1. Ethical Theory Seeking a Standard for Morally Correct Action
Week of September 9-13
Ethical Theory
Seeking a Standard for Morally Correct Action
Phil 240: Ethics

2. Overview What is an ethical theory?
The two main ethical theories: consequentialism and nonconsequentialism
Focus on consequentialism
Consequentialism as applied in business and public policy

3. Three Levels of Ethical Judgment
Particular cases: e.g., Mary’s abortion was morally wrong.
Principles: e.g.:
“Abortion is wrong except to save a human life” (applies to all cases of abortion)
“Killing another person is wrong except in self-defense.” (applies to all cases of killing)
The most general principle would apply to all actions—this is a theory.

4. A Theory is an Ethical Standard for all Actions
An answer to the question: what makes a morally right act right?
What do all morally right acts have in common?

5. Consequentialism
The morally right act is the one with the best consequences.
Consequentialism also called utilitarianism
Totally future oriented: looks at results
Certainly general enough. It can apply to all actions. But is it correct?

6. Are any actions good or bad in themselves?
Consequentialism:
No: an action is right or wrong depending on whether its consequences are good or bad.
Right good
Nonconsequentialism
Yes: Some actions are inherently good or bad.
Rule-based theory
Rights-based theory

7. Consequentialism and Nonconsequentialism (Refined)
Consequences are the ONLY thing to consider
Nonconsequentialism
Consequences count, but also rules and rights
Consequences are irrelevant
Prima facie (non-absolute) rules and rights
Absolute rules (Kant) and rights

8. Are any actions immoral in and of themselves?
Imagine you can save 10 children from dying of a painful disease by capturing one child from an orphanage and doing an experiment that will cause that one child a painful death.
No other way to save the 10 children.
Would it be morally okay?

9. Are any actions immoral in and of themselves?
Churchill example: was it morally right for Churchill to aim to kill innocent civilians in German cities in order to prevent a greater number of deaths from a Nazi victory?

10. Nonconsequentialist
Certain moral rules define correct actions: e.g., “it is always immoral to act with an intent to kill innocent people.”
Can be formulated as moral rights of the person acted on; e.g., “children have an absolute moral right not to be subjects of dangerous experiments.”
Any act violating a moral rule or right is inherently immoral (regardless of results).

11. Consequentialist Response
Consequentialism not as crude as first appears.
Would not condone killing if same good result possible with less harm
Must consider long-term and subtle consequences as well (e.g., precedent set)

12. Consequentialism “in practice”
If right act is one that creates good consequences, good for whom?
Answer: for everyone affected.
Must be impartial: self or family counts no more (or less) than anyone else

13. If right act is one with good consequences, what is “good”?
Happiness as only good
Bentham: quantity of pleasure
Mill quality as well as quantity of pleasure
Satisfaction of preferences as the good (less paternalistic?)
Goes with capitalism
“Preference utilitarianism”

14. Must Choose Best Possible Act
+ 15 +9 +8
-10 -3 -1 5 6 7

15. How Are These Points Determined?
Number of people affected
“Intensity” of the effect
Likelihood
(Should we also consider whether effect will happen sooner or later?)

16. “Consequentialism is flawed because we can’t predict the future with certainty” What should we think of this criticism?

17. A weak criticism of consequentialism: “we don’t know what’s going to happen”
Consequentialism takes that into account (likelihood)
Reasonable to “play the odds,” just as we do in everyday life
Falsely assumes that a good ethical theory must be simple and easy to apply.

18. How does utilitarian theory get applied as cost-benefit analysis?
The “minus points” are costs (e.g., $$$)
The “plus points” are benefits such as
Lives saved
Reduction in risk of dying
Suffering avoided (e.g., days in hospital)
Pleasure gained
Typical: is it worth spending a million dollars to . . .?

