THEO 353L2- Methodology required document to jog your memory to excellence

Ethical Theories: Purpose  Understand how we ought to treat each other  What to consider when deciding what to do  How we justify decisions  Learn how ethical theories influence decision-making 1. Virtue-based ...

Ethical Theories: Purpose  Understand how we ought to treat each other  What to consider when deciding what to do  How we justify decisions  Learn how ethical theories influence decision-making 1. Virtue-based perspective 2. Rights-based perspective 3. Duty-based perspective 4. Utilitarian-based perspective 5. Care-based perspective 1.Virtue-Based Ethics  Introduced method for scientific investigation  Key work on ethics: Nicomachean Ethics  Teleological approach  result of an action  Telos: Greek word meaning end or goal  what is a good life?  Human flourishing  acting virtuously -ethical action involves discerning and promoting the proper ends or goals  how things “work”  discerning their inner structure  observing their own path of development  acting to promote their flourishing -in virtue-based ethics, acting ethically requires:  Interiorizing good values  Learning good habits  Developing good character  Cultivating virtues Virtue (Aristotle definition):  A cultivated habit  A formation of character  A type of habitual dedication that enables us and directs us o To be attentive & good o To care for it o To understand it o To act in an informed and responsible way The Golden Mean  Middle way between extremes of excess & deficiency  States of character finding expression in purpose & action  Virtue is deliberate & involves appropriate emotional responses  The intermediate depends on the situation, not an exact science “What should I do?”  Refers to one’s character  What promotes the development of virtue throughout a person’s life Strengths:  Insistence on careful reflection  Balanced outcome  Recognize the limitations of human acting  Promotes development of virtue throughout person’s life Limitations:  Strangers must rely on rules & obligations, not character evaluation  Evaluating ones’ character seems trivial when faced with immediate, challenging decisions  Insufficiency of virtue – good people with good intentions can perform wrong actions 2.Rights-Based Ethics Jean-Jaques Rousseau & John Locke  Response to unjust class structures and authoritarian rule  Rights are understood to be “natural rights” of all human beings  Allow everybody full liberty & full participation in society  Paved way to American Revolution & French Revolution  The universal declaration of human rights bases itself on rights-based ethics Rights-based ethics of John Locke  Highest faculty is reason o Natural rights to use it to determine how we will live  Use reason to establish and live according to social contracts  Social contracts allow us to o Design own customs, rules, traditions, social structures  Agreement to hand-over some natural rights to the state to guarantee liberty against intrusion by others The Two Spheres of Rights-Based Ethics The Public:  Rights prevail  Obligation is to avoid infringing on the rights of others  Enforced by courts of law The Private:  Goal of rights in public realm ensures maximal liberty for our own personal ethical & religious convictions “What should I do?”  What are my rights?  In bioethics there is a correlation between rights and human dignity o Human dignity based on right to live as we choose as long as it does not interfere with others Limitations:  Extreme individualism  Focus on the individual at expense of community  Adversarial nature of rights 3.Duty-Based Ethics Immanuel Kant  Concerned with “the search for a single supreme principle of morality”  Non-religious ground for duty o Duty-centred ethics  Duty comes from rational capacity  Cornerstone to morality is freedom o We are free o We have free will to choose how to act o We are accountable and responsible for our actions  Source of duties and obligation is human reason o Our capacity for reason “commands” us to act in a responsible manner Deontological ethics  Deon: Greek word for duty  Ethics is understood as: o Personal duty o Obligation o Individual conviction o Rational decision making  Rooted in the private realm  Identified with inner, individual life of: o Personal conviction o Rational autonomy Kant’s Two Categorical Imperatives -our duty is to act according to principles that must be applicable to all. Categorical imperatives: 1. Principle of Universality: act only in accordance with the maxim through which you can at the same time will that it become a universal law  Intention of action, not consequence  Concern is with what our will is intending  Consistency of willing  Consistent = rational  Rationality is the origin of morality 2. Principle of Autonomy: respect of others “never act in such a way as to treat humanity, whether in ourselves or in others, as a means only but always as an end in itself”  Dignity is grounded in autonomy “There is nothing it is possible to think of anywhere in the world, or indeed anything at all outside it, that can be held to be good without limitation, excepting only a good will.” Deontological Ethics “What should I do?”  Consider the problem in light of the prior, fixed (rational) criteria  Is this something that everyone should be allowed to do in every case?  The good is what can be universally applied  Dignity of the person is paramount Limitations:  Conflicting obligation  Overemphasis on law, under emphasis on relationships  Contradiction between will and actions, not black and white  Abstract and impractical  Sometimes the best intentions can lead to the worst outcomes 4.Consequence-Based Ethics John Stuart Mill -Utilitarian Ethics or Teleological Ethics o Humans naturally tend to pursue personal happiness o However social life requires common action o Obligation: o Pursue the greatest good for the greatest number Utilitarian Ethics -judges the moral worth of actions in terms of the consequences of those actions  point of preference- consequences of an action  if the consequence of an action is the source drawn on to make a decision at an individual level, the criterion is happiness  If the end result promotes happiness, then it is good  The ethical act is what brings about happiness  Ethics has to do with personal preference Utilitarianism: an expression of personal preference  Individual action is right if it increases happiness more than unhappiness Cost-Benefit analysis  What will it cost?  What is the benefit?  Does the benefit outweigh the cost? What should I do?  What is wanted?  What most satisfies ones’ desire?  How efficiently can I get it?  The good is what maximizes the satisfaction of personal desire or social goals Limitations:  Who determines the good?  How is the good decided?  Majority interests outweighs minority – tends to exclude most vulnerable  Sometimes horrible actions can lead to positive results – for example, does murdering a brutal dictator justify murder? 5.Care-Based Ethics Carol Gilligan & Nel Noddings  Most contemporary ethical tradition  Feminist thinkers  Focused on female ways of moral knowing  Women operate out of a different set of values  Relationship-based reasoning Care-based ethics -challenge abstract forms of reasoning -communitarian in nature -allows for uniqueness of individuals -focus on responsiveness in an interconnected network of need, care, and prevention of harm -sees caring as the ethical ideal -need to focus attention on the concrete needs of those close to us -no core principles Mothering is not a role, but a relationship  Caring simply because of duty has an impersonal dimension  Acting out of duty is different than acting out of love and care  Christian ethics, which promotes universal love, is rejected by care-based ethics o How can we possibly care for all human beings? o Universal ethics is seen as just another abstraction “What should I do?”  Must focus on the concrete needs of those we love and care for Limitations: Ethics needs to:  Go beyond the face-to-face encounter to involve appeals to justice  Complement moral sentiment with reason