An introduction to

Ethics

Important Vocabulary/Concepts

Philosophy Ethics Motive Act Consequence Culpable Consequentialism Utilitarianism The Principle of Utility Vice Virtue Virtue Ethics Intrinsic value Instrumental value The Categorical Imperative

Ethical Philosophy

Philosophy: the rational investigation of the truths and principles of being, knowledge, or conduct.

Ethics: that branch of philosophy dealing with values relating to human conduct, with respect to the rightness and wrongness of certain actions and to the goodness and badness of the motives and ends of such actions .

Ethical Right and Wrong Vs

Factual Right and Wrong

Claim Ethical Non-Ethical

Grass is green Right

Grass is fluorescent pink Wrong

A person should never steal

Right or Wrong?

A person should never murder

Right or Wrong?

All human beings ought to die with dignity

Right or Wrong?

All human beings will eventually die.

Right

Ethical Questions Vs Non-Ethical Questions

Question Ethical Non-Ethical

Should all people ought to have the right to vote?

Is it legal for women to vote in America today?

Is the death penalty legal in Nebraska?

Should the death penalty be legalized in all states?

Is it Ethically Right or Wrong????

Throughout the history of humankind, many ethical theories have been devised in order to answer this question.

Every ethical theory forms its argument around at least one of these three things:

1. The Motive

2. The Act

3. The Consequence

MotiveNoun

something (as a need or desire) that causes a person to act

something that causes a person to act in a certain way, do a certain thing, etc.; incentive.

the goal or object of a person's actions

Her motive was revenge.

Actthe doing of a thing anything done, being done, or to be donedeed performance

Stealing may or may not be a wrongful act.

ConsequenceNoun

something produced by a cause or necessarily following from a set of conditions

the effect, result, or outcome of something occurring earlier:

an act or instance of following something as an effect, result, or outcome.

The accident was the consequence of reckless driving.

1st Motive

2nd Act

3rd Consequence

Read the Following Scenario.

A young woman is walking down Main St in Santa Ana. A homeless man is sitting on the sidewalk, begging for food. The woman remembers that she has an old cup of unpasturized apple sauce in her purse (which is well past the expiration date) and decides to give it to the hungry homeless man. The woman does not realize the food is past its expiration date. The homeless man eats the apple sauce and dies of E. coli poisoning.

What happened?

What was the woman’s motive?Was her motive ethically right/good or

wrong/bad?What was the woman’s action?Was the act ethically right/good or

wrong/bad?What was the consequence?Was the consequence ethically right/good

or wrong/bad?

How can we decide if the woman is morally culpable (deserving blame) for

the man’s death?We must decide which of the three

(Motive, Act, or Consequence) deserves the most weight.

Do you believe her motive should be weighed most heavily when deciding her culpability?

What about her act?What about the consequence?

3 Different Theories

Motive Virtue Ethics (Aristotle)

Motive and Act Kant’s Moral Theory (Immanuel Kant)

Consequence Utilitarianism (John Stuart Mill)

Virtue Ethics: A focus on Motive

Virtue Ethics is most concerned with how a person is rather than how they act.

Virtues are good traits such as honesty, loyalty, bravery, temperance, etc.

A virtuous person is a morally good personThe opposite of Virtue is Vice.Vices are traits like dishonesty,

untrustworthiness, cowardice, gluttony, etc.

The Virtuous Mean

Vice of Deficiency

Virtue Vice of Excess

Cowardice Courage Rashness

Shamelessness Modesty Bashfulness

Want of Ambition Right Ambition Over-ambition

The Moral Virtues

Aristotle believed that if a person practices certain moral virtues, like honesty and loyalty, then that person will inevitably act virtuously.

The focus of virtue ethics is mainly on the virtuous motive rather than the act or the consequence.

What would a follower of Virtue Ethics say about the Homeless Man Scenario?

3 Different Theories

Motive Virtue Ethics (Aristotle)

Motive and Act Kant’s Moral Theory (Immanuel Kant)

Consequence Utilitarianism (John Stuart Mill)

Kant’s (1724-1804) Moral Theory: A focus on the Act (and the motive), not consequences.

Kant says that we ought not be blamed for consequences if we are trying to do the right thing. Our reason for acting is important, not the consequences of our actions.

This is because consequences are often out of our control. Motives and acts, however, are in our control. Therefore, we should only be blamed for what is in our control.

Kant’s 2nd argument against focusing on consequences

Kant believes that people have intrinsic value and not

instrumental value

Intrinsic: native, innate, natural, true, real.

Instrumental: serving or acting as an instrument or means; useful; helpful

Kant believes that people ought not to be used.

Kant says that if we focus on the importance

of consequences (for example: bringing

about happiness), then we are focusing on

the instrumental value of people. Kant

thinks that this is not the correct way to

approach ethical questions.

According to Kant, what gives an Act moral worth?

The consequence of the act does not give it worth.

An act has moral worth if we act out of the right motivation and do the right thing.

He even goes as far as to say it is our Duty to do the right thing.

Duty: something that one is expected or required to do by moral or legal obligation

This idea of “Duty” brings us to Kant’s basic moral principle:

The Categorical Imperative

Kant’s Categorical Imperative

“The Categorical Imperative” is as important to Kant’s theory as “The Principle of Utility” is to Utilitarianism.

Act only on the maxim that you can will as a universal law.

In other words:We should only do what we can accept or will that

everyone do.

Act only on the maxim that you can will as a universal law.-The first Categorical Imperative

Ethical Question: Should I steal from my neighbor?

The only way I can answer yes is if I can create a universal law (a law that everyone must follow) stating: Everyone must steal from their neighbor.

Obviously, this would be a horrible law, therefore, according to Kant’s Categorical Imperative, it is unethical to steal from your neighbor.

Try again…

Ethical Question: Should I be kind to others?

Can you rightfully turn this into a universal law?

It seems reasonable that all people ought to be kind to others, therefore this question can be answered: Yes! I should be kind to others.

The second Categorical Imperative

Kant added one more rule to his theory:

Always treat humanity, whether in your own person or that of another, never simply as a means but always as an

end.

This brings us back to his belief that all people have intrinsic value, not

instrumental.

Kant’s View

How might Kant address the Homeless Man scenario?

Since Kant believes that consequences have no relevance, do you agree or disagree with Kant’s theory?

3 Different Theories

Motive Virtue Ethics (Aristotle)

Motive and Act Kant’s Moral Theory (Immanuel Kant)

Consequence Utilitarianism (John Stuart Mill/Jeremy Bentham)

Consequentialism: A focus on Consequence.

Consequentialism holds that ethical dilemmas should be evaluated based on consequences.

One of the most famous Consequentialist theories is Utilitarianism, based mainly on the writings of Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) and John Stuart Mill (1806-1873).

Pleasure, or happiness, is the consequence all people strive to achieve.

Utilitarianism: A Consequentialist Theory

Mill said, “He who saves a fellow creature from drowning does what is morally right, whether his motive be duty or the hope of being paid for his

trouble.”

Utilitarianism’s basic moral principle

The Principle of Utility (The Greatest Happiness Principle):

We ought to do that which produces the greatest amount of happiness (pleasure) for the greatest

number of people.

Do you agree? If so, you might be a Utilitarian.How might we apply this to the Homeless Man Scenario?

The Pursuit of Pleasure

When Bentham first wrote his theory, he argued that a being’s prime interest is decreasing pain and increasing pleasure.

His Godson, Mill, revised this theory by identifying the difference between intellectual pleasure and physical pleasure.

For Mill, The Quality of Pleasure Matters.

Mill stated, “It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied.”

For Mill, Intellectual pleasures bring a higher quality of pleasure--which have greater worth--when evaluating an ethical dilemma.

Hedonic Calculus

See Handout