Human Values 1 To 10

HUMAN VALUES
Thinking Critically About Ethical Issues 6

th
Edition
Vincent Ryan Ruggiero
The Need for Ethics
Chapter One
Ethics is the study of choices people make
regarding right and wrong.
Each of us make dozens of moral choices
daily:
1. Go to school or to work or play sick.
2. Use someone elses work as our own or
study and do your best.
3. Tell the truth or tell a lie.
4. Obey the speed limit or ignore it.

The Need for Ethics

1. Keep our marriage vows or break
them.
2. Meet our childrens emotional need or
ignore them.
3. Pet the cat or kick it.
Morals definition
Morals are concerned with the
judgment of the goodness or badness
of human action and character.
Teaching or exhibiting goodness or
correctness of character and behavior.
Conforming to standards of what is
right or just in behavior; virtuous.
Arising from conscience or the sense of
right and wrong.
Moral Standards
In most times and places, people
acknowledge the existence of an
objective moral standard binding on all
people regardless of their personal
desires and preferences.
There has not always been complete
agreement on what that standard was.
Moral Standards
Over the past several decades, that
need has been called into question.
It is fashionable today to believe that
decisions about right and wrong are
purely personal and subjective.
This belief is known as moral
relativism.
Moral Standards
Moral Relativism:
According to it, whatever anyone
claims to be morally acceptable is
morally acceptable, at least for that
person.
Supposedly, there is only one
exception to this rule: Judging other
peoples conduct is considered
intolerant.

Moral Standards
In the 1960s moral relativists challenged
the traditional view that fornication and
adultery are immoral.
Only the individual can decide what sexual
behavior is right for him or her and the
individuals decision should be respected.
Given the mood of the time and strength of
the sex drive, it was not surprising that
many people were disposed to accept this
view.
Moral Standards
Critics raised serious objections, of course.
They argued that even the wisest among us
are capable of error and self deception,
especially where the emotions are involved.
They predicted that the idea that everyone
creates his or her own sexual morality would
spill over into other areas of morality and
provide an excuse for everything from petty
pilfering, plagiarism, perjury, child
molesting, rape, spouse abuse, and murder.
Critics Raise Serious Objections
More important for our purposes, critics of
relativism warned that anything goes
thinking would undermine the subject of
ethics.
If morality is merely a matter of preference,
and no one view is better than any other, --
then there is no way to distinguish good
from evil or civilized behavior from
uncivilized, and any attempt at meaningful
discussion of moral issues is futile.
Moral Standards
Evidence that civility has declined and
human life has become cheapened can
be found any day in the news.
Equally significant, many people are so
possessed by the who can say?
mentality that they find it difficult to
pass moral judgment even on the most
heinous deeds.
Why Do We Need Ethics
Many people reason that we dont need
ethics because of our system of laws,
when consistently enforced, provide
sufficient protection of our rights.
In order to assess this idea we must
understand who makes laws and how
they make them.

Who makes them: local, state, and
national legislators.
How they are made is somewhat more
difficult. Legislators must get together
to talk about a particular behavior and
then vote on whether they want to
criminalize it.
On what basis do they conclude that
one act deserves to be classified
criminal and another one doesnt?
What kinds of reasons do they offer to
support their views?
How can they be sure those reasons
are good ones?
The fact that 2 or 10 or 500 legislators
expressed that personal view would
not be sufficient reason to conclude
that a law should be passed preventing
other people

from committing the act.
The only rational basis for a law
against sexual harassment is that the
act is wrong, and not just for those
who think so but for everyone.
The proper focus for lawmakers is not
on their subjective preferences but on
the nature of the actions in question.
Why do we need ethics if we have
laws?
Because law is not possible without
ethics.
The only way for a law to be enacted
or repealed is for one or more people
to make a decision about right and
wrong.
Often laws must be revised.
Ethics Defined

Ethics is the study of right and wrong
conduct.
In the philosophical sense, ethics is a
two-sided discipline.
Normative ethics answers specific
moral questions, determining what is
reasonable and therefore what people
should believe. The term normative
means setting norms or guidelines.)
Ethics Defined

The other side of philosophical ethics
is; Methaethics it examines ethical
systems to appraise their logical
foundations and internal consistency.
The focus of ethics is moral situations
that is, those situations in which
there is a choice of behavior involving
human values (those qualities that are
regarded as good and desirable).
Ethics Defined

Whether we watch TV at a friends
house or at our own is not a moral
issue. But whether we watch TV at a
friends house without his or her
knowledge and approval is a moral
issue.
Filling out an application for a job is a
morally neutral act. But deciding
whether to tell the truth on the
application is a moral decision.
Ethics Defined

An ethicist observes the choices people
make in various moral situations and
draws conclusions about those choices.
An ethical system is a set of coherent
ideas that result from those
conclusions and form and overall moral
perspective.
Ethicists are not lawmakers.
Ethics Defined

They merely suggest what ought to be
done. If people violate their own or
their societys moral code, no ethics
enforcement officer will try to
apprehend them though if their
action also violates a law, a law
enforcement agency may do so.
The idea of varying degrees of
responsibility for ones actions is
applied in ethics, too.
Ethics Defined

There are no court of ethics.
The ethicist nevertheless is interested
in the question;
Under what circumstances is a person
to be considered culpable (deserving
blame)?
Ethics and Religious Belief
Somehow the idea has arisen that
ethics and religion are unrelated and
incompatible. When religious thinkers
discuss ethical issues in political policy,
they are thought to be exceeding their
reach and perhaps even committing an
offense against the principle of
separation of church and state.
How ironic that such a notion should
arise at a time when popular culture no
longer values the distinction between
informed and uninformed opinion!
The notion is without historical basis.
In fact an interesting case can be
made for ethics having originated in
religion.
G.K. Chesterton argued as follows:
Morality did not begin by one man saying to
another, I will not hit you if you do not hit
me; there is no trace of such a transaction.
There is a trace of both men having said,
We must not hit each other in the holy
place. They gained their morality by
guarding their religion. They did not
cultivate courage. The fought for the shrine,
and found they had become courageous.
They did not cultivate cleanliness. They
purified themselves for the altar, and found
that they were clean.
Throughout our civilizations history,
religious thinkers have spoken to the larger
society on moral issues, and society has
generally profited from their guidance.
To be productive, ethical discourse must
take place on common ground; using
understanding and intellectual procedures
and judgment criteria that all participants
Christians, Jews, Moslems, atheists, and
others affirm.
A focus on faith rather than reason can also
prevent us from presenting the most
persuasive ethical argument.
Some ethical questions cannot be
adequately answered by reference to
religious beliefs alone.
Religious ethics is the examination of moral
situations from a particular religious
perspective. In it, the religious doctrine is
not a substitute for inquiry.
The Need For Ethics
Ethics fills and even more basic need in
helping up interpret everyday human
actions and decide what actions we
approve in others and want to emulate
ourselves.
It is a guide for living honorably.
Preliminary Guidelines
The basic problem you will encounter is
the tendency to judge issues on the
basis of preconception and bias rather
than careful analysis.
The reasons for prejudging will vary
from traumatic experience to personal
preference to simple opinion.

