Chapter 3: How Can I Know What is Right?

Introduction Ethical skeptics – doubt whether there is such a thing as moral truth Ethical relativists – deny that there are any universally valid moral principles Ethical absolutists – claim there are moral absolutes Teleological ethical theories – consequences determine the rightness of an action Deontological ethical theories – advocate doing what is good regardless of the consequences

Kant and the Categorical Imperative Immanuel Kant (1724 – 1804) Published The Critique of Pure Reason, which revolutionized western philosophy

Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals Immanuel Kant Good will is the only thing that can be conceived as good without qualification Action of duty has moral worth not in the purpose to be attained, but by the principle of volition irrespective of desire Duty is the necessity to act out of reverence for the law

Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals Immanuel Kant The Categorical Imperative “I ought never to act except in such a way that I can also will that my maxim should become a universal law.”

Utilitarianism Jeremy Bentham (1748 – 1832) proposed the ethical theory of utilitarianism Utilitariansim – teleological theory that what makes an action right are its consequences John Stuart Mill (1806 – 1873)- “The greatest happiness for the greatest number” Hedonism – the highest good is pleasure

What Utilitarianism Is John Stuart Mill Actions are right in proportion to their promotion of happiness and wrong as they tend to produce pain The ultimate sanction of utility is subjective– the conscientious feeling of the mind Evidence that something is desirable is that people desire it

Revaluation of Values Some relate associate morality with religion Ethical nihilism – idea that there is no answer to what is right Ethical emotivism – claim that moral judgments express the appraiser’s attitudes of approval or disapproval Friedrich Nietzsche (1844 – 1900) believed that religion and human reason had failed to answer what is right

Beyond Good and Evil Friedrich Nietzsche Criticizes past attempts to understand morality Criticizes morality as defined by classes in the social system

On the Genealogy of Morality Friedrich Nietzsche “Good” was not originally “unegoistic actions”, but distinction of the noble class as opposed to those who are common, vulgar, or “bad” Slave revolt in morality Inversion of the aristocratic value equation by the Jews Ressentiment – recover losses through imaginary revenge The good is those who are powerless, sick, poor, etc. ?????????????????????????

The Ethic of Care Carol Gilligan proposed that there is a distinction between male and female concepts of morality While men emphasize reciprocity in relationships, women emphasize response, such as care, love, and trust, etc.

Caring Nel Noddings Natural and ethical caring Obligation “I must” and “I want” Obligation Moral imperative Dependent upon relationship Right and Wrong Problem of Justification Women and Morality: Virtue

Moral Relativism Is there a balance between a moral relativism that holds all human actions as equal in moral worth and a moral universalism or absolutism that holds to one set of moral values? David Wong attempts to find this middle ground

Relativism David Wong Meta-Ethical Relativism – the doctrine of relativity of moral truth and justifiability Normative Relativism – one should never pass judgment on others with different values or try to conform them to one’s own Wong proposes a middle ground of not holding to one single morality without denying that some moralities might be false or inadequate Allowing to pass judgment on significantly different values