Ethics and tolerance in Citizenship
A guide for Citizenship PGCE Tutors
Robert A. Bowie
Senior Lecturer
Canterbury Christ Church University College
September 2004
Preface
In the compilation of this pack I am very grateful for the critical advice and support from a
number of people including Professor James Arthur and Dr. Ian Davies, and for the many
discussions with colleagues who attended the Citized conference in 2004 at which an
early draft was presented.
Contents
Part 1. Aims of this pack
Part 2. Overview of the key documents and discussions on tolerance
Part 3. Moral education and ethical literacy
Part 4. A case for moral scrutiny of action
Part 5. Some major themes
Part 6. Ethical questions
Part 7. Contemporary issues in toleration
Part 8. What to look for in students
Part 9. Managing discussions and debates in the classroom
Part 10. Resources for tutors and students
Part 11. General glossary of ethical terms
1. Aims of this pack
There are four main aims of this pack
1) Provide an introduction to the teaching of ethics and tolerance in citizenship
2) Raise some issues for tutors to discuss with their students
3) Provide suggested activities for tutors to undertake with students
4) Give suggestions for further resources
2. Overview of the key documents and discussions on tolerance
This section seeks to provide an overview of the place of tolerance in relation to
multiculturalism, pluralism and ethical literacy in the citizenship curriculum. The National
Curriculum Aims and Values and understanding of SMSC all lead towards the idea that
young people should be encouraged to work towards and uphold a tolerant and just
democratic society where diversity is respected and celebrated.
Tolerance, multiculturalism and pluralism
“Most values and attitudes will, of course, begin in PSE teaching influenced by the
ideas of SMSC, indeed exist already in the whole ethos of a good primary school
(say ‘responsibility’ itself, say ‘respect for truth’, say ‘tolerance and empathy’, say
‘a sense of right and wrong’). But, of course, in Citizenship learning and education
moral questions of responsibility gradually have to be attached to institutional
knowledge of who or what body is responsible, whether in social or voluntary
services or in political and administrative structures. And the limits of toleration
have to be discussed in terms of public order and political doctrines, as well as the
ability to understand different interests and values. Always ‘what is thought to be
the case’, ‘what is the case’ and only then ‘what ought to be the case’.”
(Crick Report, p.63)
The phrase tolerance is mentioned in a number of places in the Crick report, here in
general terms of moral behaviour and elsewhere in relation to the recognition of cultural
pluralism.
Tolerance is a much-debated concept, both in terms of its precise interpretation and its
application. David Heyd in the introduction to his book "Toleration, an elusive virtue"
(Princeton University Press, Princeton:1996, p.4) writes,
"Tolerance is a philosophically elusive concept. Indeed in the liberal ethos of the last
three centuries, it has been hailed as one of the fundamental ethical and political
values, and it still occupies a powerful position in contemporary legal and political
rhetoric. However, our firm belief in the value of tolerance is not matched by
analogous theoretical certitude ... There are, on the one hand, cases in which the
firm commitment to a moral truth restricts the scope of application of the concept of
toleration ... On the other hand, there are cases in which the belief in moral pluralism
calls for the acceptance of ways of life (or beliefs) different from my own, either
because I acknowledge their legitimacy or because I simply do not care about them
... So it seems that the idea of toleration has undergone a gradual process of
compression between the demand not to tolerate the immoral (absolutism) and the
requirement to accept the legitimacy of the morally different (pluralism)."
The induction pack places tolerance in a context of ethical behaviour and ethical literacy
to help PGCE citizenship students engage in debates about tolerance and ethics and
manage that dimension of the National Curriculum and aims and objectives of citizenship
which relates to these topics.
If pupils are going to develop their political literacy the idea of tolerance will need to be
extended beyond cultural or religious debates to include tolerance of political and ethical
viewpoints which they disagree with. This would contribute towards constructive orderly
debate and discussion without descending into arguments or disputes, and ensuring that
pupils freedom of speech is balanced by their duty of respect for each other.
The Crick reports that,
"Majorities must respect, understand and tolerate minorities and minorities must
learn to respect the laws, codes and conventions as much as the majority - not
merely because it is useful to do so, but because this process helps foster common
citizenship." (Crick, 1998)
Some have been critical of Crick’s use of the word tolerance and the concept in general
terms. In her chapter, ‘the Crick report and the future of multiethnic Britain’, in Liam
Gearon’s “Learning to teach citizenship in the secondary school” (RoutledgeFalmer,
London and New York, 2003) Audrey Osler argues that tolerance may be a first step
towards a multicultural form of citizenship but it is not enough. In fact, Crick's comments
suggest that minorities don't already respect the law or that their values are at odds with
the majority. She finds it lacking in its emphasis on difference, and believes it fails to fully
engage with the human rights developments, fails to give equal rights to minority groups
explicit mention and fails to fully engage racism and take on board some of the
McPherson report’s recommendations. Talk of majorities and minorities run the risk of
encouraging a “them and us” framework which could create obstacles to an inclusive
learning environment and the reinforcement or “protection” of some prejudices held by
pupils in the citizenship classroom.
This is a difficult area explored by Jagdish Gundara in her chapter, ‘Social Diversity and
inclusiveness’, in “Education for citizenship,” Ed Lawton, Cairns and Gardner (Kogan
Page, London:2000) as well meaning anti-racist or multicultural policies could easily
designate some communities as “other” groups. A fully inclusive approach is essential.
Gundara notes that this lead in the 1980s to emphasize the other, the exotic and the
different, without acknowledging the hierarchies of power within institutions.
In some response to the criticisms, Crick in his book "Essays on Citizenship" (Continuum,
London:2000) has noted the argument that antiracism should lead in the teaching of
values and human rights and also in citizenship education tolerance must have a broad
canvas and include groups beyond racial classifications. He suggests indirect
approaches, looking at anti-Irishman, anti Catholicism, for example. He also notes that
hate filled diversities are not all racist (the Northern Ireland divisions being a case in
point). Secondly he argues little is known about the effectiveness of explicit strategies
hence his preference for indirect strategies. Student teachers need to consider different
direct and indirect ways of approaching contentious issues in a way which maintains a
positive and inclusive learning environment. In addition Crick only mentions race and
creed which suggests a hierarchy of discriminated groups by failing to name other groups
suffering prejudice.
