How we act towards ourselves, others and the world.
Different Kinds of Ethical Theories
What is moral relativism
Some ethicists see ethics as a science and therefore can infer their beliefs from observations
the moral relativist says nuh uh
in each community there’s a different standard to what is right and what is ethical, so observations in each place will have different moral codes
ethics is not universal and can be observed like science
What is consequentialism
we can determine what is right and wrong based on its consequences
What is deontology
duty based theorizing
there ARE universal ethical codes and that we have a duty to follow them
Kant’s example
“do not lie”
if we universalize lying, it would erode the trust between people
have very harsh conditions
do not think morals are situation dependent
often viewed in a more negative light
what is divine command theory
an action is right or wrong depending whether or not the deity you follow says its right or wrong
What is feminist ethics
our ability to do right and be good people is dependent in an oppressive set of circumstances
people often do “immoral” things due the circumstances they are put in which causes them to act in certain ways
Extreme Circumstances & Ethical Dilemmas
ethical dilemma: individuals having to make a decisions where both outcomes are viewed as morally problematic
guy with a plane crash had to eat the people on board
Singer: Famine & Affluence
Why should philosophers care about solving issues relating to famine in other parts of the world?
its not beyond the capacity of rich nations to alleviate the suffering of poor nations
Works on a few assumptions
that suffering and death from a lack of food, shelter, and medical care is bad
if its within our power to prevent something bad from happening, without sacrificing anything of moral importance, we ought to do it
without sacrificing anything of comparable moral significance = without causing anything else comparably bad to happen or failing to promote some good comparable in significance to the bad thing we can prevent
What can a drowning child teach us about what we ought to do?
prevent the bad, do the good
it doesn’t matter how close or distant someone is from me to care for them
it does not matter if i am the only person to help or one in a million who could help
What is the justification for these principles?
while it may feel better if someone helped too, but failed to do so, that doesn’t affect whether we ought to help or not
am i less obliged to help the drowning child if others are nearby? an excuse for inactivity
What is the paradox of giving
very few people are likely to give
even fewer in large amounts
so this would mean those who do give more than they are obligated to
giving at this point may risk damage to oneself
but if everyone does this Bengali will have more than the money needed to help the refugees meaning the giving would be deemed unnecessary
What is Singer's reaction to the paradox?
paradox only arises if funds are sent simultaneously and the giving is unexpected
if everyone contributes to something and plans it out problems do not arise
the result of everyone doing what he ought to do cannot be worse than the result of doing less than he ought
ex: a group project
What is the final outcome of Singer's argument?
distinction between duty and charity cannot be drawn
ordinarily men who give to charity are praised
this shifts if one is obligated to give
we would not be sacrificing anything if we continue to wear our old clothes and give to charity relief
by doing so, we prevent another person from starving
the present way of celebrating charitable man cannot be supported by utilitarian thought
What objections does Singer consider? What are the responses to these that he presents?
Objection: too drastic
“shouldn’t condemnation be reserved for violating moral norms?”
Sidwick and Urmson
we need a basic moral code which is not too far from the capacities of the ordinary man
if we tell people they ought refrain from murder and give everything they do not need to famine, they will do neither
but they will do if you frame it in terms: you ought refrain from murder and it is good to give to famine relief but not that you ought to, individuals will at least refrain from murder
where do we draw the line between conduct that is required and conduct that is good but not required so that we get the best social result
“what is possible for men to do is influenced by what the people around him are doing and expect him to be doing” - singer
shifts the view from what we as individuals can do to what we should require from others
objection 2
Often made against utilitarianism (a branch of consequentialism that is concerned with generating the greatest overall happiness)
Follows from this theory, we all ought to be working full-time to increase the balance of happiness over misery
it doesn’t follow from singers theory bc there are mitigating factors to consider
nevertheless, we ought to be preventing as much suffering as we can without sacrificing something of equal moral importance
objection 3: government responsibility
Giving privately allows the government a means to escape their responsibilities.
falsly assumes people are less likely to give if the government also gives
the individual giving would put more pressure on the government to give
governments do have a responsibility to act and should be giving far more than they are
objection 4: population explosion
until there is effective population control, relieving famine postpones starvation but doesn’t eliminate it
Accepts the planet cannot support infinitely rising population and it poses a problem for anyone who thinks it important to prevent famine
Could just endorse giving to efforts working for population control
What giving is required for individuals
reducing ourselves to a level of marginal utility but that doesn’t set us too far ahead of Bengali
the goal is taking our philosophy and acting on them
we should be reducing our consumption and giving more
Problems with Consequentialism: The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas
omelas was a very simple structure wise and happy society
all imagined good
scenario is around a summer festival with a horse race
disabled kid in a broom closet thats abused
all of the good things depend on the childs misery
they want to help it, but omelas would be destroyed if they do
to disabled and inhumane and used to horrible conditions to thrive