Ethics

applied ethics

the application of normative ethical theories—i.e., philosophical theories regarding criteria for determining what is morally right or wrong, good or bad—to practical problems

bioethics

Bioethics is the study and response to moral and ethical questions arising from biology, health care, and technology

cultural relativism

Cultural relativism holds that ethical practices differ across cultures. What is right in one culture may be wrong in another, and no culture is superior.

deductive arguement

establishes a conclusion to be true by stating two or more true premises that lead to the conclusion being true.

descriptive ethics

the study of people's beliefs about morality. It contrasts with normative ethics

divine command theory

suggests that morality and ethical behavior are derived from the commands of God

ethical relativism

the doctrine that there are no absolute truths in ethics and that what is morally right or wrong varies from person to person or from society to society.

ethics

moral principles that govern a person's behavior or the conducting of an activity

inductive reasoning

refers to a variety of methods of reasoning in which the conclusion of an argument is supported not with deductive certainty, but at best with some degree of probability

metaethics

is concerned with the nature of ethics itself. It goes beyond specific moral judgments and seeks to understand the foundations, origins, and meanings of moral concepts

moral absolutism

the view that some actions are always right or wrong, regardless of context or consequence

moral argument

components:

• at least 1 premise asserting a general moral norm, such as a moral principle; without this, we cannot draw a moral conclusion

• at least 1 nonmoral statement describing a relevant action or situation

• a conclusion, or claim, expressing a moral judgement about a specific action or situation that follows from the two premises logically

moral objectivism

the belief that principles of right and wrong exist independently of personal opinions or contexts

morality

beliefs about right/wrong actions, and good/bad persons or characters

normative ethics

the study of ethical behaviour and is the branch of philosophical ethics that investigates questions regarding how one ought to act, in a moral sense.

paternalism

the interference of a state or an individual with another person, against their will, and defended or motivated by a claim that the person interfered with will be better off or protected from harm

subjective relativism

asserts that each person's opinion is equally valid, and there's no external criterion to judge one belief as better than another.

three branches of ethics

normative ethics, metaethics, applied ethics(differs from descriptive ethics)

Overridingness

moral norms are taken to have greater significance than other kinds of norms, and thus, override other norms when they come in conflict

(property of moral norms)

Universality

moral norms are take to apply in all relevantly similar situations

(property of moral norms)

Impartiality

moral norms imply that everyone should be treated evenhandedly, without bias, unless there is a morally relevant difference between individuals

(property of moral norms)

Reasonableness

for moral judgements to avoid being merely personal tastes or emotional reactions, they must be supported by sound reasons that could be acknowledged and accepted by other reasoning persons

(property of moral norms)

Autonomy

a person’s rational capacity for self-determination (limited by harm principle)

(key moral principle)

Beneficience

doing good to others

(key moral principle)

Nonmaleficence

not doing harm to others

(key moral principle)

Justice

people should receive fair treatment; they should get their due

(key moral principle)

Utility

we should seek the most favorable balance of good over bad (benefit over harm)

(key moral principle)

Modus ponens(affirming the antecedent)

If p, then q.

P.

Therefore, q. (valid)

Modus tollens(denying the consequent)

If p, then q.

Not q.

Therefore, not p. (valid)

affirming the consequent

If p, then q.

Q.

Therefore, p. (invalid)

denying the antecedent

If p, then q.

Not p.

Therefore, not q. (invalid)

Strawman fallacy

misrepresents an opponent’s position so as to easily knock it down; disregards an opponent’s actual position, and attacks a false, weaker version of it instead

(logical fallacy)

Ad hominem

attacks the opponent, rather than their actual position

(logical fallacy)

Appeal to ignorance

attempts to prove a claim is true because it hasn’t been proven false, or that a claim is false because it hasn’t been proven true at all

(logical fallacy)

Begging the question

attempts to prove a conclusion by using the very same conclusion (in modified form) as proof

(logical fallacy)

Slippery slope

attacks a position on the erroneous basis that it inevitably leads to a worse position; attempts to prove that, although p is acceptable in itself, accepting p will automatically lead to q, which is unacceptable; therefore, we should not accept p, even though it is acceptable in itself

(logical fallacy)

act utilitarianism

focuses on the consequences of individual actions and assesses them based on their expected utility or benefit. It evaluates actions separately, considering each one in terms of its effect on happiness or pleasure. Act utilitarianism means an act may be considered morally right even if it violates traditional notions of justice or individual rights.

consequentialist theory

assume that the rightness of actions depends on their consequences or results

(Ultilitarianism)

contractarianism

claims that moral norms derive their normative force from the idea of contract or mutual agreement.

deontological

say that the rightness of actions is determined partly or wholly by their intrinsic nature.

(Kant)

doctrine of double effect

often invoked to explain the permissibility of an action that causes a serious harm, such as the death of a human being, as a side effect of promoting some good end. According to the principle of double effect, sometimes it is permissible to cause a harm as an unintended and merely foreseen side effect (or “double effect”) of bringing about a good result even though it would not be permissible to cause such a harm as a means to bringing about the same good end

moral theory

explains why an action is right or wrong or why a person or a person’s character is good or bad

natural law theory

a centuries-old view of ethics that maintains that right actions are those conforming to moral standards discerned in nature through human reason

rule-utilitarianism

considers larger sets of actions rather than just individual acts. It looks at how certain rules or norms can maximize utility for society when followed by everyone. This approach considers justice and individual rights, as it promotes rules that benefit everyone in the long run without disadvantaging certain groups more than others.

utilitarianism

the view that right actions are those that result in the most beneficial balance of good over bad consequences for everyone involved

Virtue ethics

focuses on the development of virtuous character.

4 dimensions of act’s consequences (act utilitarianism)

Scope: how many people will be affected

Duration: how long the effects will last

Intensity: degree of strength/force effects will have

Probability: how likely to occur are the various effects

Problems with Act Utilitarianism

Calculation problem: difficult even when focusing on four dimensions

Moral saints problem: every act is up for moral review; any act can potentially be done better

Moral permissiveness problem: acts commonly held to be morally wrong may be morally justified (even required) under the right circumstances

Justice/human rights problem: protecting justice and human rights many not always promote the greatest overall utility in specific cases

The categorical imperative

“always act in such a way that you could rationally and consistently will that everyone act in the same manner in similar circumstances”

Problems with Kantian Ethics

Consequentialist objection: most people believe that consequences at least some consideration in moral deliberation

Absolutism objection: since Kantian principles are absolute and hold without exception, it doesn’t seem possible to resolve moral dilemmas

Rational agent objection: Kantian ethics only applies to rational agents capable of screening their motives for universality; this seems to exclude infants, those with severe mental handicaps, non-human animals, the environment, institutions, etc.

ethics

the philosophical study of morality

Supererogatory Acts

• These are actions that are morally good but not required.

• They exceed what is expected or demanded, often involving self-sacrifice or significant effort.