Crick rejects the argument that tolerance should be replaced by respect and acceptance.
He writes,
"No one accepts everything and everyone as in every respect equal. We must
discriminate, indeed between good and evil, between practical and impractical. To
discriminate as such is not wrong, only if for bad reasons; to tolerate is to recognize
genuine differences, even to feel or state some disapprovals, but to limit one's
reactions. Certainly I do not tolerate people because of their colour since the
question does not arise for colour is morally irrelevant; I try to judge everyone as
people, and their actions as good or bad, rarely wholly good or bad. But I do have
to exercise toleration (that is to limit my disapprovals) of some people's religious
and ideological beliefs, and of some of the practices that follow from them. I both
disagree and disapprove, of some other cultural practices too; but I restrain my
behaviour while not abandoning my beliefs, nor expecting others to abandon
theirs. I respect differences in a practical, peaceful law abiding way (hopefully).
'Respect' cannot mean that we think all sincere beliefs are equally true, or their
consequences equally acceptable to all others in society. The philosopher Ernest
Gellner once said that it is imperative to be socially tolerant always, but
intellectually tolerant never. We should not be ashamed of toleration as a prime
value of freedom and civilization." (p.135)
He goes on to argue that to demand full acceptance is to demand assimilation rather than
integration and a single culture rather than the pluralistic society which we have long had.
Ali Rattansi has noted that multiculturalism has presented cultures as closed systems
ignoring the fluidity of cultural formation and the continual redrawing of boundaries within
groups while antiracism ignored the questions of difference between cultures, perhaps
out of fear such discussions will weaken the struggle against racism. (see Ali Rattansi
‘Changing the subject: racism, culture and education,’ in J. Donald and Ali Rattansi (eds)
“Race, culture and difference,” London, Sage and Ali Rattansi ‘racism, postmodernism
and reflexive multiculturalism’, in S May (ed) “Critical Multiculturalism: rethinking
multiculturalism and antiracist education (London, Falmer Press:1999)
This last area of the debate is on of the most contentious of all. It is important that student
teachers are aware of this aspect of the debate while they are planning and teaching their
lessons, though managing an exploration of it in a mixed ability diverse group of children
presents real challenges.
Tolerance, intolerance and the values of the national curriculum
Hypatia of Alexandria is accredited as saying, "Reserve your right to think, for even to
think wrongly is better than not to think at all." But does this mean we allow bigots and
racists to express their bigoted and racist views, or do the expression of such views harm
others? Should the pupil who expresses the racist viewpoint feel free to do so and be
tolerated in doing so, or should he or she be punished. If he or she is punished is this for
expressing the wrong ethical principle or breaking the school rules, or harming/offending
others in the class.
It is quite clear that racism is unacceptable and a teacher has a particular responsibility to
teach against it. Karl Popper described this difficulty as the paradox of tolerance. The
insistence of unlimited tolerance ultimately leads to the death of tolerance itself since,
"it may easily turn out that they [the intolerant] are not willing to meet us on the
level of rational argument ... we should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance,
the right not to tolerate the intolerant" (Popper "The open society and its enemies.
Vol 1 The Spell of Plato," Routledge & Kegan Paul, London:1966, p.265) "
It is conceivable that some may oppose toleration of difference but in the educational
context this represents a fundamental value. Recognising the individual worth of every
student should be something teachers instinctively do and the notion of an entitlement
curriculum for every child implies that the absolute value of equal dignity and equal
opportunity underpins the education framework. From that one can deduce that toleration
of difference is essential if all children are to receive their entitlement. The question of
what should and shouldn’t be tolerated is not easy to define tightly but drawing on the
broad educational ethics of the National Curriculum, we should not tolerate attitudes and
behaviour which restrict the access others are entitled to have to the curriculum. If racism
and other forms of prejudice are allowed to go unchecked those who are their targets are
less likely to flourish in school.
These problems have not been stated to provide a comfortable resolution but simply to
illustrate the difficulties. Hopefully, in many cases teachers will not face classrooms filled
with people who hold views profoundly intolerant of each other to the extent that the
reconciliation is never possible. Hopefully the school community professes a set of values
to which the pupils attending and their families subscribe. However, it is precisely when a
teacher works in those communities that they are well equipped to manage the lessons
effectively and productively.
Why should we tolerate others? The respect we have for others may be linked to a duty to
those others and their duty to us. Ultimately it may come to a principle of valuing self and
rests on the hope that it will be reciprocated. In the light of this debate the need for ethical
literacy among both Citizenship teachers as well as pupils, becomes apparent. Power still
lies with those children who belong to 'norm' groups, often those in a regional majority. In
many cases this now includes children from a range of cultural and ethnic backgrounds.
When children are aware that racism/sexism are unacceptable they may target other
groups who are not afforded this 'protection' e.g. religious groups, thin people, disabled,
disfigured, intelligent, socially shy, gay, or people with learning difficulties etc. It is
important to extend principles to embrace all difference and diversity in society.
Summary
There is a tension between those who argue that tolerance is an acceptable way of
acknowledging genuine difference and accepting pupils’ views about difference, and a
necessary tool for moral decision-making, and those who see it as unacceptably weak for
the promotion of multicultural education. Student teachers need to take a pragmatic
approach in their teaching to ensure that the principles, aims and values underpinning the
National Curriculum are maintained and that young people should be encouraged to work
towards and uphold a tolerant and just democratic society where diversity is respected
and celebrated.
College course discussion
Do you think that tolerance is an adequate concept to be promoting in citizenship
education?
3 Moral Education and ethical literacy
The following section aims to support the development of moral education through ethical
literacy in the citizenship programme and raises questions about the tensions between
personal conscientious moral action and adherence to social convention. How can
students encourage young people to explore the issue of personal responsibility, making
individual moral judgments and balancing private beliefs with obedience to the law and
social convention?
There is a long established set of traditions in moral education. Moral education is
identified in the Crick report and SMSC education is required by Ofsted to be found
throughout the school. What is the contribution that citizenship might have towards moral
education?
One possibility is in developing a sense of ethical literacy which compliments and extends
political literacy. This might also support work in the area of extending thinking skills which
compliments all curriculum subjects, as well as work in Religious Education.
