Ethics

1. Ethics Chapter 9: Are There Absolute Moral Rules?

2. Intrinsic vs. Extrinisc • Intrinsic moral value: The act itself has moral value. • Extrinsic moral value: the consequences of the act provide the moral value.

3. Deontology • Deontology: any ethical theory which prescribes a moral duty or obligation to perform certain moral acts because they have intrinsic moral worth. • For example deontologists might claim we have a duty to be truthful regardless of the consequences.

4. Moral Duties • Absolute Moral Duties: These are moral obligations one has without exceptions. • Prima Facie Moral Duties: These are moral obligations one has, but there can be exceptions or cases in which one is released from the obligation.

5. Elizabeth Anscombe • Elizabeth Anscombe (1919-2001) • Immanuel Kant (1724-1804)

6. Kant’s Hypothetical Imperative • Hypothetical imperative: “if you want so-and-so, then you ought to do such-and-such.” • Hypothetical imperative states that certain acts are required if you desire to fulfill a certain desire, outcome or purpose. • So, if you want to go to college, then you ought to take your SAT.

7. Kant’s Categorical Imperative • Kant claimed that certain moral acts were absolutely obligatory and they were required no matter what a person desired. • For instance, lying is morally wrong in all circumstance; therefore, one ought never lie.

8. Kant’s Categorical Imperative • “Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.”

9. Kant’s Categorical Imperative • Kant claimed that before we decided on a course of action we should ask if it makes makes sense that our action become a universal law, that is that everyone do as we do. • Should I lie? What if everyone lied? If everyone lied then no one would believe anyone, therefore, no one could ever lie. • This leads to self-defeating, contradicting results

10. Objections to Kant’s Categorical Imperative • 1) No moral precept can be Absolute, because there are obvious exceptions to all moral precepts. • 2) No moral precept can be Absolute, because sometimes moral precepts conflict and therefore rejecting one of them must be morally permissible.

11. 1) Exceptions • There is a straightforward, common sense objection to Kant’s categorical imperative: There seems to be cases (exceptions) in which telling the truth would lead to disastrous consequences, as in the Inquiring Murderer Case. • If lying can save someone’s life, we should lie. • If we should, then lying is morally permissible in some rare occasions.

12. 2) Conflicts between Rules • A person might be in a situation in which he has two conflicting duties. • If 2 duties are conflicting, then it is impossible for him to perform both. • If he does only one, we would not think that he has evaded his moral duty by not performing the other. • Therefore, duties cannot be absolute, since, in this case, he was excused from performing one of the conflicting duties.

13. Kant's Insight • Morality consist of recognizing our rational duty and performing it, regardless of the  consequences. • Consistency: Rationality requires that if we accept moral reasons in one case we (all rational people) should accept them in all cases.

14. Can we have prima Facie Duties? • Prima Facie Duties are acts that one has a moral duty to perform, given we have no knowledge of other circumstances that could serve as justifying us to deviate for this duty.

15. Chapter 10: Respect for Persons • Human beings are special. • They have a value and worth that is priceless. • Each human life has an intrinsic value that is irreplaceable. • Human persons, therefore, have a special dignity.

16. Why? • Humans have special cognitive abilities: • 1) to desire, plan, establish purpose in life, make decisions, especially moral ones. • 2) humans have the power of reason, to understand, and thus a special independence, free will, and autonomy.

17. 2nd formulation of the categorical Imperative • “Act so that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in that of another, always as an end and never as a means only.”

18. Categorical Imperative • To treat others as an end means not to use them as a thing. • To have consideration for them as a person. • To value their human dignity. • To respect them.

19. Example • If I were to ask someone for a loan, knowing that I cannot pay them back, I would be treating them as a thing; I would not be respecting their rational, autonomous self. • Instead, I should tell them that I need the money and that I cannot repay them. If they want to give me the money, then it is up to them. • In the latter case, they can share my goals by giving me the money, but they do it freely.

20. Theories of Punishment • Retributive Theory: Punishment is a a form of justice; it is giving everyone what they deserve. • Utilitarianism: Reject retributive theories of punishment because to punish someone as pay back does not increase the overall happiness; instead it decreases it.

21. Utilitarianism and Punishment • Utilitarianism claims that punishment is an evil act and needs to be justified through its consequences; in other words the consequences of punishment must be such that they outweigh the negative and unhappiness the punishment produces and any other negative consequences that might arise as a result of the punishment.

22. Benefits of punishment • Gratification of victims and victims family. • Preventing more crime and future potential victims from the the offender. • Deters others from committing a similar crime. • Rehabilitate the criminal to make him or her a productive member of society.

23. Kant’s Retributivism • First, people should be punished because they deserve it. • Second the punishment should be proportionate to the crime.

24. Kant’s Retributivism and the categorical Imperative • The central idea behind Kant’s theory of punishment is that by giving people what they deserve (whether reward or punishment) is how we truly acknowledge their personhood as an end in itself. • To excuse people and not punish them for something they have done is to implicitly say, “you are not a rational, free, autonomous, agent who is responsible for your actions.”

25. Kant’s Retributivism and the categorical Imperative • Kant also believe that when a person commits an action that is evil, he or she is saying that it is okay for others to do the same to them. • In other words, when we make a determination as to a specific action, it is assumed that we have deliberated and made a choice based on our values as to how we believe someone should act. • Therefore, “His own evil deed draws the punishment upon himself.”