1
Q
What is theft?
A
Theft is taking someone else’s property without consent, undermining justice and social order
2
Q
Examine Virtue Ethics’ approach to theft
A
- Focus on char
- Virtues affected = justice and temperance (self-control).
- Justice is most important virtue w no vices, bc it is all the virtues summed into one.
- Theft undermines justice as justice requires fair distribution, respect to the law, etc.
- Aristotle’s thought that theft is a base action, wrong in itself, not just wrong because it’s an excess or deficiency.
- A phronimos wouldn’t steal as theft would stem from akrasia (weakness of will), which would prohibit path to flourishing and undermine social trust.
- However, Aristotle seems to recognise distributive justice, e.g. stealing to save your starving neighbour or yourself (may be seen as expressing virtue (compassion, courage) and promoting eudaimonia - the moral agent must apply practical reason to decide)
- However, modern virtue ethicists argue the mean may shift in extreme situations, inspired by Aristotle’s comments that we should judge the appropriate thing to do on a case-by-case basis
3
Q
Evaluate Virtue Ethics’ approach to theft
A
- VE may struggle with tragic dilemmas where all options involve vice; gives little clear guidance in emergencies
- Aristotle’s categorisation of theft as a base action may risk becoming an exceptionless rule, undermining VE’s context-dependent, character-based basis
4
Q
Examine Natural Law’s approach to theft
A
- Normally immoral
- Can derive the secondary precept ‘do not steal’ using reason as goes against primary precepts to live in an ordered society and worship God (as well as cardinal virtue of justice)
- Supported by biblical commandment
- Even with good intentions (e.g. stealing for charity), exterior act remains morally wrong bc contradicts God’s design for a rational and just community.
- A good intention cannot justify an evil act - would be following an apparent good and deviating from human telos.
- Allows for an exception in extreme necessity (e.g. starving to death) bc good interior act (preserving life precept) and saving a life has greater moral value, so this is not “properly speaking theft” according to Aquinas
- Proportionalists would agree ^^
5
Q
Evaluate Natural Law’s approach to theft
A
- Not “properly speaking theft” idea shows NML can be compassionate but risks inconsistency (double effect doesn’t apply here as according to Aquinas good interior acts can’t justify bad exterior acts; he seems to have discovered a flaw in his absolutist logic and attempts to avoid it at the disservice of his theory, as it exposes the initial framework as too rigid)
- Proportionalist adaptation addresses real-world dilemmas but reduces absoluteness.
6
Q
Examine Situation Ethics’ approach to theft
A
- No fixed rules due to relativist basis and idea that “love is the only absolute”
- Personalism says you should put people before property or laws
- Pragmatism (if works, do)
- Would make a decision based on the situation
- e.g. defo allow stealing to feed starving family but not stealing a textbook from a library so you can study as this deprives others of access (here, love is not justly distributed as benefit self at the expense of neighbours when agape is other-centred)
7
Q
Evaluate Situation Ethics’ approach to theft
A
- Compassionate but outcomes are unpredictable
- Presupposition of positivism makes this theory only applicable to Xns
8
Q
What is the best approach the theft?
A
SITUATION ETHICS: allows for situational judgement for the benefit of all
* Aristotle and Aquinas undermine their own argument by respectively introducing rigidity (base action) and leniency (“not properly speaking”)
9
Q
What is lying?