A submission to the Advisory Group on Citizenship from the Hansard Society stated,
‘Programmes should be established to promote political discourse and
understanding, as well as encouraging young people to engage in the political
process. Further, they should encourage tolerance and respect for individuals and
their property, irrespective of a person’s gender, race, culture or religion. They
must also encourage young people to behave honourably and with integrity, as
well as promote respect for the rule of law. Young people must be encouraged to
develop leadership and team skills in order to promote self-discipline and
self-motivation. They should be encouraged to take pride in themselves and the
communities to which they belong, as well as to see themselves as citizens of the
world.’ (p. 20 , 3.22 Crick Report)
One significant tension which exists in trying to develop a model of teaching ethics in
citizenship is that between the desire to encourage independent moral thinkers who can
critique the values expressed by those around them, and that which encourages a
specific set of values endorsed by the community at large for the promotion of social
cohesion.
There is sometimes a tendency to associate moral behaviour with that which expresses
the norms found in society, or a particular substratum of society, and argue that children
should be taught these social norms. However, to construct an approach to teaching
ethics in citizenship based on such a premise alone would ignore some of the most
important lessons which I would argue must be learnt from the last century and they are
expressed well in the works of Zigmund Bauman, Hannah Arendt and Jonathan Glover.
Zigmunt Bauman, writing in “Modernity and the Holocaust”(Polity Press, Oxford:1989,
p.177) having examined the large-scale moral failings of humanity in the holocaust, and
drawing on the work of Hannah Arendt considers the idea of a moral responsibility of
resisting socialization.
“In the aftermath of the Holocaust, legal practice, and thus also moral theory.
Faced the possibility that morality may manifest itself in insubordination towards
socially upheld principles, and in an action openly defying social solidarity and
consensus.”
Arendt herself in “Eichmann in Jerusalem, a report on the banality of evil”, (Penguin
UK:1994 p.294-296) demanded that,
“human beings be capable of telling right from wrong even when all they have to
guide them is their own moral judgment, which, moreover, happens to be
completely at odds with what they must regard as the unanimous opinion of al
these around them ….”
The following quotes are cited in Jonathan Glover’s book “Humanity, a moral history of
the twentieth century,” Jonathan Cape, London:1999, p.405) on
“If you have no God the moral code is that of society. If society is turned upside
down, so is your moral code. The communists made a virtue of being beastly to
each other.“ (Jung Chang, Independent on Sunday, 10 Sept 1995)
“We have seen the triumph of evil after the values of humanism have been vilified
and trampled on, The reason these values succumbed was probably that they
were based on nothing except boundless confidence in the human intellect. I think
we may now find a better foundation for them, if only because of the lessons we
have drawn from our experience” (Nadezhda Mandelstam, Hope against Hope)
Glover argues that in the absence of a religious moral law a humanized version of ethics
needs to be developed to prevent the tendency to accept as normal amoralism and
Bauman states that “there is no contradiction between a rejection of (or scepticism
towards) the ethics of socially conventionalized and rationally ‘founded’ norms, and the
insistence that it does matter, and matter morally, what we do and from what we desist.”
(“Postmodern ethics,” Blackwell, Oxford:1993, p.250) The two must go together.
The teaching of tolerance in citizenship classrooms cannot be based on one presumed
religious set of beliefs, as such an approach would exclude those who did not hold such
beliefs, but nor can it ignore the traditions of religious and philosophical ethics which have
developed in and through the cultures that exist in the UK. Writers such as Alasdair
MacIntyre have argued that it is the failure to appreciate the moral philosophy of the past
which has led to the contemporary moral crises. (“After Virtue, a study in moral theory,”
Duckworth, Kings Lynn, 1982) and voices within the communitarian movement have
argued that the right of individuals cannot long be preserved without a communitarian
perspective. (see James Arthur, “Schools and community, the Communitarian Agenda in
Education” RoutledgeFalmer, London:1999 for more.)
In the Final report of the Advisory Group on Citizenship one aspect of effective education
in citizenship is defined as
“children learning from the very beginning self-confidence and socially and morally
responsible behaviour both in and beyond the classroom, both towards those in
authority and towards each other.” (p.111 Crick in Education for citizenship and the
teaching of democracy in schools, Final report of the Advisory Group on
Citizenship , QCA 1998)
Perhaps the combined aim of socially and morally responsible behaviour could represent
the divergent aims of ethics teaching outlined above. If the attainment target of pupils
“demonstrating personal and group responsibility in their attitudes to themselves
and others.”
and if the skills of
“using their imagination to consider other people's experiences and be able to think
about, express and explain views that are not their own”
are to be encouraged, this juxtaposition must be incorporated into the teaching of ethics
in citizenship. For people to act with integrity they must be encouraged to critically
appraise the values they see expressed around them and consider their personal
response to those values. Indeed, a confessional authoritarian model of teaching morality
in which children are told what is right and wrong and taught to accept the judgment of
authority rather than consider their conscience would not lead to the outcomes defined in
the National Curriculum Attainment Targets for Citizenship. At the same time children
need to explore why acceptance of democratic social legal and moral norms is important
for an orderly society.
Summary
There is a tension between encouraging students to be independent moral thinkers who
do not accept expressed objective values uncritically and inculturating a set of values
upheld by the community. Resolving this dichotomy is a crucial task for the citizenship
teacher.
College course discussion
To what extent should citizenship education encourage acceptance of societal values
and to what extent should it enable pupils to make independent moral judgments?
4. A case for moral scrutiny of action
“As part of their new inspection framework, which came into effect in January
2000, Ofsted inspections will include an examination of how schools can, for
example, cultivate pupils’ personal development – including their spiritual, moral,
social and cultural development; promote respect and tolerance; and use
resources which reflect sensitivity to different groups, cultures and backgrounds.”
(p.37, Citizenship, A scheme of work for key stage 3, Teacher’s guide,
Qualifications and Curriculum Authority, 2001)
This section outlines an inclusive rational case for ethics education based not on any
particular belief tradition. Student teachers can consider how they can cultivate a positive
ethical learning environment which is inclusive to all pupils and upholds the idea that
young people should be encouraged to work towards a tolerant and just democratic
society where diversity is respected and celebrated.
We should think about why we act in the way we do
Talk of morality sometimes attracts negative connotations. We hear the words moralising,
moralists, morality brigade expressed pejoratively and some are suspicious of the idea
that people should think about what is right and wrong. However in general terms
education encourages people to think and it seems irrational not to think about what you
do and why you do it. This does not mean we have agreed about how we decide how we
behave or what we should or shouldn’t do, just that both areas are important things to
think about.
