Eduqas Alevel RS Ethics Theme 2E Proportionalism

what is proportionalism

an ethical system that deduces the moral value of an act from the proportion of its good and evil effects, a development of naturally centred around Aquinas' doctrine of double effect, those that follow this claim that they are developing something which has always been part of the catholic church

who is Bernard Hoose

a ethicist who was a former member of the Carmelites and published a book that commentated on proportionalism

what is proportionalism maxim

it is never right to go against the principe unless there is a proportionate reason to justify it

what are the origins of proportionalism

social: written in the 1960s meaning that the doctrines of double effect was popular. The backdrop included women rights and contraception being introduced which would not have been Included in Aquinas' theory

Aquinas origins: He pushed forwards the doctrine of double effect using the example of a man. starving to death stealing food to save his life which went against the secondary precept of stealing, but this would not transcend into all moral situations as seen when a person tells a lie to save someone from death this would not be lawful

Peter Knauer: in 1965 German Jesuit scholar became concerned with the fact that people were misinterpreting the doctrine of double effect meaning that incorrect and harmful decisions were being made due to a lack of proportionate reason when looking at the options. This is where proportionalism was born to offer objective rightness and wrongness to actions.

AO1 example

1. examine the deontological and teleological aspects of proportionalism

2. explain proportionalims as a development of natural law

why did the RC condemn proportionalism

Catholic Church has condemned proportionalism, Pope John Paul II said that any proportionalism is wrong on the grounds that it denies any action can in itself be intrinsically evil. It is guess work as you cannot know the definite outcome of any action

what does intrinsically evil mean

Everywhere and always evil

how is proportionalism a hybrid of deontological and teleological ethics

deontological: derived from natural law, follows proportional maxim, the moral rule derived from the precepts of natural law, should always be followed unless there is a proportionate reason not to, we should deny abortion unless there is a proportionate reason to allow it.

teleological: not deontological because there is a focus on the outcome rather than the action itself, it considers the consequence

There is a distinction between moral goodness and rightness. We cannot conflate something as good with right.

The difference between direct and indirect actions. E.g an act which is directly intended and an indirect consequence of a direct action. E.g surgery where the foetus is killed and not an intended abortion.

What does teleological mean?

a theory that judges actions as right or wrong by their ends or purposes (judged by the consequences of the actions)

what is the role of intention in proportionalism

in order to decide the morality of an action you need to know the intention of the actor.

- Catholic theory is that abortion isn't morally evil but the intention is. Lying is always wrong but lying to a shooter will save more lives

- they will always conciser there intention, situations and the consequences of an action to determine the morality

- blade example: it is wrong to use one doesn't provide enough context: blade to cut in anger, blade to save someone's life by a surgeon. A surgeon unnecessary using a blade to cut when they didnt need to have been cut is wrong.

what is value and disvalue

value: a reason why and action should be carried out, it can be justified including positive intentions and precepts upheld.

disvalue: a reason why an action not carried out, negative intentions and precepts not upheld

value > disvalue = do it

value < disvalue = don't do it

explain the difference between a good act and a right act according to Hoose

good = an action that follows moral deontological rules found in ethics like natural law and the secondary precepts saying that abortion is wrong

right = an action that breaks a good act however proportionally creates more good than evil (the leser of 2 evils)

- the reason for the good and right actions is that proportionalists accept that the ideal is to follow the deontological rule (the ideal good) but an act can still be morally right if not good if it proportional creates more good than evil.

what does proportionalism consider

consequences, context, the value and disvalue of each situation, institutional obligations and intentions (finis operantis - the end and act itself, it may or may not coincide with but can never alter the finis operis of the act itself)

what is an ontic evil

An evil that has no moral element - a choice was not made to carry out the evil, there is an unavoidable lack of perfection that exists in the created order due to the fall of Adam and Eve

what is a moral evil act

an act defined as bad become it breaks a religious rule and is therefore immoral, it includes evil intent as part of the action

how do proportionalists allow evil to happen

Proportionalists therefore recognise that because of this, we may need to perform an action that contains pre moral/ ontic evil as a lesser evil in order to achieve good. It can never be the objective of our action but can be present within the action itself.

what are ontic goods

qualities such as dignity, integrity and justice - which themselves are not moral but are desirable qualities should be taken into account when making a moral decision

what do proportionalists say about intrinsically evil acts

that given the presence of optic evil (predestined evil that has to happen) there can be no acts that are intrinsically evil as a result. An evil act may not always be immoral such as killing in self defence. A proportionalist will always consider the intention, situation and consequences of an action to determine the morality.