A
Lying involves intentionally deceiving others by speaking or acting against the truth
10
Q
Examine Virtue Ethics’ approach to lying
A
- Lying damages personal character over time
- Conflicts with truthfulness, honesty, courage and justice
- Aristotle demands honest, accurate self-presentation
- Mad-axeman scenario ✅: a phronimos would lie to save a life, as it won’t lead to dishonesty in the future and upholds other virtues such as courage
- Lying to hide Jews from Nazis ✅: expresses courage and justice while promoting flourishing of others
- Aristotle says that truthfulness is a synergy of different virtues, so lying may be virtuous if done with courage, accepted with regret, and intended for common good (VE emphasises CHARACTER)
11
Q
Evaluate Virtue Ethics’ approach to lying
A
- It’s flexible without being rule-less
- Matches moral intuition (axeman/Nazis)
- But phronesis is constantly developing so may lead to wrong decisions prohibiting eudaimonia as not enough phronesis yet
12
Q
Examine Natural Law’s approach to lying
A
- Intrinsically wrong
- Secondary precept ‘do not lie’ can be derived from reason as violates primary precept of living in an ordered society (trust is essential for social order) and goes against cardinal virtues of truthfulness and justice
- Supported by biblical commandments against bearing false witness
- Aquinas argues that lying is always a sin because it perverts speech, which exists to convey truth, thus lying is always a bad exterior act
- Even if it is to save a life, you are pursuing an apparent good as good interior acts cannot justify bad exterior acts
- Proportionalists however would justify if intention outweighs/is proportionate to disvalue of the act
- In a ‘mad-axeman’ scenario, Aquinas allows an evasive truth (e.g. saying that friend was at a football match earlier, which is factually true but misleading).
13
Q
Evaluate Natural Law’s approach to lying
A
- Provides moral clarity and consistency but appears counter-intuitive
- Prioritises the truth over life, which seems counter-intuitive, and also as conflicting with other primary precepts - NML struggles where duties collide (fundamental flaw of absolutist/deontological ethics)
- Aquinas’ ‘evasive truth’ is just deceptive
- Why is property flexible (as theft can be not “properly speaking”) but the truth absolute?
- This suggests that this is more his views rather than neutral logic
- Proportionalist adaptation addresses real-world dilemmas but reduces absoluteness.
14
Q
Examine Situation Ethics’ approach to lying
A
- SE holds that nothing is intrinsically wrong as love is the only absolute
- Any decision must fulfil presuppositions (e.g. must work, must put people first etc.)
Fletcher gives 3 examples of where lying is justified
- Syphilitic fiance: A doctor withholds information that woman’s fiance has syphillis because of legal rules (doctor-patient confidentiality). Fletcher says this leads to injustice and harm to the woman and her future kids. Lying IS immoral here, but not because of intrinsic wrongness but because it is too legalistic and doesn’t serve love for neighbour
- WWII Intelligence case: agents are deceived and sent to their deaths in order to keep the secret that they had broken the German code by preserving illusion of oblivion. Fletcher says that lying here is moral because it served good and saved many lives
15
Q
Evaluate Situation Ethics’ approach to lying
A
Compassionate and realistic; serves real-life dilemmas well
HOWEVER…
- highly subjective
- risks justifying manipulation and undermining human rights (e.g. WW2 intelligence case bodily autonomy) - especially important because of Christian belief in intrinsic sanctity of life
- using people as a means to an end undermines personalism
16
Q
Which is the best approach to lying?
A
VE: preserves moral character and flexibility
- SE is limitless and dangerous, NML too absolutist for the complexities of human moral life
17
Q
What is embryo research and cloning?
A
- Creating, experimenting on and destroying embryos to obtain stem cells or genetic material
- Usually to understand development, treat diseases, or improve fertility treatments, typically limited to 14 days
18
Q
What are designer babies?