It is important that we are able to reason about what we should do. Moral reasoning
recognizes that people are going to have different moral viewpoints but that all can join in
a process in which they seek to show that their moral judgments are reasonable. Moral
thought is an essential part of society. In his article “what scope is there for teaching moral
reasoning,” Graham Haydon (in Gardner, Cairns and Lawton, education for Values,
Kogan Page, London and Sterling:2000 pp27-37) argues that as long as we are engaged
in moral discussion we give consideration to the interests of others. Some hold moral
reasoning would have little effect on what people actually do, but it is reasonable to think
that a person would be more likely to be influence by moral reasoning if they had first
considered it. If we abandon thinking about what we should do and why, we are likely to
resort to pursuing our interests alone that may lead to conflict with others. Graham
Haydon gives some suggested principles for moral reasoning which seem suitable in the
context of citizenship:
Try to be aware of how your actions affect others
Try to think of yourself in the positions of others affected by what you are doing
Think about whether they would be likely to agree with what you are doing
Then consider whether you think the thing you are doing is right for people to do (p.28)
It is reasonable to think that people should act according to principles
Of course some argue that morals do not exist and, more extremely, that there is no idea
of right or wrong. It is intrinsic to citizenship that there are some principles that people
should account for in their way of life, and that these are not arbitrarily chosen but
reasonable and necessary to allow individuals to freely flourish in a just and tolerant
society. Things other than principles influence people - emotions and beliefs for instance.
I may be too frightened to admit to the police that I saw the old lady being mugged for fear
of reprisals, even though I know I would want people to help me in that situation if I was
mugged and that it is reasonable to act in the way I would want others to act to me. One
understanding of this comes from the important British philosopher R M Hare who wrote
"First a moral judgment is something that, if you agree with it, you act on; this feature is
known by philosophers as prescriptivity. Secondly, one is not allowed to make different
moral judgments about two situations one agrees to be identical; this feature is what
philosophers call universalizability. These two formal features of moral judgments are the
basis of moral reasoning." and both are implicit in the injunction ‘as you would wish
people do to you, do the same to them.’ (”Essays on religion and Education, Clarendon
Paperbacks, Oxford :992, p.94) Hare argues that in discussing moral issues these
principles can be accepted by all, though not everyone agrees with Hare.
We have a mutual duty to tolerate each other
A moral judgment may not be a prudent judgment. It may not be in our own best individual
interests because we must consider the interest of others as well. Citizenship suggests
the idea that we have duties to others as well as rights. If I am going to be respected and
allowed to flourish I should respect others and allow them to flourish. There is a mutual
duty for me to be tolerant of the needs of others, just as others must be tolerant of my
needs.
Summary
It is rational to think about why we do what we do and to think objectively about moral
principles. There is a mutual duty to be tolerant of the needs of others so that all may
flourish.
College course activity
Consider the following questions:
1) Do you agree with Graham Haydons contention that it is reasonable to require
students to think about what they do?
2) Do I have a duty to tolerate your differences? If so why?
College course activity
Consider which of these principles for moral action you consider convincing,
unconvincing, or neither convincing or unconvincing. Compare your answers with others.





Try to be aware of how your actions affect others
Try to think of yourself in the positions of others affected by what you are doing
Think about whether others would be likely to agree with what you are doing
Then consider whether you think the thing you are doing is right for people to do
Treat others how you would hope they would treat you






Think before you act
Always stick to your principles
Be consistent in how you act
Follow your instinct
If in doubt, follow the crowd
When in Rome do as the Romans
5. Some major themes
Ethics is the part of philosophy that deals with questions about morality. It would be hard
to make a case for laws which were inconsistent, irrational or unreasonable and so too for
moral behaviour. The following concepts relate to ethics education and multiculturalism in
CE and this section is intended to support student teachers by providing an overview of
important concepts to help student teachers’ subject knowledge development.
Pluralism
The reality of social pluralism means that distinct groups exist with varied value systems.
Sometimes these are seen as separate groups with single sets of values but many groups
have diverse views within them, some emphasizing certain values and others different
values. What is more, groups have overlapping values which blur the edges and
individuals, who may situate themselves within those groups, may have adopted other
values or rejected some of those from within the tradition of the group. It can be argued
that there are common values that all citizens should and could adhere to, even if they do
so for differing religious, political and cultural reasons or traditions.
There are two common forces which conflict around the idea of tolerance in a pluralist
society. On the one hand groups might, as part of their beliefs, hold intolerant views that
they want the right to not only hold but also express. On the other hand there are
oppressed groups who insist that the forces of intolerance that suppress them cannot be
tolerated. (For more on this see ‘The boundaries of justifiable tolerance: a liberal
perspective’ by Alon Harel in “Toleration, an elusive virtue,” edited by David Heyd,
Princeton University Press,:1996.)
Barbara Herman, (writing in ‘Pluralism and the Community of Moral Judgment’ in
“Toleration, an elusive virtue,” edited by David Heyd, Princeton University Press,
Princeton:1996, p.60) says,
“The permanent presence of different and often competing systems of value
challenges the ideal of civic culture on which liberal principle depends.
Conceptions of equal citizenship or of universal human rights can be seen to have
protected deep-reaching structures of inequality and domination that are
damaging to women and other subordinate groups.”
She goes on to argue that liberal toleration, while sometimes seen as a useful tool for
allowing for moral differences, permits continued private disdain for, or abhorrence of a
tolerated activity. (Ibid, p.61)
Relativism
Relativism is the view that there is no one particular ethical view that is universally true, or
that if there is; there is no way of knowing what it is. Cultural relativism is the extension
that no cultural conception of morality is better than any other. Cultural relativists reject
the idea that a single set of values is superior to any other. An extreme extension of
relativism argues that all moral statements are subjective and have no meaning.
Tolerance does not require a relativist approach in that adherence to a view does not
necessarily mean that a different view is denigrated or disrespected. Equally adoption of
relativism does not necessarily promote tolerance, as relativism sees all viewpoints as
equal, including those that do not tolerate certain views or groups of people. In addition,
Gordon Graham writes, “Those who hold that there is no truth in these matters might still
regard some cultures as admirable and others as contemptible, and to be defended or
suppressed for these reasons.” (in ‘Tolerance, pluralism and relativism’ in “Toleration, an
elusive virtue,” edited by David Heyd, Princeton University Press, Princeton:1996, p.47.)
