Week 2

Question 1

what is meta-ethics and what are the differences between meta-ethics, ethics and action?

Answer 1

• the fundamental belief and/or knowledge that contextualizes your ethical beliefs
  1. Meta-ethics = pure theory about right & wrong
  2. Ethics = deciding what is right/wrong in situations
  3. Action = following through

Question 2

meta-ethics characteristics (3)

Answer 2

• talking about ethics - not ethical issues (theory not application)
• takes place “outside” ethics - before an ethical discussion about a situation can start
• foundations of your ethical beliefs (there must be consistency)

Question 3

examples of meta-ethical questions

Answer 3

• what is right and wrong?
• how can someone know right from wrong?
• where does moral authority come from?

Question 4

specific meta-ethical example: realism vs. anti-realism

Answer 4

Realism: universal truth exists out side of the mind
Anti-realism: denies that universal truth exists
- your meta-ethical perspective helps you guide your ethical beliefs and actions

Question 5

what is passivism?

Answer 5

people who stick to their beliefs in terms of exception

Question 6

what is ethics? and whats an example of an ethical question?

Answer 6

• the discipline or fields of study itself - working with Theory on issues
• doing/engaging in ethics
• “inside” ethics
• is abortion an ethical medical practice?

Question 7

1. Ethical/unethical - what is it?

2. what do ethical positions need?

Answer 7

1. Judgement of action through thought
   - some things have a scale demand on us
2. ethical positions need to have some sort of justification attached to it (reasons and logic)

Question 8

what is morality?

Answer 8

the public opinion about ethical issues - about the right and wrong

Question 9

basic distinctions in ethical thinking: Health sciences deal with.. and why is it conflicting

Answer 9

• matter of fact: have evidence that points to the truth and can build up a case
• matter of values: describing features which are observable to all people
• conflicting bc one could be true (fact) but the value is different

Question 10

“can-to-should” fallacy & example

Answer 10

• if we have ways of controlling thing we feel like we should use it but need to look at the negative possibilities too
• just cause we have it doesn’t mean we have to use it
• Ex. we can keep someone alive with PVS (a matter of fact) therefore we should keep them alive (matter of value)

Question 11

statements of value - what don’t they come with and what 2 varieties are there?

Answer 11

• dont come with statements of truth or falsity
  1. Aesthetic: aesthesis - to do with the senses
  2. moral

Question 12

whats the difference between ethics and law? give example

Answer 12

Law: what is political - law and morality have stuff in common
Ex. Rosa Parks
- legally she did nothing wrong but ethically people saw what she was doing was wrong
- - ethical opinions were different can trump

Question 13

what is descriptive ethics?

Answer 13

• concerned with describing ethical behaviour

- attempts to determine what is as a matter of sociological or psychological fact, we morally do or say

Question 14

what is prescriptive ethics?

Answer 14

• concerned with prescribing behaviour
• attempts to determine what as a matter of obligation, we morally ought to do
• prescribing what SHOULD be happening

Question 15

what are the 3 meta-ethical approaches?

Answer 15

1. ethical objectivism
2. ethical relativism
3. ethical non-cognitvism

Question 16

what is ethical objectivism?

Answer 16

• things are morally right or wrong depending on the moral facts involved
• moral statements are true or false depending on if they “correspond” with those moral facts
• correspondence exists independently of our subjective personal and cultural opinions

Question 17

what are the 4 reasoning in ethical objectivism?

Answer 17

1. know them
2. speak meaningfully about them
3. reason about them
4. resolve disagreements by appeal to them

Question 18

what are the 3 tenets of objectivism? and explain them

Answer 18

1. cognitivist: there is an ethical reality we can know and speak about meaningfully
2. rationalist: ethical disputes can be rationally resolved by logic and reasoning
3. Absolutist: there is an objective right or wrong answer for every ethical question.

Question 19

what is ethical naturalism vs. non-naturalism? provide an example

Answer 19

ethical naturalism: moral facts are natural facts just like any other. They are observable, measurable features of the natural world
non-naturalism: moral facts but they aren not observable features of the natural world (require specialized intuition)
Ex.
“morally good” is what makes us happy (naturalism)
“morally good” is what God commands (non-naturalism)

Question 20

what is ethical relativism

Answer 20

• ethical statements are not objectively true or false in virtue of their correspondence with objective moral facts
• they are true or false relative to a particular subjective point of view
• ethical statements are cognitively meaningful but only relatively so
• True or false relative to the structure and context in which the statement exists

Question 21

what are the 3 scopes of ethical relativism?

