Theo exam 1

This person first distinguished between deontological and teleological ethics

socrates

The distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic value dates to this person

aristotles

This person's ideas mark the beginning of the discipline we now call "ethics"

Socrates

General ethics is divided into this many dimensions

3

This ethical approach determines "the good" without sense perception or scientific observation.

situational ethics/relativism

\

This is the most controversial answer to the question "What has intrinsic value?"

pleasure or happiness

Persons concerned with an "ethic of being" may claim that this is the only intrinsic good

virtue

"Descriptive morals" is another name for this dimension of ethics

emperical

This ethical approach is concerned with pronouncements of fact that can be empirically verified

ethical naturalism

All Variations of these ethical theories are subject to the criticism of depending on human ability to predict the results of actions

teleological

The practice of sharpening one's ethical skills by seeking resolutions to ethical dilemmas is called.

casuistry

The "categorical imperative" is associated with this person

Immanuel Kant

Christians who invoke the Ten Commandments or Jesus' sermon on the Mount generally follow this ethical approach

Divine Command Theory

\-Pluralistic Deontologism

This ethical approach denies that ethical claims have any rational content and states that they say nothing that is either true or false

Intuisionialism- noncognitivism

This ethical theory risks a potential loss of justice for the individual

Utilitarianism

ethics

systematic critical stdy of morals

morals

customs or standards about right/wrong

customary morality

uncritcally accepting a moral code inherited from family/influences

unable to answer why

reflective morality

can defend their morals, are open to opposing views and willing to change their minds

christian ethics

christian perspective

two types of ethics

descriptive and prescriptive

descriptive ethics

scientific study of morality, describes behavior

prescriptive

philosophical study, what people should do (prescibes behavior)

\-analytical and normative fall under this

analytical (meta)

investigates meaning of ethical terms

normative

\-all teleolgical fall under this

\-formulation of norms/ morals

\-judgement of right and wrong and offers reasons

3 types of Normative Ethics

teleological (consequentalist)

deontological (emphasis on rules)

areteological (emphasis on a persons character)

cultural relativism

peoples morals beliefs vary from culture to culture

ethical relativism

philosophical view that denies existence of universal moral standards

\-right and wrong are determined by ones culture

\-do not judge other cultures by our moral code

ethical relativism problems

\-what constitutes a culture/society \n -multiple opinions within same society on certain issue \n -can people disagree/criticize? must they conform?. \n -does disagreement on a given issue necessarily mean that there is no absolute truth abt. issue?

ethical relativism advantages

\-toleration of other's moral beliefs \n -we shouldn't necessarily assume our moral beliefs are the correct ones or even best ones

ethical absolutism

one moral code

non-conflicting absolutism

many absoltues that do not conflict

conflicting absolutisms

\-many absoltues that conflict

\-always choose the lesser of the evils

\-you are morally responsible to fix what was wrong

graded absolutism

\-chose the greater good in conflicts

\-racks up no guilt

Teleological

\-consequentalist

\-whether an act os good or bad is determined by the consequences

ethical egoism (teleological ethics)

\-individuals acts in own interest

ethical egoism is not

psychological egoism

\-truly unselfish act is impossible, descriptive theory

personal ethical egoism

\-I do what is in my own best interest

\-no claims to what others do

individual ethical egoism

\-everyone should do what is in MY best interest

universal ethical egoism

\-every one does what is in his/her own best interest

method of universal ethical egosim

\-determine alt. actions possible

\-determine all consequences of each alternative

\-determine which act promotes MY best interest to greatest extent

\-grant everyone else freedom to make their own decision

Advantages of universal ethical egosim

\-easier to determine what is in your own self interest than others interest

\-individual freedom

problems with universal ethical egoism

\-unable to resolve conflicts of interest

\-introduces inconsistency into moral counsel

\-may not provide a helpful basis for professions that serve others (medicine/clergy)

Utilitarianism (teleological)

\-decide morals on what produces the greatest good for the most people

\-right choice brings greatest good to the most people

\-Act and Rule

\

Act Utilitarianism

\-what act produces the best results for the most people

\-no rules to govern

\-each SITUATION is DIFFERENT

method of act utilitarianism

\-determine alt. actions possible in a situation

\-determine what people will be affected

\-estimate how much each action wille ffect

\-determine which produces the greatets good for the most people

Advantages of act utiliatarianism

\-deals with individial decisions on case by case

\-goal is to produce a greater world

problems with act ultilitarianism

\-too time consuming

\-more difficult to detemrine consequences for others than self

\-can justify something seemingly wrong

rule utilitarianism

\-some generally accepted guidlines (presupposes that there are enough similar human motives)

\-most good for the most people by adhering to rules that support this (avoiding potential injustice of AU)

Method of Rule utilitarianism

\-det. alt rules possible

\-estimate pos. and neg. consequences if everyone fllwed rule

\-det. which rule results in greatest good

problems with rule utilitarianism

\-still possble to justify wrong

\-revisions of never punish the innocent

\

Situationsim

consequentalists approach

\-ACT IN LOVE

legalism

the letter not the spirit of the law reigns

antinomianism

rejects all generally valid ethical norms

4 working principles of situationism

\-pragnatism (seek practical answers)

\-relativism (love is universal, but how one shows it is dif.)

\-positivism (naturalism (revealed bc of reason--positivism--revealed bc of God))

\-personalism (people important over rules)

six fundamentals rules

\-love alone is always good

\-love is not only universal rule

\-love and justice are the same

\-love is not the same as liking

\-love justifies the means

\-love decides on the spot

advantages of situationsim

\-resolves issues of conflicting norms

\-gives due values to diff. circumstances

\-stresses love and value of happiness

problems with situationism

\-is it better than having no moral standard

\-is love the only gesture that persons should show each other

\-similar to rule utilt. guideline=love