Universalism
The move towards a single universal truth or value set. The increasing support for human
rights can be seen as an example of universalism. On the other hand moves towards a
universal global culture raise concerns about an imperialist wealthy western framework
being imposed on a culturally plural world.
Normative ethics
The traditional activity associated with ethics involved looking at systems for working out
what was right or wrong. This approach is called normative ethics. The question “is racism
wrong?” is a normative ethical question. The sort of discussion that might follow would be
aimed at establishing an answer. Commonly this is what many people understand by
ethics. A normative ethical decision is a right or good decision. Normative theories
propose systems for establishing which things are right and which are wrong and many
people discuss ethics in those terms. I think it is wrong to bully younger pupils because ….
.
Meta Ethics
More recently, there have been philosophical debates about whether moral language has
any meaning, as it cannot be empirically measured in the way other statements of fact
can. This is called Meta ethics. The question “What do we mean by saying that racism is
wrong?” is a meta-ethical question. Although Meta ethics is rarely talked about explicitly
outside philosophical circles, it is implicitly present in moral discussions. Some will
approach moral questions within a framework that defines a moral statement as a
personal preference, or emotional feeling, which is a view held by some metaethical
philosophers. In a discussion about a moral issue, some may come from a perspective
that the debate is about deciding what the right thing to do is (normative) while others
conceive the discussion in terms of a chat about personal feelings (a metaethical
standpoint). In other words it is not simply the case that people disagree about the moral
thing to do, they are actually playing the game with different rules. In the discussion about
racism, pupils may treat the discussion as one in which people express personal
preferences or feelings, not one that involves searching for an ethical truth. Clearly it is
important that pupils think at a meta level about moral language.
Descriptive ethics
With the development of anthropology, ethics was also studied in comparative terms.
Anthropologists described the moral codes practiced by different societies and compared
them with others, without making any sort of judgment about which was better, or more
moral. This is comparative or descriptive ethics. This last category is not really an aspect
of ethics though some aspects of it have crept into the main ethical theories. It is common
to hear people reluctant to make judgments about different cultures, or permissive even
accepting of practices unaccepted in their own society. They may have a belief that ethics
should only really outline the moral codes and theories of different communities. They
may be opposed to bringing any kind of critical judgment about the validity of those
morals.
Summary
It is important to be aware of the different ways in which people understand discussions
about morality, pluralism, multiculturalism and universalism.
College course activity
Examine a collection of newspapers, both tabloids and broadsheets and identify ethical
statements that are normative, descriptive and meta-ethical. What do your findings
suggest about the writers’ understandings of ethics? What are the assumptions about
society implicit or explicit in the articles?
6. Ethical Questions
There are a number of big divisions that sketch out the different “moral ballparks” in which
ethics debates occur. These divisions overlap each other at points and this section should
support student teachers’ subject knowledge development in this area.
Are moral laws fixed and universal for all, or relative to the individual or society?
Absolutists ague there are fixed moral rules that are true for all times and all places, with
no exceptions. Often these people have strong attachments to a religious ethic or set of
principles such as the Declaration of Human Rights. Others think that there are no fixed
rules and morals vary according to the individual, culture or society. They might object to
attempts to judge the morality of others or cultures which have different moral systems.
Many traditional religions express absolute “truths” about moral behaviour. An absolutist
might hold that using violence is always wrong. A relativist thinker might believe that
certain violence could be justified if it is traditional to the culture. Plato is an example of an
absolutist. He thought that goodness itself was a real thing that existed beyond this world,
but that participated in the world. A good act in this world has goodness itself participating
in it. He also believed that justice and beauty are real things, along with many others.
Protagoras is an example of a relativist. He is famously attributed as saying, “man is the
measure of all things”, meaning that there is not absolute right or wrong, just your view of
what is right and my view. An interesting starting point to a moral debate might be to see
if pupils are more closely inclined towards Plato or Protagoras.
College course activity – with possible use in the classroom too
In groups consider your responses to the following questions
1) Should we tolerate political views different from our own?
2) Should taxes go up to provide more aid for overseas development?
3) Should a pacifist have to pay taxes that support the military?
Now try to identify what your group’s general principles were for making the decisions you
made.
What should determine whether an action is right or wrong, the act in itself, the
consequence it has or the affect of the character of the person doing the action?
Some people think actions are right or wrong in themselves (deontology) while others
think the ends justify the means (teleology). Deontological thinkers believe that the
rightness or wrongness of an act is determined by the act in itself - murder is wrong
because murder is intrinsically wrong whatever the circumstances or consequences.
Aquinas is an example of a thinker who thought certain acts went against what is was to
be human while others promoted what it was to be human.
Others, teleological thinkers, think that the wrongness or rightness of an act depends on
the consequences. If the consequences are desirable then the action is good. Murder
might be justified in certain circumstances but not others. Jeremy Bentham, the utilitarian,
is an example of a teleological thinker. He believed that the right choice was whatever
created the greatest outcome for the most people. So in a discussion about racism,
deontological thinkers could argue that there is something intrinsically wrong about
harboring prejudices or discriminating against people on account of ethnicity. Teleological
thinkers might be opposed to racism on account of the harm done. In some respects
teleological thinkers appear more pragmatic because they take account of the future
outcome, and are prepared to break established rules to get the best outcome.
A third distinction comes from those who reject both ends and means as the significant
determinate of what is right. This group argue that deciding what the right thing to do is
deciding what will make us virtuous, or what will develop our character in a positive way. If
an action makes us greedy or lustful, we should not do it. If by my behaviour I entrench
prejudices about others I am acting immorally. Moral behaviour, therefore, is about
bettering yourself.
So when thinking about whether we should tolerate people of different faiths, pupils may
want to think about whether in principle everyone must be allowed to freely practice their
religious belief because preventing free religious practice breaks a fundamental rule.
They may want to think about the consequences of allowing people to practice their
religion or whether people will become more or less virtuous. By exploring these three
dimensions we can consider whether something is wrong because it breaks a law, wrong
because of a bad consequence it has or wrong because of how it affects the person.
