Moral
advertisement
FALSAFAH MORAL Prof. Emeritus Dr. Abdul Rahman Md Aroff Topik Fokus Etika 1 Baju Warna Merah Baju Tan berwarna merah Harganya mahal Dia membelinya di Giant Seremban Baju itu cantik Bagaimanapun, baju itu tidak sesuai dipakai Tan di majlis agama yang dihadirinya semalam Sebenarnya, baju itu tidak patut dibeli kerana membelinya telah menyebabkan Tan berhutang dengan kawannya Dalam kalangan rakan-rakan Tan, baju berwarna merah adalah kegemaran mereka FOKUS ETIKA Pernyataan Bukan Normatif atau Deskriptif (Fakta) Normatif (Nilai) Bukan Moral (estetika, agama, politik, sosial, ekonomi, intelek, material) Moral Ciri Fungsi Nilai ditonjol secara lisan atau perlakuan Satu piawai asas yang tekal, membantu dan mencorak pemikiran, perasaan dan perlakuan kita Nilai ‘boleh’ berubah Keutamaan nilai tidak sama bagi individu yang berbeza Jenis Instrumental Intrinsik Subjektif Objektif Relatif Mutlak Which of the following are NORMATIVE statements? • You cannot trust Sandra. • Many adults are attending college today. • Striking workers broke into the plant last night. • Not all racists are white. • A patient with an incompetent doctor is likely to receive poor care. Which of the following directives are outside the scope of ethics? • Never shave with a dull blade • Never shoot guns at people • Use deception if it gets what you want • Use a tie that matches your socks • Don’t neglect your family • Don’t take what does not belong to you Which statements express intrinsic / instrumental value? Pleasure is the only thing that is good in itself. Money is important not for what it is but for what it can buy. Self-discipline is important because it purifies the spirit and strengthens the will. Wisdom is to be sought for its own sake Which of the following are subjective statements? I don’t like the smell of burning cigar. Smoking in hospital rooms interferes with the patients’ recovery. Littering clutters up the environment, poses a risk to public health, and is expensive to clean up. I don’t approve of littering. ETIKA falsafah etimologi ‘ethos’ (Yunani) atau ‘mores’ (Latin), iaitu hukum, adat resam, adab, tradisi, budi pekerti, kesusilaan, sopan santun, dan sebagainya Peraturan Masyarakat Kemoralan Sosial/ Konvensional/Konservatif / Tradisional Berfikir sendiri tentang apa itu yang dikatakan baik jahat, benar salah, tanggungjawab atau ‘duty’, tentang apa yang patut atau tidak patut dilakukan, dan sebagainya falsafah moral Keperibadian Teleologi Etika Keperibadian Mulia (Virtues/Fadhilah) Utilitarianisme Egoisme Emotivisme Deontologi Prinsip Kewajipan Eksistensialisme Intuisionisme Topik 2 Etimologi Etika Maksud KEMORALAN SOSIAL Pematuhan kepada peraturan komuniti yang ditetapkan oleh autoriti dalam masyarakat, oleh itu, keperluan masyarakat, bukan individu, merupakan matlamat etika. Kod, peraturan dan sebagainya yang tertubuh secara luaran yang mesti diakur… pantang larang Kritikan sekiranya bersifat autoritarian/autokratik, ia melemahkan autonomi, pertimbangan bebas serta pilihan sukarela individu dan mengakibatkan individu itu menurut perintah secara membuta tuli kehilangan perasaan tanggungjawab moral relativisme kebudayaan boleh membawa kepada konflik penguatkuasaan bergantung atas isbat (hukuman) yang boleh hilang kuasanya buat apa yang aku suruh, jangan buat apa yang… bertentangan dengan ‘keadilan’ kesukaran menyesuaikan peraturan masyarakat dengan situasi baru di persada dunia yang kompleks di mana masa dan keadaan sentiasa berubah dan terdapat banyak persoalan yang menjadi dilema bagi kebanyakan orang sesetengah peraturan atau norma masyarakat didapati tidak bermoral KEPERIBADIAN MULIA (VIRTUES) Maksud (Aristotle) Tret karakter dan sifat perangai yang mulia; kecenderungan bertujuan, bukan perasaan; tidak bersifat semula jadi, tetapi dimiliki melalui latihan; dan merupakan suatu jalan tengah. (purposive dispositions or traits of character; neither feelings nor faculties; not engendered in a person by nature; and each virtue constitutes a mean) Jadual Virtues dan Vices Aristotle Berlebihan Jalan Tengah Terlalu Kurang Kegentaran & keyakinan (fear & confidence) Kegopohan rashness Keberanian courage Pengecut cowardice Pendapatan & perbelanjaan (getting & spending) Pemborosan prodigality Kemurahan hati liberality Kedekut illiberality Pengucapan diri (self-expression) Cakap besar boastfulness Kebenaran truthfulness Merendahkan diri understatement Panas hati irascibility Kesabaran patience Kurang semangat lack of spirit Kemarahan (anger) Kritikan(keperibadian mulia) Nasihat yang sukar dipraktiskan Sesetengah nilai mulia perlu berada dalam keadaan yang keterlaluan atau hanya ada pertentangan Kesukaran mengkategorikan sesuatu keperibadian