A
Selecting/altering embryos to remove disease/enhance traits
19
Q
Examine Virtue Ethics’ approach to embryo research, cloning, and designer babies
A
- Key virtue = compassion
- Stem-cell research may reduce suffering and promote flourishing
- Failing to use ER&C to prevent suffering makes you responsible for the suffering that follows
- Designing traits risks undermining the mean by creating extreme dispositions (e.g. increased aggression in a soldier)
- A society of engineered humans may lack a shared understanding of virtue and a common ergon, esp. as different cultures will prioritise different virtues and engineer different strengths, shifting the mean
- Teleological ethics breaks down if we no longer share a nature
- If one is genetically engineered to operate at vice then Aristotle’s emphasis on delibaration to develop phronesis through voluntary actions us undermined
20
Q
Evaluate Virtue Ethics’ approach to embryo research, cloning, and designer babies
A
- Compassionate and allows for progression but struggles to survive in a world of designer babies
21
Q
Examine Natural Law’s approach to embryo research, cloning, and designer babies
A
- Exterior act evil even if interior act good (save lives)
- Conflicts with ‘preserve life’ if life begins at conception (Jeremiah 1:5: ‘Before I formed you in the womb I knew you’)
- View shared by Cath Church - says UK’s 14-day limit is arbitrary as it is murder nevertheless
- Treating embroyes instrumentally undermines sanctity of life and living in an ordered society
- Worship God (imago dei; creator): designer babies tamper with this and play God
- Disorder society as create even greater gap between rich and poor
22
Q
Evaluate Natural Law’s approach to embryo research, cloning, and designer babies
A
Consistent and clear protection of human life, but dependent on untested definition of personhood and offers no flexibility in tragic medical contexts where ER&C can prevent unnecessary suffering
23
Q
Examine Situation Ethics’ approach to embryo research, cloning, and designer babies
A
- Nothing is intrinsically wrong; love is the only absolute
- Fletcher emphasises love for ACTUAL persons, not potential ones
- Fletcher thinks that humans are makers, selectors and designers, so no reason to not do ER&C if can improve species
- Maximises love by curing diseases; people beneficiaries now and in future
- Designer babies justified if prevents suffering and improves quality of life
- Aesthetic design may be seen as not agapeistic because genetically encode class differences and devalue certain features in the eyes of society
24
Q
Evaluate Situation Ethics’ approach to embryo research, cloning, and designer babies
A
Highly compassionate and pragmatic, but risks eugenics and treating human life instrumentally (so could be seen as un-Christian)
25
What is the best approach to embryo research, cloning, and designer babies?
VE allows for enhancement of society via ER&C but condemns deterministic manipulation of designer babies
* SE is too risky (slippery slope), and NML too rigid and prevents humanity's development
26
What is abortion?
Abortion is the ending of a pregnancy by removing a foetus/embryo before it can survive outside of the uterus
27
Examine Virtue Ethics' approach to abortion
* Aristotle suggests that abortion may be permitted "before sense and life have begun" to serve good of the city-state (method of population control)
Rosalind Hursthouse provides a modern Virtue Ethics view
* Says that ethical issue of abortion is not about rights, rules or personhood but whether the decision reflects virtue or vuce
* It is a grave moral decision, not trivial or casual, so reasons such as inconvenience, appearance etc. reflect vices like callousness
* Says weighty reasons (e.g. severe trauma, inability to care) may actually align better with virtues such as courage, truthfulness and justice
* Both women and men must take responsibility for sexual activity and its consequences (e.g. men can be "self-centred or courageous")
28
Evaluate Virtue Ethics' approach to abortion
* Captures moral seriousness and emotional depth of abortion
* Avoids reduction to legalistic rules which may be dispassionate
* Encourages moral maturity and responsibility
* BUT depends on cultural ideas of virtues
29
Examine Natural Law's approach to abortion
* Intrinsically wrong at any stage bc violates preserve life and worship God (destroys his sacred creation), even if it's a good interior act (e.g. to protect mother)
* Would say that any relief from suffering/economic security is an apparent good due to interior/exterior dichotomy
* HOWEVER some may say that abortion is justified before 60-80 days bc that's when Aquinas thought ensoulment happened
* BUT he doesn't explicitly say that he permits abortion bc of this and Cath Church (who follow NML) rejects this distinction
* Cath Church forbids at any stage and any reason (due to concepts of imago dei and sanctity of life) unless double effect applies
* Indirect abortion may be permitted by double effect (e.g. a hysterectomy to remove a cancerous uterus), bc killing of uterus is unintended by-product of a good interior and exterior act
* Proportionalists would allow if proportional
30