College course activity – with possible use in the classroom too
Consider arguments for and against the following:
When deciding what’s right or wrong, what is the most important factor – the action itself,
what the consequence is or how the people are affected? The law is wrong because:
 it is a rule which we should follow
 there are hurtful effects of breaking the law
 lawbreaking makes people worse
What is Conscience and should we follow it?
Traditionally religions have argued that conscience is our moral sense of God’s will, or
God’s law, while secular explanations see it in terms of a psychological left over from our
upbringing (see Freud for example). In the latter case, an internalized parent/policeman
to echo all the lessons taught us in our upbringing. Others say it is simply the name for our
moral deliberation, without reference to any divine source.
It might be related to a rational process of reasoning out what is right, of a more intuitive
judgment on what is felt to be right. Once we have identified what we believe conscience
to mean, we must then decide whether we should follow it, even if it directs us to do
something that goes against a conventional moral code or the law. If we go against our
conscience are we undermining our integrity as a person?
College course activity – with possible use in the classroom too
Some people refused to fight in WW2 because they said their conscience prevented them
from killing others. Were they acting morally or immorally? Are conscientious
objectors good or bad citizens?
Are we free to act morally or are all our actions previously determined and beyond our
control?
This division has significance for establishing moral responsibility or culpability. Some
argue that people are essentially free and therefore can be blamed or praised for their
moral acts. Freedom is a necessary aspect of morality, and you can only be held
accountable for what you can freely do or not do. Determinists argue that humans do not
act freely but have a false sense of freedom that masks a reality in which human acts
have a causal relationship with a prior action. So a person who is nurtured to have deep
prejudices towards certain minority groups cannot be held responsible for those
prejudices as they are a product of their upbringing. It raises questions about whether it is
right to punish people for their actions. Libertarians might argue that we are not the
product of our upbringing; we rebel against the traditional ways of our family and come to
form our own opinion. There is a group who say we have some freedom but some aspects
of our actions are determined so punishment is justified. Issues of diminished
responsibility and crimes committed under duress might be interesting case studies.
College course activity – with possible use in the classroom too
1) Consider an example of a case where a victim of domestic violence has killed the
violent partner. Are they morally responsible for their actions?
2) Is there any difference between a planned murder or a death in a road accident
caused by drunken driving – should the respective guilty parties be punished
differently?
When making a moral decision should we follow reason, our intuition, or should actions
be out of compassion?
Should we follow our head or our gut? Some philosophers have argued that moral
decisions should be purely rational ones and emotions have no place in the process. I
should not help the old lady across the road because I feel sorry for her but because it is
rationally the moral thing to do. Emotional attachment is liable to lead us astray. I might
feel scared about people who look different from me and that feeling might affect
decisions I make to the detriment of those others. Other philosophers believe we access
moral truths through a special knowledge called intuition. When deciding what to do we
have access to a special sort of knowledge that inspires our choice. Others still argue that
we should be motivated out of compassion for others, and that unconditional love is the
key element in moral decision-making. This is not the same as romantic love, or family
love, or even a love for our “tribe” or “kind” but a love that is offered freely and expects no
return to those in need irrespective of who they are.
Are morals more than subjective feelings or likes and dislikes?
Some meta-ethical thinkers believe moral judgments have no basis in reason and are
merely expressions of how one feels towards a choice. They are entirely subjective,
perhaps based on previous beliefs. They cannot be empirically proven. Others argue that
there are ways of discerning the objective moral truths that do in fact exist, perhaps
though a mental process of reasoning, or an intuitive sense.
College course activity – with possible use in the classroom too
I like dark chocolate – are morals the same as food with some people liking dark
chocolate morals, others liking milk chocolate morals and others going for white
chocolate morals, with some liking no chocolate morals at all?
Discussion questions
Moral and religious beliefs are simply a matter of personal preference and have no place
in rational education.
Summary
There are a number of core debates within ethics that affect topics in teaching tolerance in
citizenship.
College course activity – with possible use in the classroom too
Discussing ethical theory and practice – consider the following questions and then
consider



What your framework for ethical behaviour is, if indeed you have one
What alternative frameworks students might have for religious or cultural reasons
Whether a citizenship teacher should advocate a preferred framework for moral
behaviour or not and why
1. If I do a good thing for a bad reason, does it matter?
2. Do ends justify means?
3. Do the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one?
4. Is what’s wrong for you also wrong for me?
5. Is an action right or wrong depending on the situation?
6. Are we free to make moral choices?
7. Is being moral about following rules?
8. Do we use our heads or our hearts when deciding what’s moral?
9. Can we have morals without religion?
10. Should I help my father before I help a stranger?
11. Are human beings selfish or selfless?
12. Should we follow our consciences?
13. Is ethics a special kind of knowledge or are moral views just personal feelings?
College course activity – with possible use in the classroom too
Consider what an ethical citizen might do in the following scenarios and justify your
answer:
Your ship goes down and you’re lost in the sea with two others, in a life raft. You have no
food. Without a supply of food, there’s no hope of rescue before you starve to
death. Two would survive by eating the third: otherwise, all three will die. What do
you do?
The parents of a car crash victim allow their son’s body to be used for transplants, but only
if the parts go to white patients. Do you accept their condition?
Siamese twins are born, attached at the abdomen and sharing several major organs. If
nothing is done, both will die. If the twins are separated, one will die and one will
live. What should be done?
A railway drawbridge operator is closing the bridge for the express train that’s about to
arrive when he sees his son trapped in the machinery. To close the bridge will kill
his son but save the train. To open the bridge will save his son, but the train will not
be able to stop in time. What should he do?
(from p.3-5, R Bowie “Ethical Studies”, Nelsonthornes Cheltenham:2001)
College course activity – with possible use in the classroom too
The principles of tolerance education – diamond 9 card sort
Working in small groups, arrange the cards in order of importance in the form of a
diamond. Groups should try to reach a consensus in the first instance and then using
voting if agreement cannot be reached. Present your conclusions to the other groups at
the end. 1 card must be excluded.
