Four broad approaches to ethics:
1 - teleological / consequentialist ethics
2 - deontological / duty ethics
3 - virtue ethics
4 - dialogical ethics
Underlying considerations:
ontological and epistemological assumptions
foundationalism / universalism
social constructionism / relativism
1 - teleological
teleological ethics
from the Greek “telos” – goal, end, purpose
the view that ethical judgments should be made through
consideration of the goals, ends, or purpose of an action
1 - teleological
consequentialist ethics
the view that ethical judgments should be made through
a cost/benefit calculation regarding the net outcomes of
a given action
1 - teleological
utilitarian ethics
a sub-category of consequentialism in which the
outcomes are conceived primarily in terms of
pleasure/happiness versus pain/suffering
note: one person’s “pain” can be another’s “pleasure”
1 - teleological
situational (or contextual) ethics
the view that the rightness or wrongness of actions
depends on the particular situations or contexts in
which those actions occur
because the same action in different situations can
result in different consequences
1 - teleological
standpoint ethics
the view that you should consider the rightness or
wrongness of an action from the standpoint of those
who are the most vulnerable to the negative
consequences of that action
an extension of the “depersonalized veil of ignorance”
1 - teleological
ethical egoism
the view that we should act in our own self-interest and
this will lead to ethical action as the invisible hand of
the moral market ensures the greatest maximum benefit
society is best served by survival of the fittest
altruism and charity are moral hazards
1 - teleological
lifeboat ethics
given scarce resources, not all people can survive or be
happy so the weak should be abandoned to safeguard
the interests of the rest
related to ethical egoism
society is best served by survival of the fittest
2 - deontological
deontological ethics
from the Greek “deon” – obligation or duty
the view that ethical judgments should be made through
consideration of intrinsic moral duties
2 - deontological
duty ethics
the view that the rightness or wrongness of actions
depends on the actor’s adherence to inherent ethical
duties or obligations
moral absolutism is a sub-category of duty ethics
which asserts that actions can be inherently ethical or
unethical regardless of the consequences that flow
from them
2 - deontological
categorical imperative
1) “act only according to that maxim whereby you
can at the same time will that it should become a
universal law”
2) “act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether
in your own person or in the person of any other,
always at the same time as an end and never
merely as a means to an end”
3 – virtue ethics
virtue ethics
the view that ethical actions flow from the prior
cultivation of a virtuous character, rather than
formulaic application of principles or the calculation
of consequences
places the emphasis on “being” as much as “doing”
can be deontological or teleological
3 – virtue ethics
exemplar ethics
the view that exemplars of virtuous character help us
understand what would be the right thing to do in any
given situation
what would _______________ do?
a sub-category of virtue ethics
4 – dialogical ethics
dialogical ethics
the view that dialogue, or collaborative inquiry, among
diverse experiences, perspectives, and interpretive
frameworks can lead to greater ethical insight regarding
complex and multifaceted issues
Four broad approaches to ethics:
1 - teleological / consequentialist ethics
2 - deontological / duty ethics
3 - virtue ethics
4 - dialogical ethics
Underlying considerations:
ontological and epistemological assumptions:
foundationalism / universalism
social constructionism / relativism
ontological assumptions
assumptions about the underlying foundations of reality
assumptions about what is or is not
epistemological assumptions
assumptions about what we can know about reality
assumptions about how we can know, with any
confidence, what is or is not
foundationalism
the ontological view that a system of ethics can rest on
some solid, universal foundation that is inherent in the
nature of reality
may be rooted in a material or spiritual worldview
even if foundational ethical truths exist, we may or may
not be able to discover or “know” such truths with
confidence or certitude (an epistemological problem)
epistemic foundationalism
the epistemological view that a system of ethics can
rest on some solid, universal foundation that is inherent
in the nature of reality, and that through some method
we can know, with confidence, what that foundational
system of ethics is
we can make universally valid truth claims about
ethics, if we investigate ethical truths in some valid way
may be rooted in a material or spiritual worldview
relativism
the view that there are no foundations underlying
moral or ethical judgments
universal truth claims are impossible because
no moral truths exist (moral nihilism)
subjective relativism
the view that moral and ethical judgments are nothing
more than personal opinion (or individual preferences)
cultural relativism
the view that moral and ethical judgments are nothing
more than cultural expressions (or social constructs)
social contract ethics
the culturally relativistic view that ethical systems are
nothing more than social contracts or social covenants
that we enter into, through enlightened self-interest, in
order to minimize the potential for personal harm, pain,
and suffering
these social contracts can be explicit or implicit
natural law theory
the foundationalist view that right or wrong is
determined by universal laws that can be found by
studying human nature
ethical codes derive from reason / science
divine law theories
the foundionalist view that something is right or
wrong as a result of a Divine will
ethical codes derive from revelation / religion
ethical ideals
a foundationalist concept implying that what “ought”
to be can be distinguished from what currently “is”
and that the gap between ideals and current reality
provides direction and purpose to human action
ethical commitments
some people argue that commitment to ethical ideals is
important even if we can never completely attain them
because striving yields positive outcomes
some people argue that commitment to ethical ideals is
important even if we can never prove their foundations
because the only way to gain a reasonable degree of
confidence in their foundations is to examine the
outcomes such ethical commitment yields over time