The branches of philosophy

2. The branches of philosophy • Philosophy is the study of the most fundamental questions. • Philosophy is divided into 5 main branches: • 1. Metaphysics • 2. Epistemology • 3. Logic • 4. Aesthetics • 5. Ethics

3. What is Ethics? Ethics, or moral philosophy, is the branch of philosophy concerned with systematizing, defending, and proposing concepts of right and wrong conduct. The term ethics derives from the Ancient Greek word ethikos, which derives from the word ethos (habit, or custom).

4. 4 AREAS OF ETHICS • Reflecting upon morality leads to 4 directions. • Ethics is divided into 4 major areas. • Each of these directions is studied by ethicists.

5. 1. Value Theory • The area of ethics that tries to determine what is valuable in and of itself, in what a good life consists. • Is it happiness? • Is it getting what you want? • Is it one? • Is it many? • Is it virtue?

6. 2. Normative Ethics The area of ethics concerned with determining the set of principle(s) of right action. Propose moral theories. • There are 2 types of theories: Deontological and teleological. • Deontological. Theories that propose universal rules. Making the right decision is in accordance with the rule. • Teleological. Making the right decision is based on the outcome of action.

7. From where to start? • Some moral philosophers argue that a viable moral theory is one that conforms to our intuition. • Yet others contend that because our intuitions can be manipulated, we must use impartial procedure.

8. Normative Ethics • The Divine Command Theory: Acts are right because God commands them. • Utilitarianism: Right action is one that produces the greatest happiness for the greatest number. • Deontology: Acts are right if we can use them consistently without any contradictions. • Social Contract: Morality is a set of rules that people agree to follow on the condition that others follow as well.

9. Normative Ethics • Prima Facie Duties: Rather than one single principle, there are several important duties. When they conflict, we decide which takes precedence. • Virtue Ethics: It places the virtues at the center of morality. Right is what the virtuous person does. • Feminist Ethics: Ethics has been the business of men to address other man. Women should be taken into consideration.

10. 3. Metaethics • Meta-Ethics asks about the nature, of ethics. • Meta-ethical questions: • “Is it possible to acquire knowledge of right and wrong?” • “Are certain actions objectively right or wrong” • “If certain actions are objectively wrong or right, what makes them so?”

11. Various Theories of Meta-ethics Cognitivismvs. Non-Cognitivism: Cognitivism: ethical sentences express actual propositions that can be true or false. Cognitivism embodies many views: moral realism: ethical sentences express propositions about mind-independent facts. moral subjectivism: ethical sentences express propositions about peoples’ attitudes or opinions. Moral statements are subjectively true.

12. Non-cognitivism: moral statements don’t describe properties, don’t make statements that could be true or false. When people utter moral sentences they are expressing non-cognitiveattitudes more similar to desires, approval or disapproval, like “Murder? Aaaarrrrgh!”

13. Cognitivists hold that moral judgments express beliefs: truth-evaluable mental states that represent moral facts. • Non-cognitivists hold that moral judgments express some other sort of non-truth-evaluable, non-representational mental states.

14. Take a sentence such as (1): “Slavery is morally wrong.”Moral Realism: A cognitivist theory according to which sentences like (1) are true by virtue of certain features of the world. These features or facts are believed to be independent of our perception of them or our beliefs, feelings or other attitudes towards them. Thus, according to realism, sentences like (1) are true because there are moral facts that make them true.Moral Subjectivism: A cognitivist theory according to which certain moral statements are true because the subject believes them to be true (or false). On this view, what makes “Slavery is morally wrong” true is a fact about an individual’s mind; for example, the fact that Lincoln feels that slavery is evil. What makes moral subjectivism subjective is that it allows that what is good/evil for one subject may not be good/evil for another.

