Ethics 3 Markers

Briefly explain Bentham’s felicific calculus. 

Bentham’s hedonistic quantitative act utilitarianism argues that the morality of any given action can be deduced through the felicific calculus. This takes into account the intensity, duration, certainty, propinquity, fecundity, purity and extent of the pleasure the action will generate, in order to determine its utility. 

What is rule utilitarianism? 

Rule utilitarianism, associated primarily with the ideas of John Stuart Mill, says that an action is right if it conforms to a rule that generally promotes the greatest good. A strong rule utilitarian would argue that these moral rules should be obeyed always, whilst weak rule utilitarianism allows for a varying degree of exceptions.  

Briefly explain the difference between act and rule utilitarianism. 

Act utilitarians such as Jeremy Bentham believe that an action is morally right if and only if it provides the best possible outcome in that specific situation whilst rule utilitarians including John Stuart Mill argue that general rules should be followed which seek to maximise utility in the long term.  

 

What is preference utilitarianism? 

Preference utilitarianism is a value pluralist ethical theory which argues that moral actions are those that fulfill the most personal interests of those affected by said action. It is associated with Peter Singer who argues that the preferences of animals should also be taken into account. 

What does it mean to say that an ethical theory is consequentialist?  

Consequentialist ethical theories hold that an action is good if and only if the act (or the rule under which it falls) will produce, is likely to produce, or is intended to produce, a greater balance of good over bad than any available alternative. For instance, utilitarianism prescribes that the goal of morality should be the maximisation of utility, defined in terms of well-being.  

What is a deontological ethical theory? 

Deontological ethical theories posit that the morality of an action should be based on its adherence to a set of rules and principles. For instance, Kant argues that the only thing that is ‘good without qualification’ is acting in accordance with and out of respect for the moral law, or the categorical imperative. 

Outline the difference between consequentialist and deontological ethical theories. 

Consequentialism is oriented around the consequences of an action, whilst deontological ethics see morality as adhering to a set of principles divorced for their potential outcomes. For instance, a consequentialist would evaluate the morality of lying based on its outcomes, whilst a deontologist would assess it based on whether it complies with a set of moral obligations. 

What is a hypothetical imperative? 

According to Kant, a hypothetical imperative is a conditional, amoral rule of rational behaviour applicable to a given goal or situation. For instance, if I wanted to make tea, I would need to boil the kettle. 

Outline Kant’s principle of universalisability. 

Kant’s first formulation of the categorical imperative states that an action is moral if and only if we can rationally will its maxim to become a universal law. He goes on to distinguish between perfect duties, which produce logical contradictions when universalised and are never permissible; and imperfect duties, which do not produce this contradiction but cannot rationally be willed as universal. Kant argues these are more circumstantial, although still morally binding. 

What does the humanity formula of the categorical imperative claim? 

The humanity formulation of the categorical imperative claims that it is morally impermissible for someone to use the humanity of themselves or others as merely a means to an end – as this infringes on the autonomy of a rational agent to exist as an end within themself. 

What does Kant mean by ‘good will’? 

For Kant, good will means not just acting in accordance with the categorical imperative but doing so out of respect for and duty to the moral law. He argues it is the only thing that is ‘good without qualification’, as every other virtue can serve immoral ends.  

What does it mean to say that an ethical theory is act-centered? 

Act-centered ethical theories focus on the morality of actions rather than the individual carrying them out. For instance, an act-centered ethicist would evaluate the morality of someone stealing from a shop based on their view on the morality of shoplifting, rather than on the character of the thief.  

What does it mean to say that an ethical theory is agent-centered? 

Agent-centered ethical theories focus on the holistic morality of an individual moral agent, rather than the ethics of specific actions. For instance, for Aristotelian virtue ethics, being a good person means fulfilling your telos, or function, through the attainment of virtue towards Eudaimonia.   

What is the difference between act-centered and agent-centered ethical theories? 

Act-centered ethical theories such as Kantian ethics and utilitarianism focus on the morality of specific actions – e.g. shoplifting - whilst agent-centered theories, such as Aristotle’s virtue ethics, look at the holistic goodness (or virtue) of a moral agent. 

Outline Aristotle’s concept of Eudaimonia. 

Aristotle’s concept of Eudaimonia can most accurately be translated as ‘human flourishing’. It can be understood as the good life for a human being, a fulfilled state of existence that is achieved by the constant exercising of virtue regarding each part of the soul, especially those associated with reason. Informed by a teleological view of the universe, Aristotle understood Eudaimonia to be ‘that which all things aim at,’ the ultimate good. 

What, according to Aristotle, is a virtue? 

For Aristotle, a virtue (or arete) is a character trait that allows humans to properly fulfill their function (or ergon), contributing towards the attainment of Eudaimonia (human flourishing), the ultimate goal (or telos). For this to happen, virtues must be exercised in all parts of the soul, especially those associated with reason, in order for them to be fully  developed through a process of gradual habituation. 

