on the basis of our shared identity
2 types of partiality
- other-centered partiality
- Agent centered partiality
- Other centered partiality
prioritizing ones special relationships in our moral actions
- Agent centered partiality
the prioritization of yourself and your own goals, aims and projects as an individual
- Agent Related Partiality Objection
states that the UMP requires a moral agent to be partial to others at the expense of prioritizing their own ends
-the objection appeals to the claim that there’s something morally important in allowing people to pursue their own ends and the UMP seems to often require that you put your own interests second
-UMP undermines the importance of the individuals self actualization, which can sometimes be inconsistent with the realization of the community
example in support of the Agent related objection
if you had a large sum of money should you invest it in your own studies or should you give it to a friend in need?
-UMP would say that you should invest the money in your friend on the account that you ought to do actions of goodwill in those I share identity with(special relationships like friendships). Under UMP, you have no explicit way to prioritize my own life projects in a situation here they conflict with the interest of the people I share identity with
-so the Agent Centred Partiality Objection is a demandingness objection, The UMP demands us to focus on others at the expense of oneself and ones personal goals
-the UMP therefore cannot account for the moral importance of an agent prioritizing himself, pursuing his own ends for his flourishing and self realization as a person.
Final Thoughts on the UMP
We can see that the UMP can explain many moral intuitions held by people who share in a southern African worldview and the considered judgments about Ubuntu as a normative worldview
However:
- it is unclear what we owe those who we are not in close relation to
-it is potentially too demanding in that it requires agents to prioritize the community and its interests over their own.