sebagai mulia serta menentukan ciri watak manakah yang paling utama dan yang manakah pula kurang penting Sebagai suatu kebiasaan sahaja yang tidak dapat membimbing seseorang dalam situasi luar biasa yang menimbulkan dilema moral Topik 3 Teori Etika Teleologi UTILITARIANISME Maksud Kebahagiaan yang paling banyak kepada sejumlah insan yang paling ramai (greatest happiness for the greatest number) Baik = Kebahagiaan = Keseronokan Jahat = Kedukaan = Kesakitan (Good = Happiness = Pleasure Evil = Unhappiness = Pain) (kritikan - utilitarianisme) Manusia dikuasai oleh keseronokan dan kesakitan, dan kemoralan ialah usaha mencari kebahagiaan iaitu keseronokan, dan kebencian terhadap kesakitan (vs) masochist; kesakitan, bapa kepada keseronokan Pengalaman keseronokan mestilah dimaksimumkan dan kesakitan diminimumkan (vs) Menghukum orang tak berdosa, 9 atau 10?, irihati/tamak, oleh itu berkonflik dengan keadilan atau matlamat menghalalkan cara Semua sensasi terdiri daripada sama ada keseronokan atau kesakitan yang bertentangan (vs) subjektif dan kabur. Mengaitkan keseronokan dengan kebaikan (vs) kebaikan = kebebasan, kesihatan > keseronokan; sadist, vandals = jahat = seronok! Menyamakan keseronokan dengan kebahagiaan (vs) kebahagiaan tak khusus tetapi kepuasan yang agak kekal dan mendalam; a life of pleasure=a happy life? Seronok maksimum (vs) bilangan maksimum? Yang baik (keseronokan) dan yang jahat (kesakitan) yang disukat (vs) Urusan yang menyukarkan: kuantiti, kualiti, masa/tempat, anatara individu EGOISM(E) Standard/ukuran untuk baik (good) = menguntungkan diri sendiri (benefits oneself); dan jahat (evil) = merugikan diri sendiri (harms oneself) maksud Sebagai agen moral tanggungjawab tunggal individu ialah memperolehi seberapa banyak keuntungan untuk diri sendiri (as a moral agent, the one and only moral responsibility of the individual is to gain as much benefit as possible for him/herself) Sebagai penasihat moral (selaku orang kedua/pihak ketiga) dalam membuat pertimbangan, dia juga mesti mengutamakan keuntungan bagi dirinya sendiri (as a moral advisor, in making judgement, the individual must also focus on the benefits for him/herself) Kritikan (egoisme) Eksploitasi, tidak perlu bermasyarakat dan taat kepada autoriti, membenci peraturan, organisasi dan menentang pengorbanan diri untuk kecekapan, kekuatan dan kemajuan vs sifat semula jadi manusia? Jepun! Binatang liar/buas Untuk wira/superman terus hidup dan terdorong dia memerlukan musuh, cabaran dan penentangan daripada orang kebanyakan yang mesti dibelenggu Tidak dapat memuaskan prinsip sejagat Menentang peraturan mutlak sesuatu autoriti dan memperakui hanya peraturan yang bersifat individualistik, iaitu menurut peraturan sendiri adalah bermoral (prudentialism) vs altruism Tidak dapat diuar-uarkan Tidak dapat menjalin hubungan Tanggungjawab sejarah dalam kebangkitan pergerakan Nazi Topik 4 Teori Etika Deontologi Eksistensialisme kewujudan mendahului zat dan perubahan adalah kekal. Oleh itu, individu yang kewujudannya authentic, bebas sepenuhnya buat apa yang dia suka dalam menguruskan diri sendiri; tiada apapun yang boleh membataskan kebebasannya untuk memilih dan menentukan sendiri tujuan, sikap, nilai dan cara hidupnya; segala-galanya diizinkan; tiada hukum atau nilai kudus/objektif yang wajib dipatuhi; nilai bersifat subjektif, individualistik dan tertakluk kepada situasi; yang lepas dan yang akan datang tidak penting. Sekiranya individu itu tidak mahu ‘freedom of choice’, maka dia hidup dalam ‘nothingness’ dan dia mempunyai pandangan yang penuh dengan mitos tentang kemoralan (bad faith = kepercayaan palsu) Eksistensialisme: suatu kritikan… Menjadikan tindakan seseorang itu benar dengan hanya memilih tindakan itu – menggalakkan relativisme individu Kemungkinan yang dipilih adalah yang desired, commended dan praised, bukan yang desirable, commendable, praiseworthy Tanpa matlamat, ideal atau norma, ia tidak membimbing dan memberitahu individu apa yang patut dibuat, individu itu is left hanging in the air atau terawang-awang Keputusan first hand biasanya membebankan dan makan masa Mustahil, dari segi psikologi, wujudnya freedom of choice Kantianism – Prinsip Kewajipan (Duty) Tumpuan kemoralan ialah kepada niat atau tujuan, dan motif kemoralan bukanlah untuk memuaskan kecenderungan, tetapi motifnya ialah kewajipan demi kewajipan. Kecuali tekad baik, tiada yang baik tanpa syarat. Individu yang mempunyai tekad baik ialah individu yang sentiasa bertindak atas dasar kewajipan yang diperihalkan sebagai satu set perintah mutlak, iaitu kesejagatan, kemanusiaan (hormat) dan kerasionalan. The focus of morality is on intention/purpose, and the motive of morality is not to satisfy inclinations, but its