Evaluate Natural Law's approach to abortion
* Clear and consistent but lacks compassion
* Paternalistic and dismisses women's lived experiences
* Issues of this legalistic application of double effect pointed out by **Pojman** - "give double effect, the woman is really lucky to have a cancerous uterus"
31
Examine Situation Ethics' approach to abortion
* Abortion is morally right if promotes agape (not for selfish reasons/convenience)
* No absolute rules except love
* People before rules (personalism)
Fletcher's examples:
* Dr Gisella Perl aborted 3000 babies in a Nazi concentration camp bc the women would've been incinerated - Fletcher says this is justified as saved lives
* Thalidomide case: wish to abort foetus likely to be severely disabled seen as brave, loving and responsible
* Rape of a girl: abortion = most loving response to trauma and injustice
32
Evaluate Situation Ethics' approach to abortion
* Highly flexible and compassionate: makes it sensitive and applicable to real-life complexity
* HOWEVER, lacks clear moral boundaries (Fletcher justified abortion of babies with Down Syndrome, which devalues current existence of people with Down Syndrome who lead meaningful lives)
* Un-Xn (sanctity of life)
* Can't predict consequences of an action
33
Which is the best approach to abortion
VE has the necessary nuance to make the right decision for that context, prioritising moral seriousness when SE seems to trivialise it, and NML crystallises it to the point of harm to the mother and family
34
What is voluntary euthanasia and assisted suicide?
* Voluntary euthanasia is when a mentally competent person requests death
* Assisted suicide is when a person is given the means/meds to kill themselves
35
Examine Virtue Ethics' approach to voluntary euthanasia and assisted suicide
* If a person is no longer capable of achieving eudaimonia, continued life may be pointless, so it may be the more courageous option
* OR enduring suffering may be courageous
* Depends on disposition and context
* Cardinal, Jones and Hayward use George and Anne from movie 'Amour' as a case of competing virtues
* G kills A out of love and compassion to end mutual suffering after A is paralysed and dementia
* Murder = base action for Aristotle, as justice forbids killing
* However, this is motivated by charity, mercy and regret, so may be a justified homicide, esp. because Aristotle sees regret as a sign of virtuous intention
36
Evaluate Virtue Ethics' approach to voluntary euthanasia and assisted suicide
* this doesn’t actually show how to act; depends on practical wisdom so different doctors for example may choose to prioritise different virtues leading to moral inconsistency
* So may be unsatisfactory for law and policy on VE and AS even if strong for personal ethics (as captures emotional depth and contextuality)
37
Examine Natural Law's approach to voluntary euthanasia and assisted suicide
* Aquinas rejects all forms of suicide and euthanasia as contrary to natural inclination to preserve life,
* It harms community (individuals part of wider society as a whole) and usurps God's authority over life and death
* A compassionate interior act doesn't justify intrinsically evil exterior act; it's an apparent good that prioritises comfort over God's will and human telos
* sanctity of life
* Chantal Sèbire case: disfiguring and incurable facial tumour
- killed herself after being refused right to die
- Despite her extreme suffering, NML too would reject her request for euthanasia
- when's the dignity in this?
* CC reinforces Aquinas' arguments: ignores the value of suffering for salvation as seen in Christ on cross
* But allows dying to proceed without medical intervention that would become extreme/disproportionate
* Double effect: allows for administering pain relief that may shorten life given that death is not intended
* Arthur Hugh Clough: "thou shalt not kill, but needs not strive officiously to keep alive"
38
Evaluate Natural Law's approach to voluntary euthanasia and assisted suicide
* Clear and consistent boundaries, protecting vulnerable from coercion or social pressure
* but insensitive to extreme suffering, prioritises abstract moral laws over compassion
* distinction between killing and letting die may be seen as artificial
39
Examine Situation Ethics' approach to voluntary euthanasia and assisted suicide
* right to life does not automatically Override the right to die because love is the only universal
* the motivation must be love, not convenience or economic pressure [link himself might his quietus make]
* "To prolong life uselessly… is to attack the moral status of a person"
* SE would rely on presuppositions and consider whether choice is autonomous, prognosis reliable, what is most loving
40
Evaluate Situation Ethics' approach to voluntary euthanasia and assisted suicide [5]
* Compassionate and person-centred, flexible for real-life complexity
* But subjective
* risk of slippery slope
* heavy reliance on predicting consequenses (e.g. may go into remission)
* Insufficient safeguards for the vulnerable
* un-Christian; teleological basis of agape theistic so cannot be used when legislating secular society
41
Which is the best approach to voluntary euthanasia and assisted suicide?
