JAMES RACHELS TYPES sycho|og|ca| ego|sm: a|| humans are se|hsh |n everyth|ng they do.the on|y monve from wh|ch anyone acts |s se|f -|nterest Lth|ca| ego|sm: humans have no ob||ganons to anyth|ng except what |s |n the|r own |nterest, humans ought to act |n the|r own |nterest, and peop|e are a|ways [usnhed |n acnng |n the|r own |nterests, regard|ess on the eects on others
REBUTTAL TO PSYCHOLOGICAL EGOISM This argument rests on the premise that people never voluntarily do anything except what they want to do. People only act as a means to an end. One may make a promise, and not want to keep it [e.g. help out with chores at home], and therefore acts in a way that one does not want to. However, the desire to keep promises is the end. ETHICAL EGOISM 1here |s no reason why a person shou|d act |n the |nterest of others I on|y need to th|nk about myse|f
REBUTTALS TO ETHICAL EGOISM It |s my advantage to ||ve |n a soc|ety |n wh|ch peop|e's r|ghts are respects, e.g. not ye|||ng "hre" |n a crowded theater, not stea||ng. Lth|ca| ego|sm |s not |og|ca||y cons|stent because the ego|sts ||ves se|hsh|y, but must encourage others to ||ve unse|hsh|y, or e|se her p|ans for happ|ness are defeated 1he pr|nc|p|e of eth|ca| ego|sm cannot be un|versa||zed GENUINE EGOISTS Wou|d have to say that they have no vested |nterest or care |n fr|ends, fam||y or others s]he wou|d have no sympathy or empathy 1h|s |nherent truth makes the doctr|ne d|sturb|ng to Iames kache|s J OHN ST UA RT MI L L THE PRINCIPLE OF UTILITY A|so known as "the greatest happ|ness pr|nc|p|e" napp|ness = p|easure nedon|snc |n nature Acnons are r|ght [mora||y correct] |n propornon as they tend to promote happ|ness 1hey are wrong |f they produce unhapp|ness THE GREATEST HAPPINESS PRINCIPLE Is the u|nmate end, w|th reference to a|| other th|ngs are des|rab|e It |s as far as poss|b|e from pa|n and as r|ch as poss|b|e |n en[oyments It must take |nto account a|| |nd|v|dua|s [an|ma|s |nc.], and not [ust the agent, to determ|ne |f an acnon |s eth|ca| 1he agent |s ob[ecnve OBJECTIONS 8e|ng a d|s|nterested character] ob[ecnve observer |s too h|gh a standard for humans eop|e w||| not a|ways act |n the best |nterest of soc|ety [human pop. growth] In each s|tuanon a person wou|d have to determ|ne a|| the costs and benehts MORE OBJECTIONS numans are |nherent|y awed and se|hsh 1he agent w||| want to make excepnons for her own case 1he |nterest of two d|erent peop|e w||| come |nto con|ct 1here are other ends of human acnon bes|des happ|ness THE CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE [DEONTOLOGICAL] Immanue| kant DUTY If a person who hates the|r ||fe, but neverthe|ess preserves |t acts |n conform|ty w|th duty, but not w|th the monve of duty 1he mora| worth of an acnon does not depend on the resu|t expected from |t 1he mora| worth of an acnon does not depend on any pr|nc|p|e or acnon that needs to borrow |ts monve from an expected resu|t
THE CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE
I ought never to act except |n a way that my max|m shou|d become a un|versa| |aw nypothenca| |mperanves cannot be |mag|ned w|thout a cond|non g|ven 8U1 categor|ca| |mperanves have known cond|nons A max|m g|ves us a sub[ecnve pr|nc|p|e of acnons and |s not an ob[ecnve pr|nc|p|e, or pracnca| |aw ILLUSTRATIONS Dunes of se|f and dunes of other can be d|v|ded |nto perfect and |mperfect categor|es A su|c|da| person wants to get r|d of the|r ||fe: what do they do? 1he |dea that ||fe shou|d destroy ||fe |s a contrad|cnon, and cannot be a system of nature 1h|s max|m cannot ho|d up THE END OF ITSELF Acnons must accord to the |dea of certa|n |aws numans ex|st as an end |n themse|ves, and not mere|y a means 1hey must a|ways be v|ewed as an end
CONCLUSION Act |n such a away that you a|ways treat human|ty [ranona| be|ngs] whether |n your own person, or |n the person of any others, never s|mp|y as a means, but a|ways at the same nme as an end DIVINE COMMAND THEORY St. 1homas Aqu|nas WHY WE NEED ABSOLUTES Religion is necessary for morality because without God there could be no right or wrong
God is to moral law what legislature to statutes
Without Gods commands there would be no moral rules
