Compilation for ETHICS class

Please refer to textbook, Ethics the philosophical discipline of action. Babor, E. R.

Review on the following topics:

Introduction to Ethics

Meaning of Ethics

Ethics compared with other sciences

Morality and Human Existence

Western Ethics

Greek Ethics

Christian Ethics

Kantian Ethics

Utilitarian Ethics

Existential Ethics

Dialectic Ethics

General Ethics

Human Acts

Socrates (469-399 BC)

• Socrates was predominantly interested in ethics.

A. Self-knowledge is the sufficient condition to the good life. He identified knowledge with
virtue. If knowledge can be learned, so can virtue. Thus, virtue can be taught.

B. The unexamined life is not worth living. One must seek knowledge and wisdom before
private interests. Knowledge is sought as a means to ethical action.

C. What one truly knows is the dictates of one's conscience or soul: the philosophy of the
Socratic Paradox.

• Socrates' ethical intellectualism has an eudaemological character.

A. Socrates presupposed reason as the way to the good life.

1. Our true happiness is promoted by doing what is right.

2. When your true utility is served (tending your soul), you are achieving happiness.
Happiness is evident from the long-term effect on the soul.

3. The Socratic ethics has a teleological character -- mechanistic explanation of

human behavior is mistaken. Human action aims toward the good, and there is
purpose in nature.

B. The Socratic Paradox: People act immorally, but they do not do so deliberately.

1. Everyone seeks what is most serviceable to oneself or what is in one's own self-
interest.

2. If one [practically] knows what is good, one will always act in such manner as to
achieve it. (Otherwise, one does not know or only knows in a theoretical fashion.)

3. If one acts in a manner not conducive to ones good, then that person must have
been mistaken (i.e., that person lacks the knowledge of how to obtain what was
serviceable in that instance).

4. If one acts with knowledge then one will obtain that which is serviceable to
oneself or that which is in ones self-interest.

5. Thus, for Socrates…

▪ knowledge = [def.] virtue, good, arete
▪ ignorance = [def.] bad, evil, not useful

6. Since no one knowingly harms himself, if harm comes to that person, then that
person must have acted in ignorance.

7. Consequently, it would seem to follow we are responsible for what we know or

for that matter what we do not know. So, then, one is responsible for one’s own
happiness.

8. The essential aspect of understanding the Paradox is to realize that Socrates is

referring to the good of the soul in terms of knowledge and doing what's right—
not to wealth or freedom from physical pain. The latter play no role in the soul
being centered.

C. No one chooses evil or chooses to act in ignorance.

1. We seek the good, but fail to achieve it by ignorance or lack of knowledge as to

how to obtain it.
 2. No one would harm themselves. When harm comes to us, we thought we were
seeking the good, but we lacked knowledge.

3. Aristotle's criticism: an individual might know what is best, yet still do what's
wrong.

Aristotle (384-322 B.C.E.)

D. Aristotle (384-322 B.C.E.) emphasizes the role of habit in conduct. It is commonly

thought that virtues, according to Aristotle, are habits and that the good life is a life of
mindless routine.
E. These interpretations of Aristotle’s ethics are the result of imprecise translations from the
ancient Greek text. Aristotle uses the word hexis to denote moral virtue. But the word
does not merely mean passive habituation. Rather, hexis is an active condition, a state in
which something must actively hold itself.
F. Virtue, therefore, manifests itself in action. More explicitly, an action counts as virtuous,
according to Aristotle, when one holds oneself in a stable equilibrium of the soul, in order
to choose the action knowingly and for its own sake. This stable equilibrium of the soul is
what constitutes character.
G. Similarly, Aristotle’s concept of the mean is often misunderstood. In the Nichomachean
Ethics, Aristotle repeatedly states that virtue is a mean. The mean is a state of
clarification and apprehension in the midst of pleasures and pains that allows one to judge
what seems most truly pleasant or painful. This active state of the soul is the condition in
which all the powers of the soul are at work in concert. Achieving good character is a
process of clearing away the obstacles that stand in the way of the full efficacy of the
soul.

KANTIAN ETHICS

German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) was an opponent of utilitarianism.

Basic Summary: Kant, unlike Mill, believed that certain types of actions (including murder,
theft, and lying) were absolutely prohibited, even in cases where the action would bring about
more happiness than the alternative. For Kantians, there are two questions that we must ask
ourselves whenever we decide to act: (i) Can I rationally will that everyone act as I propose to
act? If the answer is no, then we must not perform the action. (ii) Does my action respect the
goals of human beings rather than merely using them for my own purposes? Again, if the
answer is no, then we must not perform the action. (Kant believed that these questions were
equivalent).
Kant’s theory is an example of a deontological moral theory–according to these
theories, the rightness or wrongness of actions does not depend on their consequences
but on whether they fulfill our duty.