BEST IMO = VE: despite not giving decisive guidance, this allows for the necessary nuance for the complexity with such dilemmas but has more restraints and a secular basis than SE. This is not present at all in NML, which prioritises sanctity of life over autonomy and suffering, undermining the very dignity it claims to protect
42
What is capital punishment?
Capital punishment = state-sanctioned killing either on the basis of retribution or deterrence
43
Give an example of a case where an argument can be made for capital punishment
* case of **Angel Diaz**: brutal murder of a man, rape and beating of wife and teen daughter while youngest child watched - went to prison only
44
Examine Virtue Ethics' approach to capital punishment
* Aristotle doesn't explicitly discuss
* Capital punishment can be approached through justice (central social virtue) - "every virtue summed up"
* CP restoring balance when harm has occured - only way? (Angel Diaz)
* Aristotle holds people morally responsible for voluntary actions
* If one commits murder through vices, e.g. anger, then justice demands proportionate punishment
* It's not about retribution, deterring reform etc., but moral restoration
* A person of phronesis would simply obey just laws and apply CP fairly
45
Evaluate Virtue Ethics' approach to capital punishment
* Allowing CP ignores that phronesis develops over time / by habit
- too harsh/unforgiving
- but does avoid purely emotional/consequentialist reasoning (rational)
* May endorse violence in name of just resentment instead of cultivating compassion
46
Examine Natural Law's approach to capital punishment
* Aquinas says that CP is legitimate but not the responsibility of individuals because that becomes mere revenge
* Public authority (state) may lawfully execute criminals for the common good
* preservation of life by protecting innocent
* living in an ordered society (like a doctor amputating a diseased limb to save the whole body)
* Real good (safety) vs apparent good (misplaced compassion)
* Aquinas supports retributive justice (Genesis: "whoever sheds blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed") despite J's command to turn the other cheek
* CC accepts Aquinas' principles and allows CP if absolutely necessary to protect sociaty, but such cases are "practically non-existent" due to modern prisons
47
Evaluate Natural Law's approach to capital punishment
* But what about their sanctity of life? Even though the interior act good (justice), exterior act goes against precepts
* Either Aquinas is contradicting himself, or the theory is flawed and not applicable to complex dilemmas
* However, arguably Real good (safety) vs apparent good (misplaced compassion)
* But surely imprisonment would achieve same good without destroying God's creation and undermining idea of salvation for all
* Ignores risk of wrongful execution
* RCC better approach and more in line with Christianity but goes away from Aquinas
48
Examine Situation Ethics' approach to capital punishment
* may reach different conclusions
* execution loving towards victims and sociaty ("tough love")
* OR arguably life imprisonment better affirms love by allowing repentance and reform
* Fletcher'd reject blanket rules and insist on presuppositions being filled
* what outcome works best
* personalism value of both victim and offender
* relativisim: love only absolute
* CP arguably loving towards majority (but prisons better way, more loving overall)
49
Evaluate Situation Ethics' approach to capital punishment
* Flexible and sensitive to context, avoiding unjust blanket policies
* But predicting consequences (e.g. deterrence) is unreliable
* no clear guidance because of subjectivity
* Lacks safeguards against abuse of power by state
50
Which is the best approach to capital punishment?