The alternative to the closed mind is
not the empty mind even if we
wished to set aside all our prior
conclusions about human behavior and
right and wrong we couldnt.
The mind can not be manhandled
(manipulated) this way. We can
expect a flood of impressions and
reactions will rush in on our thoughts
when we consider a moral issue.
It is not the fact of that flood that
matters, nor its force. It is what we
do to avoid having our judgment
swept away by it.
Here are some suggestions:
1. Be aware of your first impressions.
Note them carefully. Knowing the
way your thinking inclines is the first
step toward balancing it (if it needs
balancing).
2. Check to be sure you have all the
relevant facts. If you do not have
them get them.
3. Consider the various opinions on the
issue and the arguments that have
been (or could be) used to support
them. The position that directly
opposes your first impression is often
the most helpful one to consider.
4. Keep your thinking flexible. Do not
feel obligated to your early ideas.
5. Express your judgment precisely and
explain the reasoning that underlies
it. It is too easy to say something
you dont mean, especially when the
issue is both complex and
controversial.
Making Discussion Meaningful
At its best, discussion deepens
understanding and promotes problem
solving and decision making.
At its worst, it frays nerves, creates
animosity, and leaves important issues
unresolved.
Here are simple guidelines for ensuring
that the discussions you engage in will
set a good example for those around
you.
1. Whenever possible, prepare in advance.
2. Set reasonable expectations.
3. Leave egotism and personal agendas at the
door.
4. Contribute but dont dominate.
5. Avoid distracting speech mannerisms.
6. Listen actively.
7. Judge Ideas responsibly.
8. Resist the urge to shout or interrupt.
Whenever Possible, Prepare in Advance
1. Not every discussion can be prepared for in
advance, but many can.
In college courses, the assignment
schedule provides a reliable indication of
what will be discussed in class on a given
day.
Decide how to expand your knowledge and
devote some time doing so.
Try to anticipate the different points of
view that might be expressed in the
discussion and consider the relative merits
of each.
Set Reasonable Expectations
2. If you have ever left a discussion
disappointed that others hadnt
changed their views or felt offended
when someone disagreed with you;
you probably expected too much.
People seldom change their minds
easily or quickly, particularly in the
case of long-held convictions.
Leave Egotism and Personal Agendas at the Door
3. To be productive, discussion requires an
atmosphere of mutual respect and civility.
Egotism produces disrespectful attitudes
toward others notably, Im more
important than other people, My ideas
are better than anyone elses, and Rules
dont apply to me.
Personal agendas can lead to personal attacks
and an unwillingness to listen to others
views.
Contribute But Dont Dominate
4. Discussions tend to be most
productive when everyone contributes
ideas.
For this to happen, loquacious
(excessive talker) people need to
exercise a little restraint, and
More reserved people need to accept
responsibility for sharing their
thoughts.
Avoid Distracting Speech Mannerisms
5. Such mannerisms include;
Starting one sentence and then abruptly
switching to another; mumbling or
slurring your words; and punctuating
every phrase or clause with audible
pauses (um, ah) or meaningless
expressions (like, you know,
man). They distract from your
message. Aim for clarity, directness,
and few expressions.
Listen Actively
6. If the speaker says something you
disagree with, you may begin framing
a reply.
The best way to maintain your attention
is to be alert for such distractions and
to resist them. Strive to enter the
speakers frame of mind,
understanding each sentence as it is
spoken and connecting it with previous
sentences.
Judge Ideas Responsibly
7. Ideas range in quality from profound
to ridiculous, helpful to harmful,
ennobling to degrading. It is
therefore appropriate to pass
judgment on them.
Fairness demands that you base your
judgment on thoughtful consideration
of the overall strengths and
weaknesses of the ideas, not on your
initial impressions or feelings.
Resist the Urge to Shout or Interrupt
8. No doubt you understand that shouting
and interrupting are rude and disrespectful
behaviors, but do you realize that in many
cases they are also a sign of intellectual
insecurity? Its true.
9. If you really believe your ideas are sound,
you will have no need to raise your voice or
to silence the other person. Make it your
rule to disagree without being
disagreeable.
HHH
CHAPTER TWO
HUMAN VALUES
The Role Of The Majority View
Chapter Two
What is a majority? Nothing more
than 51 percent or more of the
individuals in a group.
If we were to examine a particular
majority and compare their individual
thinking on a particular issue, what
would we find? First, we would find
that actual knowledge of the issue
varied widely among the individuals.
Chapter Two
Some would be well informed about all details.
Others would be completely uninformed, yet
unaware of their ignorance.
Some individuals would have read or listened
to the views of authorities, sorted out
irrelevancies, appraised each authoritys
position in light of available evidence, and
weighed all possible interpretations of the
facts.
Others would have taken the ultimate shortcut
and forgone all inquiry on the assumption
that their intuition is infallible.
Chapter Two
Finally some would have judged quite
objectively, avoiding preconceived
notions and prejudices, and being
critical of all views, including those to
which they were naturally disposed.
Others would have been ruled by
emotion, un-tempered by reason.
For this reason, know that there is no
magic in majorities.
CHAPTER THREE