Answer 21

ethical statements are true or false relative to a particular:

1. person
2. culture or society
3. historical or situational context

Question 22

what is non-cognitivism?

Answer 22

• ethical utterances are not really statements that can be validates
• they do not assert anything objectively true or false, they assert your opinion on the issue
• everything is just a feeling

Question 23

why ethical theory? and how does it provide moral guidance? (4)

Answer 23

• too bring perspective to experience
  To provide moral guidance:
  1. clear
  2. rational: you have reasons you can articulate why something is good and bad
  3. systematic: for similar situations you should be able to come to similar conclusions
  4. defensible

Question 24

what are the requirements for ethical theory? (3)

Answer 24

1. Epistemological Requirements
   - based on evidence
   - accountable to evidence
   - every moral judgement has to be driven by some level of experience, understanding or knowledge
2. logoical requirements
   - consistent
   - like cases should be treated in the same way unless new information is learned
   - intent is a variable that makes a difference
3. Practical requirements
   - must be liveable: you can actually do something
   - “ought” implies “can”: doesn’t mean its easy it means its doable

Question 25

who is Peter Singer? what does he believe and whats the problem with it? and how did he contradict himself?

Answer 25

• utilitarian: promoting the greatest good to the greatest number of people
• includes animals that can function at a high cognitive level

Problem with it..

• human who wasn’t functioning at a high level isn’t involved in this?
• Spent a lot of money on his mother’s care who had late stage Parkinson’s disease - which is directly opposite of his writings (so technically in writing’s she shouldn’t be treated as a person)

Question 26

what is psychological egoism?

Answer 26

• descriptive
• no matter what you say, people will do what’s best for them
• even if its wrong people will be selfish
• if theres a situation where it doesn’t give us a positive feedback it may stop us from wanting to do the right thing again (doesn’t mean it still isn’t right)

Question 27

what is ethical egoism

Answer 27

• prescriptive
• normative
• selfishness is a good idea and necessity
• here’s the direction you should take to deal with an ethical problem

Question 28

who is Ayn Rand and why is he important?

Answer 28

• proponent of ethical egoism
• what is good for each individual is what is ethical for them to do
• “be your own here”
• if we all did what was best for us the overall effect would be improvement in human welfare
  (focussing on others will cause the sys to break down)

Question 29

the Darley-Batson Good Samaritan Experiment

Answer 29

• They were told they were going to do a lecture on the Good Samaritan
• They were sent out on Sunday and introduced 1 variable: people were looked injured on the path that they were going to take on the parish (2 groups: 1 was told they were late and to hurry and the other group was told that they had time)
• The ones who were late ignored the person in need
• The ones who weren’t late stopped and helped (not 100% tho)
• “I’m going to be late so I cant stop to help”
• They didn’t help even tho they spent weeks studying the story

Question 30

what is the criticism of the psychological egoism - Simon Blackburn - “irrefutability”

Answer 30

• Irrefutable: any scientific theory cannot be irrefutable
• To say you are self-interested creates a logical loop in which you say you aren’t self-interested and the other says “you would like to think that”
• Selfishness is a strong motivator in human behaviour

Question 31

Bobby Sands

Answer 31

• Refused to be a prisoner and went on a hunger stroke and died
• Starved himself to death on a principle
• Chose to be miserable and wasn’t going to enjoy any of the benefits of the cause
• Seems like the most selfless act? No benefits or fate waiting for him from what we believed

Question 32

classical conditioning

Answer 32

• Do something in private that’s good you still get some sort of feeling
• Neuroscience people think that if you can get rid of the dopamine reinforcement you can get rid of the impulse to do good
• You can take people who do good things and get rid of that by introducing negative reinforcement

Question 33

what is moral distress and give example

Answer 33

• Psychological state of really ill wellbeing
  Ex.
• They know their obligations as nurses involve but circumstances beyond their control make doing the job beyond their control impossible

Question 34

what is moral integrity?

Answer 34

• you know whats right and you stand up for it even in the face of consequences