BEST IMO = SE; NML and VE contradict own logic and foundational principles
* while SE doesn't give a fixed view, it is more applicable to real-life than the strict and unstable reasoning of NML and VE
51
Examine the moral status of animals
* No agreed definition on moral status of animals
* Some deny on basis of lack of rationality, souls or language
* Others argue they have undeniable moral status due to sentience, consciousness and social behaviour like humans
* Yes, not as intelligent as humans, but IQ is not the only measure of value, otherwise we wouldn't protect the mentally weaker members of our society
Include in AO2 eval in this part of spec!!
52
What is intensive farming?
* intensive (factory) farming causes significant animal suffering in order to maximise efficiency + profit
- crowded conditions
- mutilations w/o anaesthetics
* grain consumption contributes to human starvation
* mechanisation of agriculture leads to deforestation and global warming
53
Examine Virtue Ethics' approach to use of animals for food and intensive farming
* Teleological: Aristotle doesn't object to eating animals because of hiearchy of souls - animals exist for humans
* BUT modern factory farming goes beyond anything Aristotle envisaged
* Must be judged by effect on moral character
* Key virtue = compassion; cannot be selectively applied to humans
- either you are compassionate or you aren't, and factory farming requires indifference to extreme animal suffering
* encourages vices such as callousness, greed and lack of temperance, so a virtuous agent practising phronesis might avoid factory-farmed product, otherwise it comes from akrasia and will prohibit path to eudaimonia
54
Evaluate Virtue Ethics' approach to use of animals for food and intensive farming
* Powerful critique of factory farming without needing equal moral status
* BUT is it practical in face of huge population / demand?
55
Examine Natural Law's approach to use of animals for food and intensive farming
* adopts Aristotle's hierarchy of souls
- Only humans are rational and capable of union with God
- animals have instrumental value - created by God for human use, so eating/killing them isn't a bad exterior act
* Upholds preserve life and worship God
- Biblical support for "dominion… over every living thing that moves on earth" (Genesis)
- BUT **Judith Barad** argues animals have value independent of their usefulness to human beings
- elephent tusks for fighting takes precedince over their use of chess pieces
56
Evaluate Natural Law's approach to use of animals for food and intensive farming
* Clear, but leads to moral indifference over extreme cruelty
* shows NML's anthropocentrism
57
Examine Situation Ethics' approach to use of animals for food and intensive farming
* Personalism means moral concern directed primarily at PERSONS, so human interests take priority over animal interests
- However agape is inclusive and unconditional, so can extend to animals as objects of care
* In agapeic calculus, we must consider:
- foreseeable consequences: massive animal suffering; environmental damage; global hunger persists; may even contribute to human starvation
- motive: arguably profit and convenience
- end sought: feeding population and preventing starvation
- Use of animals for food "natural"; old as humanity itself and digestive system adapted to eating meat
- means used: Horror conditions
- hunting has been replaced by exploiting
* the mechanisation of agriculture has lead to huge population rise - high demand
- Some argue keep going is more agapeic as puts persons before animal welfare (huge number of people malnourished)
- Others argue we should we should stop because maximises misery (insufficient and contributes to human starvation - cattle consume more grain than they produce as food
- more loving to reduce meat consumption develop lab-grown meat and switch to crop based agriculture (animals ARE subjects of agapeic concern)
58
Evaluate Situation Ethics' approach to use of animals for food and intensive farming
* Flexible and takes global inequality seriously, however malleable to a fault as can reach different conclusions and risks justifying cruelty, undermining SE's pragmatism as it is uncertain which end is more agapeistic
59
Which is the best approach to use of animals for food and intensive farming?
BEST IMO: VE; accounts for inequality and upholds a consistent morality (questions about pragmatism countered by inefficiency of intensive farming anyway)
* SE too uncertain
* NML too cruel
60
What is the use of animals in scientific procedures and cloning?