THE ROLE OF FEELINGS
The Role of Feelings
Chapter Three
As we have seen, it is fashionable to
believe that morality is subjective and
personal. This means that whatever a
person believes to be right or wrong
is so for that person.
The conclusion that follows from this
reasoning is that no one persons view
is preferable to anothers. One persons
sacred ritual may be the next persons
cardinal sin.
Feelings Chapter Three
Two centuries ago French philosopher
Jean Jacques Rousseau wrote,
What I feel is right is right, what I feel
is wrong is wrong.
The child, in Rousseaus view, is
inherently good;
The only corrupting influence is society
with it artificial constraints.
How Feelings Came to Be Emphasized
Values Clarification is a system that
asserts that there is no universal,
objective moral standard, that the only
norm is that each person decides to
value
It is the job of the educator to
encourage students to decide for
themselves and to remain completely
nonjudgmental of the students
choices.
Carl Rogers 1902 - 1987
One of the basic things which I was a
long time in realizing, and which I am
still learning is that when an activity
feels as though is valuable or worth
doing, it is worth doing.
Rogers goal in therapy was to
persuade the client not only to listen
to feelings which he has always denied
and repressed,
Carl Rogers Chapter Three
Including feelings that have seemed
terrible or abnormal or shameful.
but also to affirm those feelings.
Rogers was convinced that the
therapist should be totally accepting of
whatever the client expressed and
should show an outgoing positive
feeling without reservations, without
evaluations.
Carl Rogers
The only question that matters for a
healthy person, he maintained, is, am
I living in a way which is deeply
satisfying to me, and which truly
expresses me?
Pleasing others or meeting external,
objective standards of behavior such
as the moral code of ones society or
religion have no role in Rogers
process.
Carl Rogers
Rogers impact on American thought,
and on Western thought in general,
has been profound.
Together with his associate, William
Coulson, Rogers developed and
successfully implemented a plan to
promote his value-free,
nonjudgmental, nondirective approach
in the teaching of both psychological
Carl Rogers
counseling and ethics.
Coulson later renounced the approach,
claiming that it ruined lives and
harmed society.
Subsequently, two generations of
psychologists, guidance counselors,
student personnel staff in colleges,
social workers, and even members of
the clergy were trained in his method
Carl Rogers Chapter Three
And proceeded in good faith to counsel
millions of people to follow their
feelings.
The idea has been most
enthusiastically embraced by the
entertainment industry, which has
made it a central theme of movies and
television programs.
Feelings
In the space of a few decades feelings have
become the dominate ethical standard.
In recent years a number of psychologists
have addressed this error.
William J. Doherty, a therapist and professor
of psychology, argues that it is time for
psychotherapists to stop trying to talk
people out of their moral sense

William J. Doherty
I dont believe that all moral beliefs
are created equal. The moral
consensus of the worlds major
religions around the Golden Rule do
unto others as you would have others
do unto you
is a far better guide to moral living
than the reflexive morality of self-
interest in mainstream American
society.
Are Feelings Reliable? Chapter Three
Can feelings be trusted to guide human
behavior?
some feelings, desires, and
preferences are admirable and
therefore make excellent guides.
Albert Schweitzer, Martin Luther King,
Jr., Mother Teresa and countless other
caring people the world over, are
moved by love of neighbor to make the
world a little better.
Are Feelings Reliable
Honesty, demands acknowledgment of
the other aspect of feelings.
When Hitler exterminated more than
six million Jews and Staling massacred
30 million Russian peasants, they were
following their feelings.
In this case, Rousseaus and Rogers
idea to be unreasonable.
A Better Guide Is Needed
When we are thinking clearly and being
honest with ourselves, we realize that
there is a potential in each of us for
noble actions of high purpose and
honor;
But there is also a potential for great
mischief and wickedness.

Subjective Behavior
Whatever the person prefers to do is
right to do is hollow. Good sense
suggest that the right action may be at
odds with the individuals preference.
Ironically, morality by feelings
completely ignores other peoples
feelings.

Subjective Behavior. Chapter Three
To say that we should be free to do as
we wish without regard for others is to
say that others should be free to do as
they wish without regard for us.
If such a rule were followed, the result
would be social chaos.
Since our feelings, desires, and
preferences can be either beneficial or
harmful, noble or ignoble, praiseworthy
Subjective Behavior..
Or damnable, and since they can be
either in harmony or in conflict with
other peoples feelings, desires, and
preferences, they are obviously not
accurate criteria for analysis of moral
issues or trustworthy guidelines to
action.
Feelings, Desires, & Preferences
Feelings, desires, and preferences
need to be evaluated and judged.
They need to be measured against
some impartial standard that will
reveal their quality.
To make them the basis of our moral
decisions is to ignore those needs and
to accept them uncritically as the
measure of their own worth.
CHAPTER FOUR

The Role of Conscience

Chapter Four
The term conscience is so common and
often so carelessly used, that for many
people it has little meaning.
Precisely what is a conscience?
Does everybody have one or are some
people born without one?
Are all consciences created equal?
Are our consciences influenced by the
attitudes and values of our culture?
The Role of Conscience.
Can we do anything to develop our
consciences, or are they fixed and
unchangeable?
These important issues must be
considered before we can decide
whether conscience is a reliable
moral guide.
Philosophers have disagreed in their
definitions of conscience.
Some have defined it as the voice of
God speaking directly to the individual
soul.
The problem with this definition is that
in cases where conscience does not
inform a person that an act is wrong
(or mis-informs the person),
the implications is that God has failed
that person. Such an idea is
unacceptable to religious people.
Others have defined conscience as a
mirror of custom, a mere reflection of
what our culture has taught us.
This definition also creates problems:
It leaves unexplained those cases in
which conscience directs us to defy
custom.
Still others have argued that
conscience is a special sense, a moral
sense, that is innate in human beings.
This may come closest to being a
workable definition, but it also poses
difficulties that must not be
overlooked. The term sense usually
suggests developed faculties
associated with organs; sight, hearing,
etc.
Conscience cannot be that kind of
sense we are not talking of any
physical condition.
Conscience may be defined as the
faculty by which we determine that we
are guilty of a moral offense.
Conscience and Shame
We know our conscience has judged us
harshly when we feel a sense of shame
Shame:the painful emotion arising
from the consciousness of something
dishonoring, ridiculous, or indecorous
(marked by a lack of good taste) in
ones own conduct or circumstances
an emotion totally without redeeming
value that is responsible for a broad
Conscience and Shame.
range of psychological disorders,
including depression, addiction, sexual
dysfunction, and emotional problems
linked to gender, age, and race
Think back to a time in childhood when
you felt ashamed of something you
said or did, such as being disrespectful
to a parent or a teacher
Conscience and Shame.
If your shame prompted you to
apologize, or at least to do the person
a kindness to make up for the wrong,
your self-respect was restored.
Feeling bad about yourself was a
necessary step toward feeling good
about yourself again.
Individual Differences
the intensity of conscience differs
from person to person.
Some people are very sensitive to the
effects of their actions, acutely aware
when they have done wrong.
Others are relatively insensitive,
unconscious of their offenses, free
from feelings of remorse.
Individual Differences

Some see right and wrong as applying to
only a limited number of matters

Still others were at one time morally
sensitive, but have succeeded in neutralizing
the promptings of conscience.
Individual Differences.
There are the extremists: scrupulous
(having moral integrity) people are
morally sensitive beyond
reasonableness and their counterparts
(opposites) are virtually without
conscience, using other people as
things, unmindful of their status as
equal persons, and pursuing only what
satisfies the almighty me.