• If it does not have proportionate justification then the action is an evil moral act.

• If it does have proportionate justification the action is not an evil moral act

how does proportionalism work

1. Proportionalism holds that there are certain moral rules (such as those derived from Natural Law) that it can never be right to go against; unless there is a proportionate reason which would justify

2. Therefore, deontological moral laws derived from Natural Law do provide firm moral guidelines which should never be ignored, unless it is absolutely clear that, in the particular unique situation, this is justified by a proportionate reason.

Therefore the Proportionalism maxim is :

‘it is never right to go against a principal unless there is a proportionate reason which would justify it’. i.e. a bad action can be done if there is a larger reason why it should be carried out.

what are the three developments of proportionalism

1. conflict situation proportionalism by Peter Knauer

2. value maximisation proportionalism by father Garth Hallet

3. revisionist theology proportionalism by Joseph selling

what is the conflict situation proportionalism development

This was developed by Peter Knauer.

- He says that with the existence of ontic evil there will always be a certain level of disvalue within an action. There is the option to act bad meaning there will be more cases of immoral acts such as euthanasia or abortion but CP isn't because the outcome is known.

- the action has to have greater value than disocvalue, the basis of all morality is that the bad effect (disvalue) cannot trump the value. He largely agrees with the doctrine of double effect but says that ' the bad effect cannot outweigh the good eggiest; there is a proportionate reason to tolerate the bad effect' is the basis of all morality

what is value maximisation proportionalism development

this was developed by Father garth Hallet

- his general view was ‘no’ with exceptions

- He argued that we cannot explain a good act. Good is a simple word with many other definitions and is an evaluative term. Suggesting that when making decisions it is a value balancing act

- Hallet argued that truly objective moral decisions are only made in avoiding two extremes of consequences, arguing that what is good and what is morally right cannot be different

- Hallet does not consider the intention of the moral agent he thinks that it should be detached from the motive of an action. This is because the action is still bad no matter the intention so he doesnt like killing in self defence, you should only weigh up the value and disvalue of the actual action not the reason why the action needs to happen

what is revisionist theology proportionalism development

this was developed by Joseph Selling

- argued that there are different ways to ensure the greater good beyond proportionate reasoning.

- we should: a. seek greater good and lesser evil, b. prioritise urgent situations, c. make a distinction between material cooperation and moral cooperation

- we should mirror the example of Jesus and be flexible with our approach

- ethics should be person centred which should be the same for proportionalism

- we should understand the whole event, what person should I aspire to be

- every decision should come back to the teachings of jesus

- we should consider the whole person and look at the whole picture such as Jesus healing on the sabbath

yes, proportionalism is a workable ethical theory

- it is a hybrid system between deontological and teleological which makes it workable. Gives room for all situations and allows the rules to be bent when needed such as an abortion through the ectopic pregnancy. The compassionate elements of the ethical theory allow for the complex human nuances to be met

- it considers the intention of the act which other deontological theories ignore, by looking at the intention the morality can be easier decided. such as a surgeon cutting a body - the intention to help of harvest organs tell us if its bad or not

- seeks to rectify ethical conventionalism - doing something because you always have, looks beyond the law and promotes good acts and doesnt actively promote evil acts

- tries to drive you towards being a virtuous person - Joseph selling

- Jesus was considered a proportionalist

proportionalism has flaws

- it shows compassion but potentially leaves too much room for comfort and allows too much to get by. deontological systems are needed due to the size and complexity of humanity.

- willingness to consider the intention can lead to too much being allowed and considered moral

- fails to recognise that some actions are inherently evil

- doesnt give guidance as to what is good law and what is bad law, Finnis does this by telling us the basic goods we should strive for and the 9 practical reasons to help us achieved them

proportionalism is not workable in a contemporary society

- not contemporary because it can lead to a slippery slope and downfall of morality. If you look at the intention of an act rather than the outcome then that can be problematic

- we are going of guess work, living only by the outcome is not good as we cannot predict the actual outcome

- it wouldn't work in a legal setting as disvalue and value are very subjective forms of measurement. Such as euthanasia to elevate suffering, how can this be proved in court. The laws then loose value if they can be bent for certain reasons

- Catholic church rejects proportionalism, more of a methodology than a frameworks as it doesn't give much guidance and relies on the adherence of natural law

- it is too subjective and then becomes chaotic