Moral Theory Review

More on Facts and Truth Facts – the way things actually are (sometimes called objective reality) Truth – a statement that matches the facts (an accurate representation of the way things are) Objective truths – represent objective facts Relative truths – statement can only be evaluated relative to some other state of affairs

Belief and Proof Belief – an opinion; a statement the believer thinks is true Can a belief be false? Proof – evidence or reasons that establish that a statement is true. Can a belief be true but not proven?

Objectivism vs. Relativism Should moral beliefs be evaluated on objective standards or relative to something else? Ethical Objectivists believe that there are objective (universally valid) moral standards. According to this theory the truth of at least some moral claims is objective.

Absolutism An extreme version of Objectivism Absolutists claim moral principals have no exceptions and are independent of context. Most objectivist theories are not absolutist.

Ethical Relativism Ethical Relativism – the claim that there are no objective moral principles. The truth of all moral claims is relative to the beliefs of the individual or their culture. Social relativism: The truth of moral principles is determined by social choice (e.g., cultural norms) Individual relativism: The truth of moral principles is determined by the individual’s beliefs and choices

What’s wrong with relativism? If relativism were an accurate account of the nature of morality: Any behavior could be justified as morally right Questions about right and wrong could be answered with opinion polls Inter-societal moral judgments would be impossible Revolutionaries would always be wrong Moral progress would be impossible

A note on tolerance Good reasoners recognize their own fallibility Objectivism does not entail forcing others to accept one’s beliefs Appealing to the principle of tolerance is an appeal to an objective moral principle.

Moral Theory Assuming morality is objective, how do you determine what is right or wrong? The goal of moral theory is to develop a systematic way of determining what makes an action right or wrong.

Consequentialism Morality is based on the outcome (i.e. consequences) Consequentialism is not egoistic Utilitarianism is a type of consequentialism Consequentialists weigh likely positive and negative consequences to determine the right action.

Pros & Cons Consequentialist reasoning is quite common Consequentialist reasoning is “fair” It seems to make morality clear cut But it can very difficult to predict and weigh the consequences It is often oversimplified or improperly used to rationalize choices Consequentialists must be very careful to consider all of the consequences for all those affected.

There are many counter-examples Consequentialism does not allow for “special obligations” (lifeboat example) Sometimes consequentialism seems to validate actions that are clearly wrong. (forced organ donor example)

Deontology Morality is based on duties/obligations/principles rather than consequences Kant was a deontologist. The categorical imperative: Act only on that principle whereby you can will that it become a universal law. Applies universally because of human dignity

Examples of Principles Fidelity Veracity Autonomy Beneficence Nonmaleficence Justice

Questions for deontologists Where do the principles come from? All deontological theories have to face the difficulty of defending and justifying their principles When principles conflict: how does one determine which takes precedence?

Virtue Ethics Originated with Aristotle Focuses on the individual’s character rather than her or his particular actions Virtues are dispositions/habits -- you have to work to get them There is no definitive list of virtues, but some possibilities are: wisdom, courage, compassion, generosity

Virtue ethics + ? Character plays a key role in making good choices, but you still need some way to determine which choices are the right ones. Virtue ethics provides limited guidance in moral decision making

The ethics of care Traditional theories have been criticized for being “cold” Some theorists suggest that human relations are not cold and abstract They suggest that moral emotions such as care and empathy should be included in the considerations about right action. (e.g., warm and cold doctors)

What to do? There is not one established theory to guide our choices. Reasoned choices require that the moral agent consider consequences and duties in a caring and empathetic way.