The Shapers of Conscience
Many people have the vague notion
that their consciences are solely a
product of their own intellectual
efforts, without outside influence.
The thought that ones life is and has
always been completely under ones
control is very reassuring. In any
case, the notion is wrong.
The Shapers of Conscience.
Conscience is shaped by two forces
that are essentially outside our control
Natural endowment and social
conditioning. and one that is, in
some measure, within our control
moral choice.
The specific attributes of our
conscience including its sensitivity to
moral issues and the degree of its
influence on our behavior
Natural Endowment
A persons basic temperament and level and
kind of intelligence are largely in the
genes.
Both temperament and intelligence play a
considerable role in shaping the total
personality.
The person with practical intelligence and
the person with philosophic intelligence will
not have the same potential for ethical
analysis or the same potential for
perceptiveness in moral issues.
Social Conditioning.
Conditioning is the most neglected
shaper of conscience. ..it is in many
ways the most important.
Conditioning may be defined as the
myriad (enormously large) effects of
our environment; the people, places,
institutions, ideas and values we are
exposed to as we grow and develop.
We are conditioned first by our early
social and religious training from
parents.
This influence may be partly conscious
and partly unconscious on their part,
and indirect as well as direct.
It is so pervasive that all our later
attitudes-political, economic,
sociological, psychological, theological
in some way bear its imprint.
If children are brought up in an
ethnocentric (favoring ones own ethnic
group) environment, that is one in
which the group (race, nationality,
culture, or special value system)
believes it is superior to others
will tend to be less tolerant than
other people.
Social Conditioning..
If they cannot identify with a group,
they must oppose it.
In addition, they will tend to need an
out group, some outsiders whom
they can blame for real and imagined
wrongs.
This makes it difficult or impossible for
them to identify with humanity as a
whole or to achieve undistorted
understanding of others.

Social Conditioning..
We are also conditioned by our
encounters with brothers, sisters,
relatives, friends.
We imitate others strategies for
justifying questionable behavior.
We are conditioned by our experiences
in grade school, by our widening circle
of acquaintances, and perhaps by our
beginning contact with institutional
religion.
All these situations...that affects un in
dramatic, though subconscious, ways.
Though memory may cloud, experience
remains indelible (not capable of being
removed).
We are then conditioned by our contact
with people, places, and ideas through
books, radio, newspapers, magazines,
tapes and CDs (music) and especially
television programming.
What we see and hear makes an
impact on our attitudes and values,
sometimes blatantly, sometimes subtly
(hardly noticeable).
Situation comedies instruct us as to
what may appropriately be laughed at
and or ridiculed. Soap operas and
dramatic programs train our emotions
to respond favorably or unfavorably to
different behaviors.
Social Conditioning
Commercials tell us what possession and
living styles will make us happy and are
desirable.
As the entertainment and communications
media have grown more numerous and more
sophisticated, the number of individuals and
groups involved in social conditioning has
multiplied, and their messages are often at
odds with home and church and school.
Moral Choices
Long before we were able to make
authentic (real) moral choices, heredity
and social conditioning had already
shaped our conscience.
Childrens choices are not fully
conscious acts but mere assertions of
will that express their inherited traits
or imitation of others behavior.

Moral Choice
A toddlers obeying or defying their
parents directions is an example of
such choosing.
Only in later childhood do we develop
the ability to weigh alternatives and
make reasoned choices.

A Balanced View of Conscience
The conscience is not an infallible
moral guide.
Conscience is the most important
single guide to right and wrong and
individual can have.
when circumstances demand an
immediate moral choice, we should
follow our conscience.

C
CHAPTER FIVE

Comparing Cultures
Chapter Five
Before continuing our search for a
dependable standard of ethical
judgment, it will be useful to consider
the issue of whether moral judgments
are ever appropriate outside ones own
culture.
Contemporary scholarly discussion of
cultures and subcultures is significantly
affected by the social movement
known as multiculturalism.
Comparing Cultures.
Among the central tenets (belief) of
this movement are that every race or
ethnic group has its own values and
characteristic behaviors, that no
groups values are any better or worse
than any others and that criticism of
another cultures ideas and actions is
wrong.
Comparing Cultures.
Cultures differ in their ideas about right
and wrong, and the differences are not
always slight.
Sex before marriage has been
generally viewed as immoral in the
West.
Yet in some island cultures, it is
encouraged.
Interpreting the Differences
Cultural relativity, derives from observation
of cultural differences and two important
realizations:
1) that a cultures values, rituals, and
customs reflect its geography, history, and
socioeconomic circumstances and
2) that hasty comparisons of other cultures
with ones own culture tends to thwart
(oppose or defeat) scholarly analysis and
produce shallow or erroneous conclusions.
Interpreting the Differences.

In themselves these realizations are truisms
(undoubted or self-evident truths); no
reasonable person would deny that a
peoples experience influences its beliefs and
behaviors
or that careful, objective thinking is
preferable to careless, biased thinking.
Interpreting the Differences

Cultural relativity means, that the
appropriateness of any positive or
negative custom must be evaluated
with regard to how this habit fits with
other groups habits.