Kant believed that there was a supreme principle of morality, and he referred to it as The
Categorical Imperative. The CI determines what our moral duties are.

the following is an exerpt from the notes of Professor Eric Barnes...

Morality and imperatives: What does it mean for one's duty to be determined by
the categorical imperative?

What is an imperative? An imperative is a command. So, "Pay your taxes!" is

an imperative, as are "Stop kicking me!" and "Don't kill animals!"

Hypothetical Imperatives: these imperatives command conditionally on your

having a relevant desire. E.g. “If you want to go to medical school, study biology
in college.” If you don’t want to go to medical school, this command doesn’t
apply to you. Another example, your father says, "if you are hungry, then go eat
something!" - if you aren't hungry, then you are free to ignore the command.

Categorical Imperatives: These command unconditionally. E.g. “Don’t cheat on your

taxes.” Even if you want to cheat and doing so would serve your interests, you may not
cheat.

What is the connection between morality and categorical imperatives? Morality

must be based on the categorical imperative because morality is such that you are
commanded by it, and is such that you cannot opt out of it or claim that it does not apply
to you.

How does the categorical imperative work? The categorical imperative has three
different formulations. That is to say, there are three different ways of saying what it
is. Kant claims that all three do in fact say the same thing, but it is currently disputed
whether this is true. The second formulation is the easiest to understand, but the
first one is most clearly a categorical imperative. Here is the first formulation.

1) First formulation (The Formula of Universal Law): "Act only on that maxim
through which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal
law [of nature]."
 a) What is a maxim? A maxim is the rule or principle on which you act.
For example, I might make it my maxim to give at least as much to charity
each year as I spend on eating out, or I might make it my maxim only to
do what will benefit some member of my family.

b) Basic idea: The command states, crudely, that you are not allowed to
do anything yourself that you would not be willing to allow everyone else
to do as well. You are not allowed to make exceptions for yourself. For
example, if you expect other people to keep their promises, then you are
obligated to keep your own promises.

Calculating Consequences:
The Utilitarian Approach to Ethics

Utilitarian Theories

Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism is a normative ethical theory that places the locus of right and wrong solely on
the outcomes (consequences) of choosing one action/policy over other actions/policies. As
such, it moves beyond the scope of one's own interests and takes into account the interests
of others.

Bentham's Principle of Utility: (1) Recognizes the fundamental role of pain and pleasure in
human life, (2) approves or disapproves of an action on the basis of the amount of pain or
pleasure brought about i.e, consequences, (3) equates good with pleasure and evil with
pain, and (4) asserts that pleasure and pain are capable of quantification (and hence
'measure').

In measuring pleasure and pain, Bentham introduces the following criteria: INTENSITY,
DURATION, CERTAINTY (or UNCERTAINTY), and its NEARNESS (or FARNESS). He also
includes its "fecundity" (will more of the same follow?) and its "purity" (its pleasure won't be
followed by pain & vice versa). In considering actions that affect numbers of people, we
must also account for its EXTENT.

John Stuart Mill adjusted the more hedonistic tendencies in Bentham's philosophy by
emphasizing (1) It is not the quantity of pleasure, but the quality of happiness that is
central to utilitarianism, (2) the calculus is unreasonable -- qualities cannot be quantified
(there is a distinction between 'higher' and 'lower' pleasures), and (3) utilitarianism refers to
"the Greatest Happiness Principle" -- it seeks to promote the capability of achieving
happiness (higher pleasures) for the most amount of people (this is its "extent").
Act and Rule Utilitarianism

We can apply the principle of utility to either PARTICULAR ACTIONS or GENERAL RULES.
The former is called "act-utilitarianism" and the latter is called "rule-utilitarianism."

Act-utilitarianism -- The principle of utility is applied directly to each alternative act in a

situation of choice. The right act is then defined as the one which brings about the best
results (or the least amount of bad results).

• Criticisms of this view point to the difficulty of attaining a full knowledge and
certainly of the consequences of our actions.
• It is possible to justify immoral acts using AU: Suppose you could end a regional war
by torturing children whose fathers are enemy soliders, thus revealing the hide outs
of the fathers.

Rule-utilitarianism -- The principle of utility is used to determine the validity of rules of

conduct (moral principles). A rule like promise-keeping is established by looking at the
consequences of a world in which people broke promises at will and a world in which
promises were binding. Right and wrong are then defined as following or breaking those
rules.

• Some criticisms of this position point out that if the Rules take into account more and
more exceptions, RU collapses into AU.
• More genearl criticisms of this view argue that it is possible to generate "unjust
rules" according to the principle of utility. For example, slavery in Greece might be
right if it led to an overall achievement of cultivated happiness at the expense of
some mistreated individuals.

Exam Type

1. Identification

2. Modified True or False

3. Identifying philosophers and their philosophical statements or moral views