* Animals are widely used in medical research and testing for human benefit (vaccines, cancer treatments), often without consent or adequate pain relief
* Cloning is producing genetically identical copies, to preserve or improve a species, or to test treatments
61
Examine Virtue Ethics' approach to use of animals in scientific procedures and cloning
* Aristotle himself used animals in scientific investigation, suggesting it is acceptable
* The highest human function is reason, and science develops the intellect and produces genuine human goods, e.g. knowledge, health
* Compassion directed towards humans may suggest it is morally good
- A virtuous scientist would insist on pain control and humane treatment
* however, compassions must extend to all.
- **Rosalind Hursthouse** points out how many animal experiments are not necessary and are disproportionate; excessive/careless experimentation would reflect cruelty and callousness, not virtue
62
Evaluate Virtue Ethics' approach to use of animals in scientific procedures and cloning
* the fact that Aristotle used animals in scientific research can't really be used to justify because if he didn't practice what he preached that's on Aristotle not VE
* Allows a balanced, nuanced approach, but fails to draw a clear line (how much suffering is too much?)
- BUT we do draw a line on how much anaestesia human require, why not same for animals?
63
Examine Natural Law's approach to use of animals in scientific procedures and cloning
* Permissible
- aimed at preserving life
- Humans given dominion over animals so worshipping God too
* accepted by CC too
- Any pain inflicted would be accepted if necessary by experiment
- If pain inflicted because of human cruelty tho, this is morally wrong bc the person "might go on to do the same to men"
- not because animals have moral worth but because it risks habituating violance towards humans
* As for cloning, genetic experiments within species is acceptable, but mixing species or radically altering animal nature would likely get rejected by Aquinas as it violates God's design and telos of species
- e.g. allow to increase milk yield, animal size and resistance to disease (CC supports) but not cloning of pets for example which RSPCA has criticised due to poor quality of life
- NML rejects here bc amounts to unjustified abuse; fulfils none of the precepts
64
Evaluate Natural Law's approach to use of animals in scientific procedures and cloning
Allows life-saving research, but underestimates animal pain and goes againts Christian belief in stewardship (not worshipping God)
65
Examine Situation Ethics' approach to use of animals in scientific procedures and cloning
* Fletcher himself was involved in cloning and advocated use of animals in scientific research as the means to the end of human welfare (pragmatism)
* UK survey shows ~80-90% support, which suggests society sees this as loving and necessary, furthermore most simultaneously stress need for adequate pain control for animals
* SE'd would agree as it is the most practical, effective and agapeic ways of addressing general problem of human disease
* However some argue it can never be loving to subject an animal to extreme suffering as agape is universal and unconditional
* Pain control claims are disputed e.g. by PETA
* agaptic calculus must be future-looking and risk aware
- Cloning generally not in support because highly risky suffering and uncertainty about where it leads, but individuals need to make up own minds using agapeic calculus
66
Evaluate Situation Ethics' approach to use of animals in scientific procedures and cloning
* Responsive to medical emergencies but risks excusing extreme harm as means to an end
* SE struggles where what is loving is hard to quantify
67
Which is the best approach to use of animals in scientific procedures and cloning?
BEST IMO = VE; allows for medical development and accounts for animal suffering;
* SE too flexible and NML rigid to the point of cruelty
68
What is blood sport?