The question?
Is it possible for a custom or habit
within a culture to be long-standing
and completely consistent with other
behaviors of the group yet at the
same time be immoral?
Remember, the differing values among
cultures with consideration of
similarities.
The Similarity or Values

Christianity is not unique in affirming
the importance of keeping a pure and
honest mind; early Buddhism
(Dhammapada), begins with these
words:
Those who harbor resentful thoughts
toward others, believing they were
insulted, hurt, defeated or cheated, will
suffer from hatred, because hate never
conquers hatred.
Yet hate is conquered by love, which is
an eternal law.
The Bible
Thou shalt not use
Gods name in vain.

Thou shalt honor thy
mother and thy
father.

Thou shalt not kill.
The Koran
Make not Gods name
an excuse for your
oaths.
Be kind to your parents
if one or both of them
attain old age in thy
life, say not a word of
contempt nor repel
them but address them
in terms of honor.
If anyone has killed one
person it is as if he had
killed the whole
mankind.
The Hindus refusal to use cattle to
feed starving people shows a wanton
(unjust) disregard for human life.
Yet the real explanation for the refusal
is that their religion prevents them
from butchering cattle for any purpose.

Mortimer Adler
Alder rejects the illusion that there is a
Western mind and an Eastern mind, a
European mind and an African mind or
a civilized mind and a primitive mind.
There is only a human mind and it is
one and the same in all human beings.
In other words, all people have the
same basic physiological, psychological
and intellectual equipment.
Is Judgment Appropriate?
People who accept an extreme
interpretation of cultural relativism say
that moral judgment of other cultures
is never appropriate.
In other words, multiculturalism
implies one culture should not criticize
another.
Three Important Cautions
1. Understanding is no substitute for
moral judgment.
2. The time and place of an act have no
bearing on its moral quality.
3. Culpability for immoral acts may vary
widely.
1. Understanding is no substitute for
moral judgment.
Because speaking from ignorance is
irresponsible, we should refrain from
judging any act until we understand
the context in which it occurred.
2. The time and place of an act have no
bearing on its moral quality

Actions we have unhesitatingly
denounced in our own time and place
have a way of sounding morally
acceptable for other times and places.
3.Culpability for immoral acts may vary widely.

Culpability applies in ethics as well as
in the law the responsibility of the
perpetrators varies according to the
circumstances.

-30-

CHAPTER SIX

A FOUNDATION FOR
JUDGMENT
A foundation for moral judgment (that
is) surer than the majority view,
feelings, or conscience, is said to be
non-existent or that no such
foundation exists.
A Foundation For Judgment
David Hume, English Philosopher says,
no logical way to get from knowing
what is (factual knowledge) to knowing
what ought to be (objective moral
standards).
Hume held that no amount of
observation of the way people actually
behave can ever lead to a conclusion
about the way they should behave.
David Hume
Hume was not denying morality, but
only denying that reason can tell us
what is moral.
He believed that we all have a moral
sentiment that guides us by
responding to sensations of pleasure
and pain.
Assessing Ought Statements
If morality were subjective, and
knowing what is could never lead to
knowing what ought to be, we might
reasonably expect that
(a) only foolish or irresponsible people
would say what other people should or
should not do, and
(b) the statement they utter would be
demonstrably shallow and irrelevant to
other peoples lives.
On the other hand, if intelligent,
responsible people make such
statements and the statements prove
to be reasonable and relevant, then we
are justified in concluding that Hume
was mistaken. Let us see.
Assessing Ought in Ancient
Cultures
Babylonian Slander not.
Hindu One should never strike a
woman; not eve with a flower.
Chinese Never do to others what you
would not like them to do to you.
Ancient Egyptian Love thy wife
studiously. Gladden her heart all thy
life long.
Assessing Ought in Ancient Cultures
Old Norse Be blameless to thy
kindred. Take no vengeance even
though they do thee wrong.
Greek Choose loss rather than
shameful gains.
Roman Death is to be chosen before
slavery and base (under-handed)
deeds.

The authors of these sayings we can
not judge them personally, but we do
know that their words were generally
regarded as wise sayings in their
culture.
Also, even though we are ages
removed from those times, they still
speak meaningfully to the
contemporary human condition.
Governmental Ought
The Declaration of Independence is not
usually thought of as a collection of
moral judgments, but it is.
It begins with the moral judgments
that all Men are created equal, that
they are endowed by their Creator with
certain unalienable Rights, that among
these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit
of Happiness:
Governmental Ought
Further, it states that the people
empower the government to secure
these Rights and when the
government fails to do so,
the people have not only the right but
also a duty to overthrow it.
The Founding Fathers
/Governmental Ought
The U.S. Constitution was created out
of moral offenses allegedly
committed by King George against the
colonists.
The Bill of Rights is properly viewed as
a safeguard that the moral obligations
affirmed in the Declaration of
Independence would not be violated.
Governmental Ought
The United Nations Declaration of
Human Rights contains similar
references to rights.
It begins, by declaring that human
rights should be protected by the rule
of law and goes on to say that all
human beings should act towards one
another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Governmental Ought
And the Nuremberg Code, enacted
after the Second World War in
response to Nazi atrocities,
specifies the rights and safeguards
that should be guaranteed in medical
experiments.
Organizational Ought
The search for organizational
statements of right and wrong
behavior is not difficult to conduct.

College of Alameda has a code of
conduct which is a code of ethics.
Virtually every sizeable corporation has
a carefully framed code of ethics.

Except however, the American
Philosophical Association, which has no
published code of ethics. This is ironic
since ethics has historically been a
sub-discipline of philosophy.

The American Medical Associations
code of ethics states that physicians
are ethically and legally required to
protect the personal privacy and other
legal rights of patients
and that they have an ethical
obligation to report impaired,
incompetent, and unethical
colleagues.
The code is filled with shoulds and
musts and obligationswhich is, the
language of ought.
Violations of the code generally result
in formal reprimand or, in serious
cases, dismissal. In the case of
professional organizations, violations
can result in the loss of ones license to
practice the profession.
Our Own Everyday Ought
Each days news brings a wide
assortment of reports that prompt us
to make moral judgments.
To these deeds, we express not a
personal moral sentiment but an
objective moral assessment.
Can be conclude that David Hume was
mistaken?
According to the author we dont say,
I myself wouldnt do such a thing, but
I cant say whether others ought to do
it. Instead we say, what millions of
morally sensitive individuals say, That
is a moral outrage and the
perpetrators ought to be punished.
We judge the deed to be wrong no
matter who does it. In other words,
we express not a personal moral
sentiment but an objective moral
assessment.
Is David Hume right and all the Ought
we have considered or can we
conclude that he is mistaken?
The Principle of Right Desire
The fact that people do act in a certain
way does not prove that they should
act in that way.
There is nothing to test the ought
sentence against. Hume decided that it
is impossible to get from is to ought.
Adler demonstrates that it is possible.
He found the key in the ancient Greek
philosopher Aristotles Nicomachean
Ethics.
Aristotle noted that although
prescriptive (ought) statements cannot
be tested for their correspondence with
reality,
They can be tested for conformity with
right desire.
The principle of right desire, Adler
terms the first principle of moral
philosophy, is as follows:

We ought to desire what is really good for
us and nothing else.
Adler notes that this principle is self-evident,
meaning that the words ought and really
good for us are related in such a way that
the sentence can not be contradicted. (To
say that we ought NOT desire what is really
good for us, or that we ought to desire what
is really BAD for us would be illogical.