Pupils should feel
free to express
their views and
beliefs whatever
they are
Racist and sexist
Citizenship
teachers should
create an
environment
where all pupils
feel valued and
respected
Language
Difference and
Common values
diversity should be should be implicitly
highlighted and
if not explicitly
praised in the
encouraged in the
classroom
class
Extreme beliefs
Citizenship
attitudes should be
suggestive of
actively
intolerant attitudes
discouraged
should be
prevented
should be
tolerated but not
encouraged
Pupils from groups
Homophobic
which are more
language and
likely to have
attitudes should be
experienced
discouraged
intolerance should
receive positive
discrimination
from the teacher
The belief that all
pupils should be
allowed to benefit
from education
should be taught
as a moral truth
teachers should
keep their own
political,
philosophical and
religious beliefs
private
All moral codes
should be up for
critical discussion
and evaluation in
the citizenship
classroom, none
should receive
higher
acknowledgment
than any other
7. Contemporary Issues in Toleration
1. College course activity – also with possible use in the classroom –
France has decided to restrict the outward wearing of religious symbols and clothing. Was
this the right thing to do?
Continuum debate – students divide in the room
Agree to one side
Not sure in the middle
Disagree to the other side
Each side must persuade the “not sures” and then those on the other side to come over –
limited time is allowed.
2. College course activity – with possible use in the classroom too
Smaller group discussion focused on the philosophical difficulties
Does Religious freedom mean:
It is necessary for religious believers to keep their religion private so that others do not
feel oppressed by it (at least in state schools), or
Allowing people to express their religious beliefs outwardly, if that is part of their religion,
in public?
3. College course activity – with possible use in the classroom too
Managing the topic in class:
1. In a class with students from a number of ethnic and religious groups, what might
be the ground rules for engaging a sensitive topic?
2. How would openly intolerant, and possibly racist views be mitigated against?
3. How would openly intolerant, and possibly racist views be dealt with if expressed in
the lesson?
8. What to look for in students
The following aspects of character, disposition and philosophy of life, as well as
knowledge, would be considered helpful for students to have.
A commitment to a diverse society and inclusive education.
Openness to the diversity of views on moral issues - students should not see
themselves as having a duty to politically or religiously indoctrinate pupils into a
single viewpoint. This would conflict with the aims of the National Curriculum.
An awareness that there are different ways people decide what the right thing to do is,
from pragmatism (your own best interests) to the common good as well as
religiously and rationally inspired approaches.
A critical approach to systems of ethics - students should not be unthinkingly
accepting of ethical principles or beliefs.
Students should broadly accept that people are entitled to their own view, but they
should not be encouraged to suspend their critical faculties. This goes for pupils as
well of course. There is a potential for conflict here with some pupils who, out of
religious observance, will adhere to certain ethical principles as a matter of faith
rather than reason, and students must be accepting of this approach in the
classroom.
A tolerance of diverse religious, social and cultural backgrounds is of course a
prerequisite, though this does not extend to the toleration of the expression of
viewpoints which would prevent learning, enflame, cause harm or lead to public
disorder.
An acceptance that some people believe their opinion or belief is the best or right
opinion or belief and others are wrong - students should not be advocating
relativism of all truth in the classroom, though this does not of course extend to
their personal private beliefs.
Students should be seeking to establish a community of enquiry in their classroom,
rather than espousing given truths, which would not be in accordance with the
aims and values of the national curriculum.
Knowledge of a variety of religious and cultural traditions.
Knowledge of critical thinking or philosophy, especially ethics
9. Managing Discussions and Debates in the classroom
These ideas are based on suggestions found in the following books and more
suggestions can be found in them:
“Active learning, 101 Strategies to teach any subject,” Mel Silberman, (Allyn and
Bacon, London:1996)
“Active Learning Strategies to support Spiritual and moral development,” Joyce
Mackley and Pamela Draycott’s (CEM, 2000)
A few things to think about first:




Plan discussions, especially if they are on sensitive issues so you are prepared for
possible hotspots
Structure discussions to facilitate engagement. Whole class discussions may not
draw the engagement of students who are quiet or unsure of their views or unsure
of expressing them. Discussions can be staged to allow people to write down their
ideas before any talking takes place.
Don’t simply ask for people’s opinions. “Do you think we should encourage
different people to come and live in the UK” is more confrontational than “why are
some people against people from other countries coming to live in the UK.” Asking
for opinions demands a personal response while asking pupils to think about other
people’s opinions creates some distance between the pupil and the topic.
If the discussion covers a topic of a sensitive nature there are a few precautionary
measures you can take. Give notice about what is coming up so pupils have a
chance to raise concerns with you in private. Ensure there is a clear code of
conduct that the group has signed up to at the outset in terms of how comments or
viewpoints are expressed. Decide in advance how you are going to manage
comments that may reflect prejudices or cause offense.
Continuum - Write number 1-20 on sheets of papers, 1 meaning strongly agree and 10
meaning strongly disagree. Pupils are given sheets with a list of statements that they
must respond to in private by an agreed method (pen, cross etc) so that an individual
could not be identified from their answers. The sheets are then folded and passed to
another person, they pass it on till it has moved 5 times. Then the teacher reads each
statement and the pupils stand by the number individuated on the sheet they now have.
This creates a human bar chart that has been anonymously completed. Time could then
be given to a short discussion about the possible reasons for the responses as indicated
or pupils could be asked to try to justify the views they have been given. (taken from Joyce
Mackley and Pamela Draycott’s Active Learning Strategies to support Spiritual and moral
development, CEM:2000, p.15)
Star Discussion Four to six small groups try and find a common view or solution. Each
group elects a speaker who remains in the group but enters into discussion with the
speakers of other groups. (from Friederike Kilpper “Keep Talking” The Bath Press,
Avon:1993 p.9)
Onion The class is divided into two equal groups. Chairs are arranged in a double circle
with each inner circle chair paired with an outer circle one so that every student has a
partner in the other circle. After a few minutes of discussion the outer circle move one
place and now everyone has a new partner. The discussion could remain on the same
topic or different topics could be discussed. Students could be invited to express their
own views or could be asked to take a view (inner circle agree, outer circle disagree)
(from Friederike Kilpper “Keep Talking” The Bath Press, Avon:1993, p.9)
Fishbowl Discussion
Prepare 3 questions on your topic
1) What causes conflict between different groups of people in our community?
2) What steps can the Government, Schools, community leaders and religious
leaders do to deal with the problem?
3) What can we do personally?
Have 2 circles of chairs, a smaller inner circle of about 1/3 of the total number of chairs.