If morality is subjective, then we cannot criticize others, but if we say the Nazis were wrong, then we presuppose an objective standard of morality PROBLEMS? If we accept d|v|ne command theory, then whatever God dehnes as good |s good. 1oday murder |s wrong, tomorrow |t |s r|ght, 1oday |y|ng |s wrong, tomorrow |t |s a v|rtue. 1herefore God |s arb|trary. ON THE OTHER HAND If we w|sh to argue that God |s not arb|trary, then God has to appea| to a mora||ty outs|de of her] h|mse|f, God d|scovers mora||ty rather than |nvennng |t. 1h|s puts mora||ty above God, or more abso|ute or rea| than God. Aqu|nas: God cannot contrad|ct h|s] her d|v|ne omn|potence. !"#$%&'()*")%+* %$*+"-.-&/ Some say we can never understand another cu|ture except our own we|| enough to make [udgments about |t Mora| [udgments are on|y va||d |n the country or or|g|n Most peop|e th|nk th|s |s the most respecuu| way to approach other cu|ture [and re||g|ons] 8ut: 1h|s |s the root of mora| |so|anon|sm And Cu|tures [udge |ncom|ng cu|tures, as we|| as the |ncom|ng cu|tures [udge the present ones
BEHAVIORISM Comes from psychology Is the theory that human and animal behavior can be explained in terms of conditioning, without appeal to thoughts or feelings, and that psychological disorders are best treated by altering behavior patterns. Comes into conflict with nature versus nurture debates
FEMALE ETHICS In a back|ash to V|ctor|an |deo|ogy, some constructed that women were |ndeed equa| to men mora||y, and somenme even mora||y super|or to men Iema|e eth|c |nc|uded concern about the v|o|ent and destrucnve consequences to human ||fe un||ke patr|archa| he|ds ||ke war, po||ncs, and cap|ta||sm that crush some to ga|n the upper hand 8ut the fema|e eth|c |s |nseparab|e from the po|ar|zanon of ma|e and fema|e, [essenna||sm] wh|ch has a|ways |ed to the subord|nanon of women
THEORY OF JUSTICE numans must accept two bas|c pr|nc|p|es: Lqua| bas|c ||bernes and the arrangement of soc|a| and econom|c |nequa||nes 1hese two wou|d be accepted by ranona| humans |n a hypothenca| pos|nons |f they d|d not know any facts about themse|ves Cf course no soc|ety can be a scheme of cooperanon wh|ch |s vo|untar||y entered |nto Lach person |s p|aced |n a soc|ety due to the|r b|rth 8ut the theory of [usnce wou|d be c|ose to perfect |f executed correct|y
QUESTIONS Wh|ch theor|es have the b|ggest aws |n them? 1he |east aws? Are any theor|es ever perfect? CHRISTIAN APPROACHES Roman Catholicism, in which there is a tendency for reason (especially in the form of natural law) to be most prominent, Among Protestant approaches, reason and Scripture are generally primary.
THE NATURAL LAW St. 1homas Aqu|nas PRESUPPOSITIONS 1he wor|d |s a creanon of a supreme|y ranona| be|ng: God God has made everyth|ng accord|ng to a d|v|ne p|an An eterna| |aw governs everyth|ng
THREE NATURAL INCLINATION 1o preserve human ||fe 1o surv|ve [sex, food, hghnng] 1o do good PRECEPTS Good |s a natura| |nc||nanon Natura| |aw has been taught to a|| an|ma|s [food, sex, hghnng] 8ecause humans are |nc||ned to good, humans have a natura| |nc||nanon to know the truth about God, and to ||ve |n soc|ety SITUATIONAL ETHICS Ioseph I|etcher OVERVIEW S|tuanona| eth|cs puts a h|gh prem|um on freedom from prefabr|cated dec|s|ons and prescr|pnve ru|es 1he s|tuanona| eth|cs approach to dec|s|on mak|ng |s re|anve, or non- abso|ute and var|ant, or non-un|versa| LEGALISM Lega||sm a|ways emphas|zes order and conform|ty wh||e s|tuanona| eth|cs puts a prem|um on freedom and respons|b|||ty 1he r|ghtness |s |n the shape of the acnon as a who|e, an not |n any s|ng|e phase or d|mens|on of |t Lega||st says "do what |s r|ght and |et the ch|ps fa|| where they may" Lega||sm c|a|ms a r|ght, S.L. says your r|ghts depend |n the s|tuanon SITUATIONALISM Was prec|p|tated |n Chr|snan eth|cs by the eras reacnon to |ega||sm S|tuanona| Chr|snan eth|cs has a tacnca| formu|a for the strategy of |ove: the |nd|canve, p|us the |mperanve equa|s the normanve [what |s, p|us the command equa|s what ought to be done] Iudgment ] dec|s|on |s respons|b|||ty |n hum|||ty EXAMPLES Unmarr|ed |ove |s more eth|ca| than marr|ed hatred Ly|ng can be more eth|ca| than te|||ng the truth Stea||ng |s beuer than respect for persona| property No acnon |s |ntr|ns|ca||y r|ght or wrong: |t depends on whether |t hurts or he|ps peop|e |n the s|tuanon