19. What are the problems of CBA?
The “dwarfing of soft variables”—stuff that can’t easily be quantified as dollars like enjoyment of a sunny day.
Defining the value of a human life in dollar terms.
Willingness to pay for reduction in risks
Wording of surveys
Expected future earnings?
Irrationality of popular perception of risks.

20. Problems Applying vs Criticisms
Problems applying do not challenge the whole approach of utilitarianism
They are things utilitarians disagree about
If we decide consequentialism (utilitarianism) is the right theory, then we may still debate
What things are good (happiness, etc.)?
How to figure out the numbers (e.g., $ for life)

21. Criticisms of Consequentialism
Ethical Theory
Week of September 9-13
Criticisms of Consequentialism
Phil 240: Ethics 1

22. Key Concepts Moral rules and moral rights
Ethical Theory
Week of September 9-13
Key Concepts
Moral rules and moral rights
Justice (as one part of morality)
Morally relevant difference between acts and omissions
Intuition and “reflective equilibrium”
Testing whether an argument withstands criticism
Phil 240: Ethics 2

23. You Should Know What are the main criticisms of consequentialism?
Ethical Theory
Week of September 9-13
You Should Know
What are the main criticisms of consequentialism?
How does the consequentialist respond to each of them?
Different views on the role of theory in relation to our intuition on particular cases.
Phil 240: Ethics 3

24. Problems Applying vs. Criticisms
Ethical Theory
Week of September 9-13
Problems Applying vs. Criticisms
“Problems applying” utilitarianism do not challenge the whole approach of the theory. (Criticisms do.)
They are things utilitarians disagree about.
If we decide consequentialism (utilitarianism) is the right theory, then we may still debate
What things are good (happiness, etc.)?
How to figure out the numbers (e.g., $ for life)
Phil 240: Ethics

25. Criticisms of Consequentialism
Ethical Theory
Week of September 9-13
Criticisms of Consequentialism
Utilitarianism does not take into account rights and rules.
Utilitarianism does not take into account justice.
Consequentialism does not take into account the morally relevant difference between acts and omissions
Consequentialism does not take into account special obligations to special people
Consequentialism requires too much of us (relate this to #3)
Phil 240: Ethics

26. Consequentialism ignores moral rules and moral rights
Ethical Theory
Week of September 9-13
Consequentialism ignores moral rules and moral rights
A fundamental question of all ethics: Do we need the notion of rights?
Big problems: Where do rights come from? What rights do we have?
But can we have an acceptable ethical theory without rights?
Phil 240: Ethics 4

27. Theory and Particular Cases
Ethical Theory
Week of September 9-13
Theory and Particular Cases
Can’t decide on particular case first and then pick the theory that matches. Why not?
But we do test theory by application to specific cases. (Analogy with science.)
Debate on role of intuition.
Reflective equilibrium.
Phil 240: Ethics 5

28. Utilitarianism Ignores Justice
Ethical Theory
Week of September 9-13
Utilitarianism Ignores Justice
10% of population becomes slaves.
90% are extremely happy.
Society has greatest balance of +/- points.
Utilitarian chooses this.
Everyone has freedom
Total happiness not as great
Phil 240: Ethics 6

29. Utilitarianism Ignores Special Obligations to Special People
But why should I save my daughter over 100 starving children?
Cannot appeal to feelings
Cannot appeal to what most people would do.
Need an ethical principle.

30. Morally Relevant Difference Between Acts and Omissions
Ethical Theory
Week of September 9-13
Morally Relevant Difference Between Acts and Omissions
Is it morally worse to kill a patient who wants to die than not to treat?
Is it morally worse to bomb innocent civilians than to allow them to die by not acting?
What if killing can reduce the number who die, as Williams’ Indian example?
Is it wrong to buy running shoes when the money could save many people’s lives? Ut
Phil 240: Ethics

31. Think About What is the strongest criticism of utilitarianism? Why?
Can utilitarianism withstand criticism?
Basic: A claim is well-grounded if the arguments for it can withstand criticism.
A “well-grounded claim” is one more worthy of belief.