Blood sport involves the intentional killing of animals for human entertainment, e.g. bull-fighting, hunting
69
Examine Virtue Ethics' approach to blood sport
* blood sport exists primarily for pleasure and spectacle
* Participation encourages vices, e.g. callousness, indifference to suffering and cruelty (enjoyment of dominance and pain)
* Compassion violated, for humans too because upsets many people
* Claims that blood sports show courage on weak as Aristotle defines courage as reasoned, proportionate use of risk
- bull-fighting invalues calculated risk and entertainment (inferior form of courage)
- alternatives e.g. karate are more couragous than callous (as it should be)
70
Evaluate Virtue Ethics' approach to blood sport
* Strong condemnation protecting rights, but what counts as "callous" varies by sociaty (bull-fighting is traditional in Spain - but causes harm)
71
Examine Natural Law's approach to blood sport
* humans can use animals as they see fit, including blood sports, even if it may cause pain or death to animals
* CC adds nuance
- Stresses kindness to animals, like *St Francis of Assisi*, and says "it is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die needlessly"
* also, an animal which is killed/maimed as a result of blood sports fulfils the end for which it was created by God (but maybe this is their end because dominion) [check if this items is a chatholic thing]
72
Evaluate Natural Law's approach to blood sport
* Internally consistent but appears morally repugnant to modern sensibilities, struggling to condemn gratuitous cruelty (tho IMO same habitouous violance argument from scientific experiement may apply
* NML fails to protect the vulnarable and not even worshipping because stewardship (which CC points out)
73
Examine Situation Ethics' approach to blood sport
* doesn't put interests of humans before animals where human pleasures gained at expense of animal suffering
* there's no clear loving outcome
* May even damage character by desensitising people into allowing pain for pleasure
* Legal bans in UK suggest societal judgement against it
* tho some may argue fox-hunting as agapeic because protecting livestock and if less cruel than factory farming
- not generally done with this aim though
74
Evaluate Situation Ethics' approach to blood sport
* Condemns gratuitous cruelty but still no absolute prohibition
75
Which is the best approach to blood sport?
BEST IMO = VE; clearly prohibits cruelty unlike NML and SE, and also has a secular basis unlike the other two which won't convince many people who aren't Christian
76
What is xenotransplantation?
Xenotransplantation is transplanting animal organs (e.g. pig heart) into humans to save human life
77
Examine Virtue Ethics' approach to animals as a source of organs for transplant
* Supporting may express compassion for humans; lives could be saved
* Commitment to knowledge and medical progress, fulfilling our ergon
* However treating animals as expendable resources risks cultivating callousness
- Some people in society may be deeply distressed by the practice, harming social harmony
* A virtuous person using phronesis would weigh compassion for humans against compassion for animals
- Supports strict regulations but allow because animals are for human use (hiearachy)
78
Evaluate Virtue Ethics' approach to animals as a source of organs for transplant
* Doesn't offer certainty but attempts to respect rights of all
* Phronesis cultivated throughout life - different agents reach different decisions
79
Examine Natural Law's approach to animals as a source of organs for transplant
* Humans have moral right to use animals as they see fit, so using xenotransplantation to preserve life would justify killing the animal for organs
* Safeguards would be in place for any attempt to modify human germline or it'd be a modification of God's blueprint for humanity (**imago dei**)
* View shared by Catholic Medical Association, who say all procedures must be carried out with due concern for animal pain and suffering - though no such requirement is made by Aquinas
* how can animal killed for xenotransplantation fulfil the end for which it was created by God (unless end = serve human beings)
* Would prolonging life in this manner also go against God's blueprint for humanity ("it was their time")?
80
Evaluate Natural Law's approach to animals as a source of organs for transplant
depends heavily on theological assumptions about dominion, when this isn't even a view shared by all Xns (see CMA, though clear in opinions)
81
Examine Situation Ethics' approach to animals as a source of organs for transplant
* directed at persons (do animals count?)
* End = saving human lives (agapeistic)
* Pigs = plentiful and similar in organ size; human donor insufficient to meet demand
* Agapeic calculus needs to be future-looking and accept risk (e.g. transmitting infection) as unavoidable
* Some argue that socially and cognitively complex animals should count as persons - therefore using animals as spare parts is dehumanising
- but doesn't solve problem (human can't meet demand)
82
Evaluate Situation Ethics' approach to animals as a source of organs for transplant
* Future-focused and pragmatic but no clear moral limits
* moral sensitivity but no certainty
83
Which is the best approach to animals as a source of organs for transplant?
BEST IMO = VE; Respects rights for all more certainly than SE does; NML is completely unconvincing as it justifies (potentially un-Christian) cruelty towards animals
* SE pretty good too - not a complete flop like usual
RS2: Ethics
flashcards
Decks in class (6)
# Cards