Briefly explain why Aristotle thinks that pleasure is not the only good.

Aristotle argues that, although the attainment of pleasure can play an important role in the journey to Eudaimonia, it cannot be the only good as it is not only end people seek, and, in isolation, would lead to ‘a bovine existence’ ‘fit only for cattle’, not for the sophisticated telos (or function) of humans. 

What is Aristotle’s doctrine of the mean? 

Aristotle argues that every virtue (or arete), character traits enabling humans to properly fulfill their function, exists on a spectrum between vices of excess and vices of deficiency. Where the virtuous course of action falls on this line depends on the specifics of any given situation, and so moral agents must rationally apply the doctrine of mean to each situation to determine the best course of action and to act in accordance with virtue. 

What does Aristotle mean by a ‘voluntary action’? 

Aristotle defines a voluntary action as one that is done willingly in accordance with the agent’s intention and so has full moral value. For instance, choosing to dive into the ocean to save a small child would be a voluntary action, and so would contribute towards the attainment of virtue (in this case courage) and, in the long term, Eudaimonia.  

What is moral realism? 

Moral realism is the meta-ethical position that moral propositions refer to objective features of the world. For instance, Kant argues that the morality of an action relates to its accordance with the demands of a mind-independent moral law (the categorical imperative) accessible through reason. 

What is moral anti-realism? 

Moral anti-realism is the meta-ethical position that moral propositions do not refer to objective features of the world and so have no mind-independent truth value. For instance, cultural relativists argue that the truth value of a moral statement is dependent on the cultural context in which it is expressed. 

What is the difference between moral realism and moral anti-realism? 

Moral realists believe that moral propositions refer to objective features of the world, whilst moral anti-realists reject this, arguing that moral statements are instead: categorically false claims about the world, claims about subjective beliefs, or non-cognitivist expressions of attitudes.  

Outline Ayer’s verification principle. 

Ayer’s verification principle states that a statement is only meaningful if it is a) analytically true or b) synthetically verifiable. According to the principle, moral statements, which are neither tautological nor empirically demonstrable, are meaningless. 

What is ethical naturalism? 

Ethical naturalism is a meta-ethical view which claims that ethical sentences express propositions, some of which are true, and that these moral features are reducible to some non-moral features. For instance, Jeremy Bentham, a hedonistic utilitarian, argues in the language of natural science that moral actions maximise pleasure and minimise pain as it is a psychological fact that people will naturally desire these ends. 

What is ethical non-naturalism? 

Ethical non-naturalism is a meta-ethical view which claims that ethical sentences express propositions, some of which are true, and that, although made true by objective features of the world, they are not reducible to any non-moral properties of the world. For instance, GE Moore argues that goodness is indefinable, yet perceivable through a special moral faculty. 

What is the difference between ethical naturalism and ethical non-naturalism? 

Ethical naturalists believe that moral features are reducible to some non-moral features. For instance, Jeremy Bentham, a hedonistic utilitarian, argues in the language of natural science that moral actions maximise pleasure and minimise pain as it is a psychological fact that people will naturally desire these ends. However, ethical non-naturalists, such as GE Moore, argue moral properties are not reducible to non-moral properties and so are indefinable. 

What is ethical intuitionism?  

Ethical intuitionists argue that moral truths exist mind-independently and can be discovered non-inferentially. GE Moore argues that, as moral properties are unlike any other property, they are indescribable through amoral language, and yet are accessible through a special moral faculty. 

What is error theory? 

Error theory, associated with JL Mackie, argues that moral statements intend to describe objective features of the world, yet fail as these do not exist. Therefore, according to Mackie, all moral statements are false. 

What is ethical cognitivism? 

Ethical cognitivism is the meta-ethical view that ethical statements express propositions and so have a truth value. For instance, error theory claims that all moral statements are false, as moral properties do not exist. 

What is ethical non-cognitivism? 

Ethical non-cognitivism is the meta-ethical view that ethical statements do not express propositions and so don’t have a truth value. For instance, emotivism, associated with AJ Ayer, argues that moral statements express emotions and attitudes. 

What is the difference between cognitivism and non-cognitivism about ethical language? 

Ethical cognitivism is the meta-ethical view that ethical statements express propositions and so have a truth value; ethical cognitivists reject both of these assertions, arguing that ethical statements do not attempt to describe reality and so are not truth-apt. 

What is emotivism? 

Ethical emotivism, associated with AJ Ayer, argues that moral statements express non-cognitive emotions and attitudes, and so cannot have a truth value. For instance, when someone says, ‘murder is wrong’, according to Ayer, they are simply expressing ‘Boo! Murder!’.  

According to Hare’s prescriptivism, what does ‘x is morally right’ mean? 

Hare’s prescriptivism argues that moral statements primarily function similarly to a universalised command or request, whilst implicitly committing the person making the statement to the same standard. So according to Hare, ‘x is morally wrong’ means ‘Don’t do x’.