15. (Meta-ethical) Moral Relativism: A cognitivist theory according to which morality is relative to a certain civilization. Moral sentences like (1) are true (or false) relative to the people who deem them so. Moral Objectivism: A cognitivist theory according to which the certain moral claims are true (or false) independently of our thinking them so. Accordingly, we value kindness because kindness is good—it is not good because we value it.  The good is not good because it satisfies desire—it satisfies it because it is good. The evil is not evil because it thwarts desire—it thwarts desire because it is evil. Thus for the objectivist, kindness is good and cruelty is evil, objectively, intrinsically, i.e., not in relation to individuals or groups of individuals. Slavery is wrong in and of itself regardless of the going practices in a given society and regardless of anyone's desires or aversions.

16. Emotivism: A noncognitivist theory according to which moral language is not fact stating but rather expressive of feeling. Thus one who utters (1) expresses his disapprobation or repugnance toward slavery. It is as if one stated, “Boo slavery” or “Yuk, slavery!” Prescriptivism: A noncognitivist theory according to which moral claims such as (1) are commands. A prescriptivist who says that abortion is wrong, for example, is not arguing that abortion has a moral property of wrongness. Rather, he is prescribing that one not commit abortion.

17. Moral nihilism: a meta-ethical theory according to which nothing is morally right or wrong. Some nihilists argue that moral statements such as “Slavery is wrong” or “Saving innocent lives is good” are neither true nor false because there are no moral facts in the world that would make such statements right or wrong. Another form of nihilism, known as error theory, which argues the following: • When we make moral statements, we always assume that something can be right or wrong. • But because nothing can be right or wrong, our statements are mistaken. • Consequently our moral statements are errors.

18. 4.Applied Ethics • Typically, moral philosophers regard this branch of ethics one that deals with more particular problems, such as issues in medicine, sports, business, etc. • Selecting a theory to solve particular problems. • However, there is disagreement about which theory is correct. • Some philosophers propose that we address such problems without considering a specific theory.

19. …A ChallengeWho are We to Judge?

20. MORAL RELATIVISM: the concept that morality is relative. Objectivism says that all people are under the same moral principles. Moral principles are objective. Relativismsays that societies decide what is moral. Who are we to judge?

21. Moral Relativism does not say that in morality anything goes. • It does not mean there are no moral rules. • Moral rules are relative. • It states that what’s moral for a society could be immoral for another. • So there is no way to say that one society is moral and the other immoral. • Morality is relative to the particular society.

22. Who Are We to Judge? • The Callatians, an Indian people, ate their dead people, while ancient Greeks cremated theirs. They viewed each other’s practice as immoral. So moral relativism concludes that morality is a matter of what peoples take it to be.

23. But, is morality relative? It seems that people’s beliefs differ, not moral principles. Callatiansbelieved their dead would continue living if ingested. Greeks believed flesh could be corrupted and so cremated the dead. Often, peoples’ differences are not moral but cultural. Aabortion? Everyone agrees that murder is wrong. We disagree over whether a fetus is a person.

24. Implications of Relativism

25. If relativism is true, you must admit there was nothing wrong about Nazi morality or slavery!

26. Think About it… Those who fought against segregation and slavery were moral reformers. If you are a moral relativist, you cannot praise moral reformers. In fact, you should condemn them.

27. Those who try to better the moral principles of a society try to change the moral rules of that society! Moral progress implies moving toward an ideal, objective, moral standard. But this is what relativism denies! There is no objective morality.

28. Also, relativism says that the social group you belong to determines morality, right? But ask yourself: to which social group do I belong? Answer: you belong to many groups.

29. Finally, some might say relativism is valid because we should have tolerance and respect other people’s practices and beliefs. But, if we apply this principle universally, then tolerance is ruled out by relativism because you are not a relativist but an objectivist.

30. Assessing Ethical Theories

31. In ethics we need to determine what makes things right or wrong. Which theory is best? A theory’s principles must provide a compelling explanation of why certain things are right while others are wrong. Adequate ethical theory needs to satisfy certain criteria. The more fully the theory satisfies all these criteria the better the theory.

32. 1. Completeness: theory should be able to address completely moral concepts. If the theory leaves something out that must be included, then that theory is faulty. Hedonistic theories, don’t account for justice. • 2. Explanatory Power: The theory must give us insight into what makes something moral or immoral. It must help us understand the difference between right and wrong.