This self-evident principle as our major
premise, we can confidently make
moral judgments. Adler offers this
example:
We ought to desire what is really good
for us.
Knowledge is really good for us.
We ought to desire knowledge.

The Principle of Contradiction
One of the most dramatic ethical
issues of the millennium has exploded
during the final decade of the twentieth
century.
The creation of human embryos for
research.
In vitro fertilization unites sperm and
egg outside the female body in a test
tube.
Then the fertilized egg would be
implanted in the womans uterus and
the pregnancy would proceed.
In a proposed controversial use, an
egg would be fertilized in a test tube,
allowed to develop into an embryo,
used for Scientific experimentation
then discarded after 14 days; the point
which the nervous system begins to
function.
Former Presidents Clinton and Bush
ban federal funding on this research.
The creation of human embryos ..that
will destroy them is unconscionable.
Principles of contradiction is expressed
as follows: An idea cannot be both true
and false at the same time in the same
way.
Where we are dealing with a genuine
contradiction, we can no more imagine
both sides being true than we can
imagine a stick with one end or a
square circle.
Contradiction is not always blatant;
sometimes it is subtle and thus may
escape detection for years.
Challenges to Judgment
The principle of right desire, is bridging
the gap between is and ought, to
provide a foundation for judgment.

Relativism
Relativism is the view that no objective
moral standard is possible; hence,
issues of right and wrong are personal
and subjective,
and may be decided by each person for
himself or herself without danger of
being wrong.
Absolutism
A moral absolute is a norm or principle
that is true at all times and in all
places and admits no exceptions.
Many moral norms do admit exceptions
and therefore cannot be considered
absolute.

-30-
THE BASIC CRITERIA
CHAPTER 7
THINKING CRITICALLY
ABOUT ETHICAL ISSUES
Brief Review

In the previous chapters we noted that
religion and law cannot substitute for ethics,
although they are related to and compatible
with ethics;

That the majority view is as apt to be
mistaken as correct;

That feelings are often capricious
(unpredictable) and therefore unreliable;
and that conscience, though in some cases
trustworthy, is susceptible to negative
influences and error.
Brief Review
We also found that, moral judgments
of other cultures are appropriate when
they are based on understanding and
thoughtful analysis.
Finally, we observe that despite
skepticisms claim that moral
prescriptions (ought statements) are
illogical
Brief Review
and we observed that the principle of
right desire provides the necessary
foundation in logic and together with
the principle of contradiction, enables
us to approach ethical analysis with
confidence.
In this chapter we will build upon that
foundation.
A FOUNDAMENTAL GOOD:
RESPECT FOR PERSONS
One example of something that is
really good for us, is knowledge.
Another significant good is respect
for persons, which, as Errol E. Harris
explains, includes three requirements:
1) that each and every person should
be regarded as worthy of sympathetic
consideration, and should be so
treated;

RESPECT FOR PERSONS
2) that no person should be regarded
by another as a mere possession, or
used as a mere instrument, or treated
as a mere obstacle, to anothers
satisfaction;
3)that persons are not and ought
never to be treated in any undertaking
as mere expendables.
RESPECT FOR PERSONS
Respect for persons is an important value in
most ethical systems.
This is not to say that respect for persons in
always interpreted in the same way or that it
is always given precedence over other
values.
In some cultures person is defined not
broadly as all members of the species
Homo sapiens but narrowly, as a member
of our tribe or one who enjoys the rights of
citizenship.
RESPECT FOR PERSONS
Simply stated, some may learn respect
for persons with whom they share
something in common; race, economic
status, religious beliefs, neighborhood,
age groups, educational status, clubs
or gang affiliates, languages, etc.
In the Roman Empire many of the
freedoms now associated with
personhood were denied to noncitizens
RESPECT FOR PERSONS
In the philosophical sense, respect for
persons may be considered an
extension of the principle of right
desire.
Just as we should desire only what is
really good for us, so too we should
desire the same thing for other people
because they are essentially no
different from us.
RESPECT FOR PERSONS
In the theological sense, respect for
persons reinforces the idea that human
beings are created in the image and
likeness of God
And therefore, their many differences
notwithstanding (in spite of), are
children of God.
THREE BASIC CRITERIA
Criteria is a standard on which a judgment
may be based.
Harris suggest, respect for persons is not
merely a theoretical (existing only in theory)
construct but a practical standard for the
treatment of other in everyday situations.
Over the centuries 3 basic criteria have been
associated with that standard and have
informed ethical discourse (discussion).
THREE BASIC CRITERIA
These criteria obligations, moral
ideals and consequences will be our
principal concern throughout this and
subsequent chapters.
Obligations
Obligations; every significant human
action occurs, directly or indirectly, in a
context of relationships with others.
Relationships usually imply obligations;

Obligations
The most obvious kind of obligation is
a formal agreement.
A contract with someone for example
to sell something or to perform a
service we consider that person
ethically (as well as legally) bound to
live up to his or her agreement.
Obligations
There are obligations; of friendship,
keeping confidences, of citizenship in a
democracy participation in the electoral
process, of business employer and
employee- morally bound to use fair
hiring practices, judge workers
impartially, and pay them reasonable
wage. Employees are morally bound
to do the job as efficiently and
competently as possible.
Obligations
When we say obligation bind morally,
we mean they exist to be honored.
To honor them is right; to dishonor
them is wrong.
The obligation has moral force.