motive is duty for duty’s sake. Except for the good will, nothing is good without conditions. The individual who has the good will is one who always acts on the basis of duty which is described as a set of categorical imperatives, that is, universalism, humanity (respect) and rationality. Kritikan (Kantianisme) Tidak boleh berlandaskan kecenderungan (Cannot be based on inclinations) Prinsip terlalu am, tiada kecualian (The principle is too general, no exceptions) Tiada panduan untuk memutuskan perselisihan antara kewajipan (No guidance to resolve conflict between duties) Kurang kritis tentang konsep yang mungkin mempunyai makna yang tersendiri dan berbeza kepada orang yang berlainan (Not critical regarding concepts that may have different meanings to different people) Topik 5 Teori Etika Semasa EMOTIVISME Moral judgements often serve to express the feelings of the speaker; moral discourse is primarily influential, i.e. the moral statement of the speaker is an instrument to control, redirect and modify the attitude of the speaker’s audience. This is the purpose of emotivism, and it is the central thesis of emotivism. Moral words have emotive meanings, because they appeal to the feelings or the emotions. kritikan O Irrationalistic views about ethical judgements, i.e. undermine the rationality of morals O To ‘influence’ - this purpose is in no way distinctive of moral discourse; for, the mass media, political speeches, threats, bribes, and so on, can also create an influence. Moral discourse has not necessarily and not always this purpose; one can still talk about morality wit or to those who already have the ‘attitude’ to be promoted, and this moral discourse need not be less moral for that. O Some moral terms such as ‘heroic’ and ‘vicious’ are somewhat emotive, there are also many moral terms such as ‘good’, ‘generous’, ‘ought’, and ‘honest’ which are not emotionally stirring. Moral opinion, advice, and such like, can be expressed by a person without him being in state of moral excitement. Equally, a piece of discourse may be highly emotive but unconcerned with morals. INTUITIONISME The view that normal human beings have an immediate awareness of moral values; a form of self-perception or moral sense. There are moral truths which, when known, are known by intuition; and, if we do not know them, our defect of intuition is comparable either to a defect of physical insight or of intellectual discernment. Anthropological and psychological evidence seems to be against the existence of such a faculty (wangi/busuk, gelap/terang, panas/sejuk); that this faculty does not exist can also be shown by everyday experience of disagreement about what is right or wrong in particular situations. cont… O Moral discourse is unique and cannot be reduced to non-moral discourse without loss or change of meaning By making the whole topic sui generis, by saying that moral terms and judgements are simply indefinable and self-evident (yellow is yellow), intuitionism has emptied moral theory of all content. Moral truths were, it seemed, such that nothing could possibly be said about what they meant, what their grounds were, or even why they mattered at all. Topik 6 Insan yang Terdidik dari segi Moral KANDUNGAN (Content/Substance) Keperibadian Mulia (Virtues) Pentaakulan Moral (Moral Reasoning) Peraturan Masyarakat (Rules of society) the morally mature educational administrator BENTUK (Form) Etika Berprinsip (Principalistic Ethics) Perasaan Moral Perlakuan Moral (Moral Action) DIMENSI (the 3H dimensions: head, heart, hand) (Moral Emotions) Kandungan (content) Moral peraturan masyarakat (rules of society) ~memajukan kebajikan dan kestabilan serta survival masyarakat kerana tercapainya kedamaian, kerukunan dan social order (furthering the welfare and stability as well as the survival of society because there would be peace and social order) ~menjimatkan masa dan tenaga (saves time and energy) ~tindak balas terhadap masyarakat yang bertambah permisif (in response to society that is becoming more permissive) keperibadian mulia (virtues) ~mengandungi cara bagaimana patut mengikuti peraturan masyarakat (tells the manner how to follow society’s rules) ~berfaedah kepada individu yang ada hubungan dengan individu yang peribadinya mulia (beneficial to those who have relationship with the virtuous person) Bentuk (form) Moral prinsip (principle) > situasi (situation) ~mengurangkan relativisme dalam perkara berkaitan kemoralan (reduce relativism in matters related to morality) ~prinsip (keadilan & kepedulian) tidak ketepikan situasi (the justice and care principles do not disregard situations) Mengapa keadilan & kepedulian (Why justice & care)? ~nilai asas (basic values); ibu nilai (mothers of all values); akal & hati (cognitive & affective) Jika tiada dimensi TM EM TLM TM - tak mesra (impersonal) EM tak rasional (irrational) - perasaan menenangkan diri sendiri (warm comfortable feeling) TLM taat membabi buta (blind conformist); kebertanggungjawaban diabaikan (no sense of responsibility/ accountability) tak mesra (impersonal) - cakap kosong (cheap talk kelemahan moral (moral weakness); cakap tak serupa bikin (does not practise what is preached)… Individu yang peka serta memahami tentang keperluan terhadap peraturan tertentu dalam komuniti dan mempunyai keperibadian yang sesuai untuk dia hidup sejahtera dalam komuniti itu. Dia berhati-hati membuat pertimbangan/keputusan berdasarkan prinsip keadilan serta perasaan kepedulian dan dengan penuh tanggungjawab juga akauntabiliti mengambil tindakan yang wajar. Dia juga berkebolehan meneliti situasi dalam menangani isu moral. Selain itu dia berketrampilan merungkai (problem-setter) konflik moral dalam membuat keputusan yang ‘informed’ dan terbaik (problem-solver). Topik 7 Agensi Moral AGENSI MORAL is a moral exemplar is devoted to standards of best practice and conditions of competence to be maintained and promoted has a special responsibility to be a conscientious moral actor, to deliberately make decisions and take actions in a distinctly moral manner reflects upon and considers the moral consequences of his decisions, actions, as well as the policies and practices of his institution has the capacity to reflect successfully on conflicting matters, i.e. developed informed and responsible judgments, and choose the best among desirable options, hence, a problem-setter and a problem-solver PENYELESAIAN KONFLIK MORAL VALUES ANALYSIS the Coombs approach Identifying and clarifying the value question Assembling purported facts Assessing the truth of purported facts Clarifying the relevance of facts Arriving at a tentative value decision Testing the value principle implied in the decision the Fraenkel strategy What is this incident about? What happened here? (Dilemma) What could/might you do in this situation? (Alternatives) If you were to do this, what might happen as a result? (Consequences) If that happens, then what might happen (i.e. what might be additional short- and long-term effects)? (Consequences of consequences) What evidence is there that these will occur? (Evidence) Which consequences would be good? Bad? Why? Measured against what criteria? (Assessment) What do you think you should do? Why? QUESTIONS/GUIDELINES FOR EXAMINING AND MAKING ETHICAL DECISION Have you defined the problem correctly? Is the dilemma (issue or conflict) really what it appears to be? What is this incident about? What happened here? How did this situation occur in the first place? Is the action you are considering legal? Ethical? How would you define the problem if you stood on the other side of the fence? Do you understand the position of those who oppose the action you are considering? Is it reasonable? To whom and to what do you give your loyalty as a person and as a member of the organisation? What is your intention in making this decision? How does this intention compare with the probable results? Whom could your decision or action injure or harm? Whom does the action benefit? How much? How long? CONT… Can you discuss the problem with the affected parties before you make your decision? Have you sought the opinion of others who are knowledgeable on the subject and who would be objective? Are you confident that your position will be as valid over a long period of time as it seems now? Would you be willing to allow everyone to do what you are considering doing? Could you disclose without qualm your decision or action to your superiors, family, society as a whole? Would your action be embarrassing to you if it were made known to your family, friends, coworkers, or superiors? What is the symbolic potential of your action if understood? If misunderstood? What conditions would you allow exceptions to your stand? YOU SHOULD LOOK AFTER YOUR BOSS’S OFFICE IN HIS SHORT ABSENCE OF ABOUT THREE HOURS a) b) c) Your secretary has just quite badly cut one of her fingers and should have treatment at the hospital. You are the only one in the office who can take her to the hospital. You have already promised to spend the time discussing an urgent problem (involving an inspection of equipments situated in the branch office 20 km away) with two of your subordinates. You want to continue writing a short report. AS REQUESTED BY YOUR SUPERIOR,YOU SHOULD ATTEND A CONFERENCE NEXT SCHOOL VACATION, FLYING TO AND FROM PENANG, THE DESTINATION a) b) c) You should be spared the air sickness planes give you. You have to take