33. 3. Practicability: how useful is a theory? - Clear and precise moral claims. If the theory’s principles are vague, then it isn’t a practical theory: “don’t hurt people unless they deserve it.” Vague. - Moral guidance to ordinary people. - Principles should not create conflict. Imagine a friend lives in the US illegally. Should you turn him in? A practicable theory must be able to resolve your dilemma.

34. 4. Moral confirmation: a theory must give correct answers to moral questions. Does it work? A theory is morally confirmed if we have good reasons to consider it true. This criterion resembles the scientific method. In science we begin testing a theory’s hypotheses by experiment and observation.

35. SOME WAYS NOT TO ANSWER MORAL QUESTIONS, AND THE IDEAL MORAL JUDGMENT

36. Moral judgments and personal preferencesSome people like classical music; others do not. This is disagreement in preferences. Moral disagreements, disagreements over right or wrong, are not the same. If I say abortion is always wrong and you say abortion is never wrong, then you are denying what I affirm. The point: right or wrong require reasons. Cannot be determined just by finding out about the personal preferences of people.

37. Moral judgments and feelings Some philosophers think words like right and wrong are empty. This position suggests it doesn’t matter one way or the other. But morality matters. So, one must not use personal feelings to determine what’s right and wrong.

38. Thinking it is so does not make it so This should be obvious: upon reflection you might be surprised. You might think same-sex marriage is immoral, but when you reason logically, you might arrive at the opposite conclusion.

39. Irrelevance of statistics Some people think that the more people believe something, the truer something is. Religious people may say that God exists because the majority of the world’s population believes in a god. Clearly this is not true. If the majority holds that capital punishment is wrong, that doesn’t make it wrong.

40. The appeal to a moral authority: Many people think that there is a moral authority, e.g., a God. However, appealing to such an authority creates problems...

41. THE IDEAL MORAL JUDGMENT There are different concepts that an ideal moral judgment must satisfy

42. Conceptual clarity: if someone tells us that euthanasia is always wrong we could not determine whether that statement is true before we understand what euthanasia is. Concepts need clarity. • In the case of abortion, for example, is a fetus is a person?

43. Information: We answer moral questions by having knowledge of the world. For example, in order to know why eating meet is morally wrong, we must know the facts: e.g. animals feel pain and like us do not want to feel pain. They are killed, Chopped up, packaged, and sold. Many people ignore, or want to ignore, these facts.

44. Rationality: must be able to recognize the connection between different ideas. The best way is to use logic. Sally thinks all abortions are morally wrong, but she recently has had an abortion. Sally is not being rational or logical.

45. Impartiality: correct answer to moral questions must be impartial. Impartiality is related to justice: the principle that justice is the similar, and injustice the dissimilar, treatment of similar individuals, e.g. If causing suffering to humans is wrong, but it is not wrong in the case of animals, this is not impartial. - we should not consider irrelevant characteristics such as the color of the skin, the color of hair, nationality, height, age, species, and so on.

46. Coolness: the idea is that the more emotionally charged we are, the more likely we are to reach a mistaken moral conclusion, while the cooler or calm we are, greater the chances that we will avoid mistakes.

47. VALID MORAL PRINCIPLES besides information, impartiality, conceptual clarity, etc., ideal moral judgment must be based on valid or correct moral principles. Ideally, one wants not only to make the correct moral judgment but also to make it for the correct reasons.

48. Criteria for evaluating moral principles: • Consistency:whatever principle let Sally to believe that all abortions are morally wrong and yet have an abortion is morally right, must be an inconsistent principle. • Adequacy of scope: A successful principle is one that provides guidance to different circumstances. So, the wider the principle’s scope, the greater its potential uses, the narrower its scope, the narrower its range of applications. • Precision: What we want from an ethical principle is not to be vague. For example if we are told we should love our neighbors and we should do no harm we must also be told in a clear way what love, harm, and a neighbor are supposed to mean.

49. Moral Theories

50. Is the family of moral theories arguing that the only the consequences of our actions matter morally. A consequentialist argue that morally right acts are those that will produce the best outcome, or consequence. There are many different varieties of consequentialist theories. Consequentialism