Moral Ideals
Ideals are notions of excellence, goals
that bring greater harmony in ones
self and between self and others.
One group of moral ideals that can be
traced back to the time of ancient
Greece and continues to be relevant to
contemporary living is the cardinal
Virtues prudence, temperance,
justice and fortitude.
Moral Ideals
Prudence: having good sense
Temperance: self restraint
Justice: Fairness
Fortitude: strength and endurance in a
difficult or painful situation.
The word cardinal derives from the
word for hinge; and it would not be an
exaggeration to say that moral living,
in large part, hinges on these virtues.

Moral Ideals
Religious thinkers have added another group
of virtues, the theological virtues of; faith,
hope, and charity.

Other ideals that have moral significance are
fairness, tolerance, compassion, loyalty,
forgiveness, amity (friendship), and peace.

Moral ideal invite us all to be better human
beings in what we think, say, and do.
Consequences
Consequences are the beneficial or
harmful effects that result from an
action and affect the people involved,
including, the person performing the
action.
Some consequences are physical;
others are emotional.
Some occur immediately; others occur
with time.

ANALYZING ETHICAL ISSUES
You now have a set of criteria to use
that can be of considerable help as you
examine ethical issues.
Step 1: Study the detail of the case.
Step 2: Identify the Relevant Criteria
Step 3: Determine possible courses of
action
Step 4: Decide which action is most
ethical.
Double Standard

The error of the double standard
consists of using one set of criteria for
judging cases that concern us or
someone we identify with, and another
set for judging other cases.

Unwarranted Assumptions
The error of unwarranted assumptions
consists of taking too much for
granted.
The fact that it usually occurs
unconsciously makes it a particularly
troublesome error.
Does this mean that you should never
speculate about what is not known or
stated? Not at all. It means only that
you should do so responsibly
OVERSIMPLIFICATIONS
Exists whenever our treatment of a
case goes beyond reducing it to
manageable proportions and distorts it.
In moral reasoning it is usually caused
by omitting consideration of some
important criterion an obligation, for
example, or a significant consequence.
HASTY CONCLUSIONS
Drawing hasty conclusions refers to
embracing a judgment before we have
examined the case fully.
To avoid making a hasty conclusion,
make no conclusion until you have
completed your analysis of the issue.
HASTY CONCLUSIONS
One approach to take to avoid errors: Think
of yourself as two people, an idea producer
and an idea evaluator.
Let the first you generate as many varied
ideas as it wishes, but before accepting
them or presenting them to others in
speaking or writing,
Submit them to the scrutiny of the second
you. This approach will help you form the
habit of going beyond mere thinking to
thinking about thinking. -30-
CONSIDERING OBLIGATIONS
CHAPTER EIGHT
THINKING CRITICALLY
The numerous obligations noted in the
previous chapter are classified as
obligation of fidelity (faithfulness) and
are characterized by an actual or
implied promise to others.
W.D. Ross identified the following
ones:
Obligations of reparation: require us to
make amends for the wrongs we
commit.
Obligations of gratitude: require us to
demonstrate our appreciation for the
considerateness others have shown us.
Obligations of self-improvement:
these arise simply from the potential
each of us has for improvement in
virtue or (moral) intelligence.

Obligations of justice: demand that we
give each person equal consideration.
Obligations of beneficence: require us
to do good acts for their own sake;
that is , for no other reason than the
they are good.
Obligations of non-maleficence: require
us to avoid doing injury to others.
CONSIDERING OBLIGATIONS.
Taken together, obligations of
beneficence and non-maleficence are a
logical extension of an idea that is
fundamental to all ethical systems
that morality consists of both avoiding
evil and doing good.
When Obligations Conflict
Any one of these obligations may be
present by itself in a moral situation.
But more often two or more are
present; and many times they conflict.
In such cases the problem is to choose
wisely among them.
Weighing The Obligations
Consider the relative importance of
each and give preference to the more
important one.
TWO MORAL DILEMMAS
The famous attorney, Clarence Darrow,
is said to have won a case by stealing
the jurys attention during the
prosecutors summation
To judge fairly we would have to know
more than the details given here or
available in the news accounts of his
case.
THE ALABAMA SYPHILIS CASE
A government sponsored medical
experiment where 600 Black men were
selected for the experiment. They
were promised free transportation to
the hospital, free medical treatment for
diseases other than syphilis, and free
burial.
The purpose was to determine the
extent of the damage that syphilis
would do if left untreated.
Professionals already knew or
suspected that blindness, deafness,
degeneration of the heart, bones and
central nervous system, insanity, and
death would occur.
Of the 600, a third never developed
syphilis. Half of those who did
received the arsenic-mercury
treatment that was standard before
the discovery of penicillin.
Even after the discovery of penicillin a
decade later and its widespread use as
a cure for syphilis, they received no
treatment. They remained human
guinea pigs.
There were several obligations the
researcher should have weighed. 1
st
,
there was their obligation as physicians
to care for their patients. 2
nd
, there
was their obligation to justice,
2
nd
, there was their obligation to
justice, to respect other human beings
and treat them in a manner consistent
with their humanity.
Finally, there was their obligation as
researcher to serve mankind by
seeking cures for deadly diseases.
Apparently they thought of the men
not as patients, but as subjects

During the very period in which the
experiment was conducted, Nazi
doctors performed similar barbarities
(mercilessly, harsh or cruel) on the
inmates of concentration camps.
After World War II at the Nuremberg
trials, the United States and its allies
condemned those doctors for crimes
against humanity.
The shock felt by sensitive person at
this disclosure reveals the importance
of choosing well among conflicting
moral obligations.