your family for a one-week holiday in Malacca during school vacation. At the same time you have already arranged a crucial meeting with a busy and important client. ATAN IS YOUR BUSINESS PARTNER.YOU FOUND THAT HE HAS BEEN FALSELY ADVERTISING YOUR COLLEGE. Honesty vs Profit What would you do? a) Urge him to discontinue such a practice b) End your current partnership with him c) Let it be so as not to risk the college’s account (profit) DIVERGENCE & CONFLICT Whenever one set of reasons lead to the conclusion that one action should be taken whereas a second set suggests that a distinct action should be taken, the result is DIVERGENCE. What we would do in following the first set of reasons is simply different from, but not incompatible with, what we would do in following a second set. Hence divergence does not necessarily imply conflict, in fact, we can often resolve any tension by simply doing both of the recommended actions. CONFLICT is, whenever different sets of reasons lead not only to divergent recommendations but to logically contradicting ones, that is, following the one recommendation means or entails not following the other. The strategy of DISSOLUTION Involves developing alternatives that would avoid the problem. It is built upon flexibility and it also makes a virtue of foresight. • Accommodates by performing both actions (tension caused by divergence without conflict) • Take other action(s) if any (tension caused by undesirable consequences of either of two alternative courses) • Change the circumstances or the means (tension arises between two aims owing to present circumstances or to the means chosen) (Some conflicts are unavoidable, especially given circumstances over which one is forced to live; in general, many consequences of one’s actions are uncontrollable because they are unforeseeable . Dissolution is also limited as a strategy because it does not build character) You are a labour union leader. Some of the union members hold insecure jobs and are frequently laid off. No welfare programmes provide funds for those laid off. To this group of members, job security is very important because they could face starvation without it. The union also has a group of highly trained and much desired workers whose labour is always in demand. To this group of members, job security is not really an issue because they are confident they will always have it. They want you to demand an increased number of weekends and holidays. The union is thus faced with a problem. As a union leader, what would you do? The strategy of HIERARCHY-BUILDING When two/more values cannot both/all be realized, then those values have to be ranked from most to least important, i.e. value hierarchies must be built. To justify the formation of this hierarchy, it is necessary for there to be some objective criteria as follows: *more encompassing – if one’s action could be said to contain not only one desired value but another desired value besides, then that action could thereby be said to be the better for being the richer. *more fundamental – if a fundamental value is not realized, then another, less fundamental value, cannot be realized; if the less fundamental value is realized, then the more fundamental value can be or has been realized. (The problem is that conflicting values do not always neatly form hierarchies) You are offered a position with a company in Vietnam, starting on April 1, 2010. It is the kind of job that you want, the kind that you have studied for. But you have made other commitments. You have accepted a position with XYZ and will report for duty on Jan 2, 2009. You cannot break your word with XYZ, contracts are contracts. Once you have made a commitment, you do not go back on it. But that opportunity with the Vietnam Co.! A better job, higher pay, and management potential. With Vietnam Co., you will meet new people, learn about new cultures; it is more than just a job. With XYZ, you will be locked in. There is less chance for personal growth. After a year or two, you will know your job and will probably want to move anyway. However, you are not sure. The situation in Vietnam is not very stable yet. What if you are back on the streets looking for work in two years because Vietnam Co. has been nationalized or something? WHAT IS YOUR DECISION? The strategy of COMPROMISE • Each of the value should be actualized in some degree • No rational hierarchy is available, either of the values in conflict or of the persons whose interest should take first place • Tension between the values cannot be dissolved (Not all contested values can be realized in degree. Compromise will regularly tend to promote a degree of injustice in favour of the powerful) sekian