IN SITUATIONS 1he quesnon |s not what shou|d I do, but what shou|d I do? 1he s|tuanon ||st puts the onus of dec|s|on on the acnon- taker rather than prefabr|cated d|recnves 1he on|y th|ng |s |ove, or [usnce, or concern Sartre says humans are the same- fac|ng a s|tuanon that changes- the cho|ce |s a|ways a cho|ce of the s|tuanon kespons|b|||ty VIRTUE ETHICS roposed by Ar|stot|e, adopted by Catho||c mora| theo|og|ans Lqua||y between excess and dehc|t 1he |ntermed|ary of two extremes Lxcess and dehc|t are character|sncs of v|ce 1he mean of p|easure and pa|n |s temperance Some th|ngs are a|ways wrong: adu|tery, theh, murder, envy, sp|te.you cannot cheat on your spouse w|th the "r|ght" person It |s no easy task to be good
PERSONALISM Its essential, unifying perspective is that persons and personal relations are more basic for understanding reality than abstract ideas like being or nature. It describes human persons as radically social beings who develop full potential only within human relationships. It rejects the extreme body/soul dualism that exalts the spiritual at the expense of the somatic.
QUESTIONS Does ] shou|d b|oeth|cs favor one theory over another? Shou|d any be thrown out a|| together?
VIDEO- ETHICS AND AUTONOMY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvIYt7bTeH0 JUDAISM LIKE OTHER SYSTEMS some of the moral norms of Judaism are identical to those of many other traditions norms, for example, requiring aid to the needy and prohibiting murder and theft. Jewish ethics uses many resources, as do other religions and secular systems, to know the good, teach it, and motivate people to do the good. In these ways, then, Jewish ethics is like other moral systems of thought and practice.
JUDAISM UNIQUE The Jewish vision of the ideal person and society is a different picture from that in Christianity and most other religions and secular philosophies. The use of Law as a motivational tool is also unique.
SIX MAJOR MORAL METHODOLOGIES OF JUDAISM Stories History Maxims and theories Theology General moral values Law STORIES 1. Stories- the core Jewish storythe Exodus from Egypt, the revelation at Mount Sinai, and the trek to the Promised Landloudly proclaims that we can and must work together with God to redeem ourselves and others from slavery of all sorts.
HISTORY/ MAXIMS AND THEORIES 2. History. No nation that has gone through the exile and persecution endured by Jews can possibly have an idealistic picture of human beings. 3. Maxims and theories. The Book of Proverbs, the Mishnah
THEOLOGY/ GENERAL MORAL VALUES 4. Theology. All of Jewish morality is based, ultimately, on the biblical command that we should seek to be holy as God is holy; that moral action is commanded by God. 5. General moral values. The Torah announces some general moral values that should inform all our actionsjustice, saving lives, caring for the needy, respect for parents and elders, honesty in business and in personal relations, truth telling, and education of children and adults.
LAW Advantages: a bottom line translates moral goals into concrete rules helps us to decide among conflicting moral goal establishes and preserves the authority of moral norm preserves the coherence of a moral system
THE THREE FOLD STOOL There are three sources of authority: Scripture, tradition, and reason. Jewish approaches tend to give primacy to tradition, supplemented by reason, with Scripture foundational in principle but less directly appealed to.
TRADITION Tradition is privileged, and even claims that may seem to an outside observer to be motivated by reason and experience may well be ascribed to tradition These include the Talmud and traditional sources of halakhah as providing the basis and framework for analysis of ethical concerns.
General Adapted from Contemporary Approaches to Bioethics, EXP 0027. Taught at Tufts University, Spring 2012. Jewish Ethical Theory Elliot N. Dorff. Is There a Unique Jewish Ethics? The Role of Law in Jewish Bioethics Annual of the Society of Christian Ethics, 21 (2001): 305-317: 305-306; 308-310. Aaron L. Mackler. Is There a Unique Jewish Bioethics of Human Reproduction? Annual of the Society of Christian Ethics, 21 (2001): 319-323: 320. Christian Ethical Theory Ronald Modras, Birth Control, Personalism, and the Pope 283-290: 283-284. Adapted from Contemporary Approaches to Bioethics, EXP 0027. Taught at Tufts University, Spring 2012.