ethics in the social world
to analyse the social world, those aspects must be problematised
Margaret Olivia Little’s example: Andocentrism
- the way we see the social world is shaped by the assumptions we do not see
- these assumptions impact how we frame ethical issues and the way we consider an issue as belonging (or not) to the domain of ethics
deontology
acting in line with our duty is what makes it right
utilitarianism
an action is right if and only if it produces the most pleasure / happiness / utility
virtue ethics
- goodness is prior to rightness
- virtues are valuable intrinsically
Holms take on ethics in public space
Modern democratic society is characterised by: religions, philosophy, moral doctrines
- but no one of these doctrines is affirmed by citizens generally (nor political parties)
- can’t expect for a doctrine to ever be affirmed by all citizens
Holes take on policy making
Societies are:
1. morally pluralistic - there is a variety of views concerning the moral issue at hand
2. liberal democracies - not are not dictatorship, autocracies, oligarchies, plutocracies, or populist democracies
ethical pluralism
- idea that there are many theories about what is “right” and “wrong” (moral norms) which may be incompatible and/or incommensurable with a society moral norms
- policy making involves deciding in contacts where there are likely to be guided by different norms
- deciding when it is appropriate to act under one norm or another requires careful consideration
monist perspectvies
common grounds:
- share the meta-ethical postulate that there is a fundamental unity to reality (all moral demands can be brought back to normal or a prefragmental state)
rather absolutist:
- founded on the notion of a supreme moral claim that is somewhat self-validating or self-justifying
- the big 3 are rather absolutist b/c they reflect a belief in universally applicable moral principles and objective qualities of right/wrong
- monism simply asks us to choose one moral framework and apply it our ethical decision making
principlism
is monist
trans-cultural ethical judgments
are present when an agent/group is held accountable to an ethical standard, regardless of the fact that this standard was not accepted at the time or place where the action was committed
2 things to do to accept a theory
- understand and analyse its philosophical basis
- explore possible objections and refute them
descriptive relativist ethics
postulate:
- different cultures and different times accept different ethical principles and share different moral beliefs and practices
- its factual understanding of reality
- may form a certain field of empirical study
normative relativistic ethics
postulate:
- ethical norms are relative to social, cultural and historical contexts
- these norms (values, principles) are only applicable within certain cultural limits
- no universal standard exists by which to evaluate ethical norms and judge the actions of another culture
cross-cultural judgments
if we accept ethical relativism:
- we cannot judge or morally condemn other cultures for their practices (polygamy, medically assisted death) and practices of other times (child sacrifice)
- the absence of cross-cultural and cross-temporal judgments is intuitively seen by many as disturbing or even morally repugnant
pluralist perspective
- it is too demanding to expect one single correct answer to every moral dilemma
- pluralism accepts that there may be more than 1 correct moral framework
- differs from relativism in that it does not accept that all frameworks are equal
- morality does not simply come down to personal preference
- possible to make rational judgments between various frameworks and to judge some to be better than others
moral pluralism
- ethical pluralism (value pluralism) is a theory about the nature of the values/goods that human beings pursue, and the pursuit of which make up the substance of their moral lives
- certain human values come into conflict with other equally valid human values
- compromises between values can be achieved or solutions to value conflicts found - one is forced to choose between values
- pluralism holds that values are incommensurable in that they cannot be ranked
pluralist perspective
Intrapersonal:
- can one person use different ethical frameworks to make different decisions?
Interpersonal:
- is it acceptable for different people, or different cultures, to use different systems of ethics?
monistic and pluralistic traditions respond differently to conflicts of values
LOOK AT SLIDES
Engelhardts thinking
the moral division of the present society does not allow the foundation by reason alone of a moral code indicating a true and valid moral content for all
- agreement
liberalism
emphasises autonomy, self governance, and individual rights
libertarianism
- strongly value individual freedom and see this as justifying strong protections for individual freedom
- insist that justice poses stringent limits to coercion
communitarianism
- centred around the importance of community in the functioning of political life
- community-oriented takes on the analysis and evaluation of political institutions as well as for understanding human well-being
egalitarianism
- people should get the same or be treated the same or be treated as equals
Mill on liberty
- liberalism = autonomy, self-governance, and individual rights
- the state generally should not interfere with individuals pursuit of their own conception of the good life
- paternalism and non-neutrality toward conceptions of the good life by the state are problematic