President Clinton apologized to the five
survivors in 1997.
THOROUGHNESS IS IMPORTANT
It is difficult to reach wise decisions in
cases with conflicting obligations when
we have identified all the obligations.
It is important to consider all possible
obligations- including those of
reparation (making amends),
gratitude, justice, and beneficence, as
well as those of fidelity before
attempting to judge.
CONSIDERING MORAL IDEALS
CHAPTER NINE
THINKING CRITICALLY
Considering Moral Ideals
How can we reconcile conflicts between
moral ideals or between a moral ideal
and an obligation?
the word ideal has acquired the
connotation of impracticality.
We may call people idealistic when
they produce grand but unworkable
ideas.
Among the ideals that figure
prominently in ethical reasoning, we
saw, are fairness, tolerance,
compassion, loyalty, forgiveness, and
peace.
Other important ideals are
truthfulness, honesty, integrity, social
responsibility, and the four cardinal
virtues conceptualized by the ancient
Greeks.
Four Cardinal Virtues:
Prudence. The virtue, known also as
practical wisdom, consists of
choosing ones behavior judiciously by
consulting experience and deliberating
thoughtfully about what response is
most appropriate.
Justice. Justice denotes the evaluation
of situations according to their merits,
without prejudice, and giving each
person his or her due.
Temperance. Socrates considered
temperance to be almost synonymous
with self-mastery. The temperate
person, he argued, is the one who
exercises control over his or her
desires and thereby escapes
domination by them.
Aristotle took a similar view, holding
self indulgence to be childish.
Courage. This virtue does not consist
only in conquering fear and in
withholding the body from flight no
matter what the risk of pain. It
consists at least as much in steeling
the will, reinforcing its resolutions,
And in turning the mind relentlessly to
seek or face the truth.
Four Cardinal Virtues
To the cardinal virtues Christian
philosophers added the theological
virtues of faith, hope, and charity.
Today the term charity is most closely
associated with giving material goods
to the poor, but that is very different
from its historical meaning.
Four Cardinal Virtues
The term derives from the Latin word
caritas, which means affection; in
Christian ethics it means love -
Specifically, the love of God and ones
neighbors.
Although all three of the virtues are
important components of religion-
based ethics, only the third, charity, is
widely accepted in philosophy-based
ethics.
Ideals In Professional Ethics Codes
Although popular culture often treats
ideals and virtues casuallythey
continue to be honored in the ethical
codes of professional organizations (in
areas of); truthfulness, honesty,
integrity, social responsibility, fairness,
prudence, justice, and temperance.

Ideals in Conflict
Ideals, like obligations, do not always
harmonize with one another. In many
situations they compete with one another.
Students on a bus tease another student
about his or her clothes, shoes, hair, etc.
An older students is also repulsed by his or
her appearance but decides to sit with the
student and talk with him or her despite
possible protest from friends.
Ideals in Conflict
By choosing to honor the ideal of
kindness the girl violates the ideal of
honesty.
(In other words the truth that she was
repulsed by the younger students
appearance, did not stop her from
honoring her ideals of kindness).
Ideals Versus Obligations
Moral ideal compete not with
themselves but with obligations.
Example: the body of a man who died
from a rare form of cancer arrives at a
funeral home. The mortician receives
a call from a medical university who
are studying this form of rare cancer.
The university want the body for
research. The man and the family said
no.
Ideals Versus Obligations
The mortician is being asked to set aside his
obligation to the relatives to treat the body
as they wish, and instead to honor the ideal
of concern for the suffering of other human
beings.
Since the research offers only a possibility,
and since his obligation to the family is not
casual, but serious and formal, the mortician
should refuse. 30
CONSIDERING CONSEQUENCES
How do we deal with cases in which the
consequences are not neatly separable
into good and bad, but are mixed?
CHAPTER 10
The relationship between actions and
consequences is a cause-and-effect
relationship.
In human affairs the responses are never
completely predictable.
The main difference between the laws of
cause and effect in the physical universe and
cause and effect in human affairs is that
humans have the capacity to choose how
they respond to events.
To be sure, natural endowment and
social conditioning exert a powerful
influence and make some patterns of
response more likely than others.
But in the vast majority of cases, these
forces only diminish, rather than
eradicate, ones freedom to choose.
Free will enables people to resist
outside influences, defy psychological
and sociological axioms (a fundamental
truth), and behave unpredictably.
Lets be clear that free will doesnt
suspend the laws of nature. If a
woman jumps out a 5
th
floor window,
she is not likely to get up and walk
away, no matter how robust her will to
survive.

DEALING WITH PROBABILITY
The fact that people can and do
behave unpredictably makes
consideration of consequences more
difficult than it might otherwise be.
Oftenunable to arrive at certainty but
must be content with probability.

MAKING THE ANALYSIS THOROUGH
For moral judgment to be reliable, all
significant consequences must be
identified-the indirect as well as the
direct, the subtle as well as the
obvious, the unintended as well the
intended, the delayed as well as the
immediate, the emotional and
intellectual as well as the physical.

MAKING THE ANALYSIS THOROUGH
The temptation to judge quickly and
/or self-servingly poses a serious
obstacle to thorough analysis.
To ensure that you account for all
significant consequences, develop a
habit of using your imagination:
Visualize the action taking place at a
particular time and place, and ask
probing questions.
THREE DIFFICULT QUESTIONS
The basic rule of ethics is to do good
and avoid doing evil. But real-life
situations are often messy and raise
difficult questions, notably the
following:
1. Is it justifiable to perform an evil act
in order to achieve good
consequences?
Many ethicists answer no, arguing
that an evil act remains evil and
therefore unacceptable even when
done with good intentions or with a
good result.
2. Is it justifiable to perform an act that
is not in itself evil but produces mixed
consequences, some of them
beneficial and others harmful.
Most ethicists would say yes, provided
three conditions are met:
The good consequences are
inseparable from the bad,
The good consequences outweigh the
bad, and
The bad consequences are not directly
intended.
3. When only two actions are possible and
both produce good consequences, which
should be chosen?
The morally preferable action is the one
that produces the greater good.
Similarly, in cases where two actions are
possible and both produce harmful effects,
the morally preferable action is the one
that produces the lesser evil.
A CAUTION
in dealing with what is contemplated or
hypothetical, it is wise to keep the following
caution in mind:
However clear and logical our determination
of consequences may be, it is a prediction of
future events and not a certainty. The
particular set of responses that occurs and
the changes in the thoughts, attitudes, and
behavior of everyone affected by the action
are intricate and sometimes in some ways,
unpredictable.
DEALING WITH DILEMMAS
In evaluating a moral dilemma,
consider first whether it can be avoided
altogether; whether it is a true
dilemma or only an apparent one.
In a true moral dilemma, you must
choose between two alternatives-there
is no third.

Once you determine that you are
dealing with a true dilemma, look for
an indication that one of the two goods
is greater than the other,
or that one of the evils is less evil.

-30-

Human Values 1 To 10

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Human Values 1 To 10

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

HUMAN VALUES

Thinking Critically About Ethical Issues 6

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi