PHIL 2 Philosophy: Ethics in Contemporary Society Week 2 Topic Outlines

Week 2, PHIL22.2 Week 2 Absolutism versus Relativism – Chap. 4 An Analysis of Freedom versus Determinism – Chap. 5 Reward and Punishment – Chap. 6 Act of Setting Up a Moral System – Chap. 7

Week 2, PHIL22.3 Topic 1: Absolutism vs. Relativism Anthropological “facts” about absolutism and relativism Types of propositions and how truth and knowledge relate to them How human beings can relate absolutes to their moral lives

Week 2, PHIL22.4 Anthropological “Facts” about Absolutism and Relativism In support of absolutism: Similar moral values exist in all societies. People in all cultures have similar needs. Many similarities exist in situations and relationships in all cultures. Many similarities exist in sentiments, emotions, and attitudes.

Week 2, PHIL22.5 Anthropological “Facts” about Absolutism and Relativism (continued) In support of relativism: Extreme variations exist from culture to culture in customs, manners, taboos, and religions. Moral beliefs and attitudes are learned essential from people’s cultural environments. People in different cultures tend to believe theirs is the one true morality.

Week 2, PHIL22.6 Types of Propositions and How Truth and Knowledge Relate to Them Propositions are either true or false. A true proposition describes a state of affairs that was, is, or will be occurring. A false proposition describes a state of affairs that did not occur, is not occurring, and will not occur. Truth is absolute.

Week 2, PHIL22.7 Types of Propositions and How Truth and Knowledge Relate to Them Types of propositions: Analytic – known to be absolute Internal sense or internal state – known to be true because we have the experience Empirical, or external sense – describes affairs of which we have evidence through our external senses Moral – concern things with moral import; they are empirical and rational

Week 2, PHIL22.8 How Human Beings Can Relate Absolutes to Their Moral Lives Basic moral principles are near absolutes; they should be observed as absolutes whenever possible. There may be justifiable exceptions to these principles. If we make an exception to a near absolute, we must fully justify that exception.

Week 2, PHIL22.9 Topic 2: An Analysis of Freedom vs. Determinism Hard and soft determinism, fatalism, and indeterminism Arguments for and against determinism Applying freedom-vs.-determinism to moral responsibility

Week 2, PHIL22.10 Hard and Soft Determinism, Fatalism, and Indeterminism Determinism: for every effect, event or occurrence in reality, a cause or causes exist. Hard determinism: if all events are caused, then freedom is incompatible with determinism.

Week 2, PHIL22.11 Hard and Soft Determinism, Fatalism, and Indeterminism (cont.) Soft determinism: all events are caused, but some events and causes originate with human being. Fatalism: all events are irrevocably fixed and predetermined; humans cannot alter them in any way.

Week 2, PHIL22.12 Hard and Soft Determinism, Fatalism, and Indeterminism (cont.) Indeterminism: not everything is caused; there is a certain amount of chance and freedom in the world.

Week 2, PHIL22.13 Arguments For and Against Determinism For: Human beings are determined by their genetic makeup, over which they have no control. Humans are completely physical beings whose development is totally determined by external stimuli of their environments. Little evidence suggests that non-caused events ever occur.

Week 2, PHIL22.14 Arguments For and Against Determinism (continued) Against: Most religious theories of salvation make no sense if human beings are not free to choose between good and evil. Scientific determinism ignores the mental or spiritual side of humans. Events being uncaused is no guarantee of human freedom, but only of chance.

Week 2, PHIL22.15 Applying Freedom-vs.-Determinism to Moral Responsibility How can you hold a person morally responsible – blaming, praising, rewarding or punishing them – for what they do and do not do if they cannot help it?

Week 2, PHIL22.16 Topic 3: Reward and Punishment Relationship between reward and punishment and justice Theories of reward and punishment: retribution, utilitarianism, and restitution Criteria for rewarding and punishing

Week 2, PHIL22.17 Relationship between Reward and Punishment and Justice Justice is the distribution of good and bad to human beings on a just and fair basis. Justice is concerned with past events. Justice should be individualistic – punishment and reward should be for the individual, not the group.

Week 2, PHIL22.18 Theories of Reward and Punishment: Retribution, Utilitarianism, and Restitution Retribution: giving people what they deserve, an eye for an eye; also called revenge or just deserts Utilitarianism: rewarding or punishing based on the results of the act and whether it brings about the greatest good consequences for everyone involved

Week 2, PHIL22.19 Theories of Reward and Punishment: Retribution, Utilitarianism, and Restitution Restitution: compensating a victim for harm or wrong done to him or her; such compensation is usually made by the perpetrator

Week 2, PHIL22.20 Criteria for Rewarding and Punishing Criteria for rewarding: As equally as possible According to ability According to what they merit According to need According effort According to danger or unpleasantness of job

Week 2, PHIL22.21 Criteria for Rewarding and Punishing (continued) Criteria for punishing: It must involve unpleasantness. It must be imposed or endured for some reason. It should be imposed by some person or group with moral or legal authority. It must be imposed according to certain rules or laws.

Week 2, PHIL22.22 Topic 4: Act of Setting Up a Moral System Major conflicting general issues in setting up a moral system Resolving the central problem areas of morality Priority in which five basic principles should be applied

Week 2, PHIL22.23 Major Conflicting General Issues in Setting Up a Moral System Consequentialism vs. nonconsequentialism Self- vs. other-interestedness Act vs. rule Emotion vs. reason

Week 2, PHIL22.24 Resolving the Central Problem Areas of Morality A workable set of standards for morality includes: Rational and emotional aspects Logical consistency with flexibility Universality and particularity Ability to be taught and promulgated Ability to resolve conflicts

Week 2, PHIL22.25 Priority in Which Five Basic Principles Should Be Applied Determining priority of the basic principles: General way, in which the principles are classified into two major categories based on logical and empirical priority. Particular way, in which priority is determined by the actual situation or context in which actions and decisions occur.

Week 2, PHIL22.26 Priority in Which Five Basic Principles Should Be Applied (cont) General way – two categories: Primary category – Principle of Goodness Value of Life Secondary category – Justice Truth-telling Individual freedom

Week 2, PHIL22.27 Priority in Which Five Basic Principles Should Be Applied (cont.) Particular way – priority is determined only by referring to the actual situation or context in which the moral action or decision occurs Morality always occurs in particular situations to particular people, never in the abstract.

Week 2, PHIL22.28 Week 2 Thiroux, Jacques P. Ethics – Theory and Practice, 8th ed. Chapters 4-7