NORMATIVE THEORIES OF ETHICS – LESSON NOTES
This week, we return to our study of ethical theories. Up to this point,
we have given a general introduction to the three major ones. Now, we
move a little deeper, looking at the various theories and how they
interact with each other How does a person justify what he believes is
right or wrong? How do you? Your answer tells more about your ethics
than your actual position on any topic. To describe such an answer, our
textbook uses the term like "Normative Theories of Ethics."
"NORMATIVE" = normal, in the sense of being conventional.
Lecture: Normative Theories of Ethics
I. Introduction: The Problem of Moral Justification
Consider a common moral dilemma: Tom is trying to decide whether it
is ethically appropriate to spank his children. He consults two friends.
Bob responds, “Spanking is wrong. You must treat children with respect
if you expect them to respect you.” Alvin counters, “Spanking is not
only acceptable—it’s necessary! Discipline is what today’s youth lack.”
Despite their opposing views, both men cite the Bible as justification for
their beliefs. Bob appeals to the Golden Rule, quoting Jesus: “Do unto
others as you would have them do unto you.” Alvin appeals to Proverbs:
“Spare the rod and spoil the child.”
This anecdote illustrates a critical ethical issue: How does one justify a
moral belief? That question forms the heart of normative ethics.
II. What Are Normative Theories?
Normative ethics concerns the standards and principles that determine
whether an action is right or wrong. While some people refer to this as
Page 1 of 6
“backing up your beliefs,” philosophers refer to it as constructing or
evaluating normative ethical theories—frameworks used to justify
moral judgments.
•
•
•
Normative (from norma, Latin for "rule"): Refers to standards or
conventions—what people ought to do.
Ethics: The philosophical study of morality; how we determine
right from wrong.
Theory: An organized system of ideas explaining how or why
something happens—not a scientific law, but a reasoned
explanation.
So, a normative theory of ethics is a structured approach to
determining what actions are morally right or wrong.
III. Major Branches of Normative Ethics
Normative ethical theories can be divided into two primary categories:
A. Consequentialist Theories
These theories judge the morality of actions based on their outcomes. In
short: the ends justify the means.
1. Egoism
o Focus: The agent’s own well-being.
o Personal Egoism: “I act in my own interest; others should do
the same.”
o Impersonal Egoism: “Everyone should act in their own selfinterest.”
o Psychological egoism, often offered as a justification, claims
all humans are inherently self-interested—even seemingly
altruistic acts have self-serving motives.
2. Utilitarianism
o Focus: The greatest good for the greatest number.
Page 2 of 6
o
o
Key Figures:
▪ Jeremy Bentham: Proposed a "calculus of pleasure"—
actions are right if they maximize happiness and
minimize pain.
▪ John Stuart Mill: Refined Bentham's view, arguing
that intellectual and moral pleasures are superior to
mere physical satisfaction.
Two Types:
▪ Act Utilitarianism: Evaluates each individual act by its
consequences.
▪ Rule Utilitarianism: Evaluates the moral rules that
guide actions—rules that, if followed generally,
produce the most good.
Criticisms:
•
•
•
Difficulty in quantifying happiness.
May justify immoral acts if they maximize total utility (e.g.,
sacrificing one innocent person to save many).
Tends to ignore individual rights.
B. Nonconsequentialist Theories
These theories maintain that the morality of an action is intrinsic—it is
right or wrong in itself, regardless of the consequences.
1. Kantian Ethics (Deontology)
o Founded by Immanuel Kant, who argued that morality
arises from duty, not consequence.
o Central principle: The Categorical Imperative
▪ First Formulation: “Act only on that maxim whereby
you can at the same time will that it should become a
universal law.”
Page 3 of 6
▪
Second Formulation: “Treat humanity, whether in
your own person or that of another, always as an end
and never as a means only.”
Criticisms:
•
•
Rigid absolutism: No exceptions for lying, even to prevent harm.
May conflict with moral intuition in complex cases.
2. Ross’s Prima Facie Duties
o W.D. Ross proposed that multiple moral duties (e.g., fidelity,
gratitude, justice, beneficence) must be balanced.
o These duties are prima facie—binding unless overridden by
a more pressing duty in a given situation.
o Recognizes that moral life often involves conflict and
judgment, not strict rules.
Criticisms:
•
•
May lack the systematic clarity of other theories.
Still depends on subjective judgment.
IV. Summary and Synthesis
Ethical reasoning is rarely simple. Tom’s dilemma about spanking is not
just about what feels right, but about how we justify what feels right.
That justification process—whether focused on consequences, duties, or
situational judgment—is the work of normative ethical theory.
There is no universally accepted theory that answers all moral dilemmas
with precision. However, learning these theories equips students to think
critically, evaluate arguments, and articulate their own ethical reasoning
more clearly.
Page 4 of 6
V. Glossary of Key Terms
Term
Definition
Example
The study of
Deciding whether lying
principles for
Normative Ethics
is always wrong or
determining right and
sometimes permissible
wrong
The view that
Saving five people
Consequentialism
outcomes determine
outweighs harming one
moral value
Acting in one's self- Donating to charity for
Egoism
interest
tax benefits
Promoting the greatest Implementing policies
Utilitarianism
good for the greatest that reduce overall
number
suffering
Evaluating the
Telling a lie if it saves a
Act Utilitarianism
morality of individual
life
acts
Following rules that
Honesty is generally
Rule Utilitarianism
usually maximize
better for society
good
Judging actions by
Lying is wrong, even to
Nonconsequentialism their nature or intent,
avoid hurt feelings
not outcomes
Universal rule to act
Kant’s Categorical
as if your action
Never make a promise
Imperative
should be a universal you don't intend to keep
law
A principle or
“It’s okay to lie to avoid
Maxim
intention behind an
embarrassment”
action
Page 5 of 6
Term
Means vs. Ends
Prima Facie Duty
Supererogatory
Definition
Example
Treating others as
Using someone only for
individuals (ends), not
a job reference would
tools for one’s benefit
violate this
(means)
An obligation that
Telling the truth vs.
appears binding unless protecting a friend in
overridden
danger
Good actions that are
Donating 50% of your
above moral
income to charity
obligation
Page 6 of 6