Number pupils 1,2,3 and sit them 1s in the inner circle and 2&3s on the outer circle. The
inner circle is the discussion circle and 1s discuss for 10 mins question 1. 2s and 3s listen
to the discussion. Then have 1s and 2s swap places and 2s now discuss the second
question. Follow the same procedure for 3s and then ask the whole class for their
reflections. (From “Active learning, 101 Strategies to teach any subject,” Mel Silberman,
(Allyn and Bacon, London:1996))
Formal Debates
These require much more organisation and planning, with lessons given over for
research and preparation of arguments. Pupils can be divided into those arguing for,
against, first and second speakers, a jury to interrogate the speakers and a timekeeper to
keep things moving. People can be asked to argue for views they don’t necessarily hold
and voting can take place both on the quality of the cases made and the views people
have come to (before and after the debate in this latter case)
10. Resources for tutors and students
Select list of Academic Reading
Arendt, Hannah, “Eichmann in Jerusalem, a report on the banality of evil”, Penguin 1994,
first published Viking 1963
Arthur, James with Bailey, Richard “Schools and Community: The Communitarian
Agenda” (Falmer Press, London, 2000)
Bauman, Zigmunt, “Postmodern Ethics,” (Blackwells, Oxford, 1993)
Bauman, Zigmunt, “Modernity and the Holocaust,” (Polity, Oxford, 1989)
Gardner, J. C. Roy, Lawton, Denis, “Education for Values, Morals Ethics and Citizenship
in Contemporary Teaching,” London and Sterling, Kogan Page, 2000
Crick, Bernard "Essays on Citizenship," Continuum, London 2000
Donald, J. and Rattansi, Ali (eds) “Race, culture and difference,” London, Sage in
association with The Open University, 1992
Gearon, Liam “Learning to teach citizenship in the secondary school”, RoutledgeFalmer,
London and New York, 2003
Glover, Jonathan “Humanity, a Moral History of the Twentieth century,” Cape, London
1999
Hare, R. M “Essays on Religion and Education,” Clarendon, Oxford, 1992
Hayden, Graham A monograph by based on his doctoral thesis printed in “Journal of
Philosophy o Religion” Vol. 33, No.1 March 1999
Heyd, David "Toleration, an elusive virtue," Princeton University Press, USA, 1996
Lawton, Cairns and Gardner (Ed.s) Education for citizenship
Mason, Mark The Ethics of Integrity: educational Values Beyond Postmodern Ethics, in
“Journal of Philosophy of Religion” Vol. 35, No.1 2001
MacIntyre, Alasdair “After Virtue” Duckworth, Guildford and Kings Lynn, 1981
May, S (ed) “Critical Multiculturalism: rethinking multiculturalism and antiracist education:
London Falmer Press, 1999
Popper, Karl "The open society and its enemies. vol 1 The Spell of Plato," London,
Routledge & Kegan Paul. 1966
Introductory texts with activities aimed towards Sixth form ethics
Ethical Studies By Robert Bowie (2nd edition, Nelsonthornes, 2004) ISBN:
0748780793 -. Chapters include notes written on the topic, activities and tasks and
extracts from original sources.
Moral Problems, a coursebook for Schools and Colleges by Michael Palmer,
(LUTTERWORTH PRESS:Cambridge, 1991) ISBN 0-7188-2791-0
Philosophy in practice, an introduction to the main questions by Adam Morton,
(BLACKWELL: Oxford, 1996)
Standard ethics texts for first year undergraduate level
Ethics for Beginners by Dave Robinson and Chris Garratt, (ICON BOOKS:,
Cambridge, 1996) ISBN 1-874166-40-4 A wonderful image and caption based
introduction to ethics in the Icon series. It effectively takes the reader through
ethics topics in a very student friendly way.
The Puzzle of Ethics By Peter Vardy and Paul Grosch, (FOUNT:UK,1994) ISBN 0
00 627701-2 Peter Vardy was described by Theology as "a gifted communicator.
He is the best popularizer of philosophy of religion currently working in Britain."
This book, written with Paul Grosch provides a readable introduction to ethics with
questions at the end of each section. It is suitable for A Level and should be
considered for your class sets.
The Elements of Moral Philosophy (2nd edition) by James Rachels (McGraw-Hill:
USA, 1986) ISBN 0-07-051098 A very readable introduction to Ethics with
chapters on What is Morality, Cutural relativism, Subjectivism, Morality and
Religion, Egoism, Utilitarianism, Absolutism, Kant, the Social Contract and Virtue.
A good resource for students and teachers.
Practical Ethics (second edition) Peter Singer (CUP: UK, 1993) ISBN 052143971x A
clear and comprehensive introduction to applied ethics looking at issues such as
discrimination by race, sex, ability or species, abortion, euthanasia and embryo
experimentation, moral status of animals, political violence and civil disobedience,
overseas aid, the environment and refugees.
Ethics, Inventing Right and Wrong by J.L. Mackie (Penguin: London, 1977) ISBN:
0140135588 A classic text from a leading relativist. His critique against objective
morality and case for the subjectivity of values is an important contribution, well
worth a read for ethics teachers and students alike.
Causing Death and Saving Lives by Jonathan Glover (Penguin, London 1977) ISBN
0140134794 A fascinating study of the moral problems of abortion, infanticide,
suicide, euthanasia, capital punishment and other life or death choices. Essential
reading.
Possible Curriculum Resources for ethics/moral education in citizenship
Ethics & Citizenship; Tools for Moral Decision-Making (ISBN no. 0 340 844914)
was published in July 2002 by Hodder & Stoughton Educational. You can order
copies through Bookpoint Ltd, on 01235 827720, 130 Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon
OX14 4SB, at £36.99 each
Good Thinking: vol.1,2 and 3 , Education for Citizenship and Moral Responsibility
Ted Huddleston and Don Rowe, Evans Education,2000,
(sales@evansbooks.co.uk) , Fax:020 7487 0921 Classroom resource £25.00
Photocopiable - Three courses of study for Key Stages 3, 4 and '5', introducing
students to moral ideas, language and debate, within a framework of citizenship
and public morality. The course builds progressively through the key stages from
simple situations and dilemmas to complex social problems.
Tolerance websites
These sites have resources to help teachers and packs for pupils, many of which are free
to download.
Promoting Positive Tolerance and Active Citizenship - http://www.irespect.net/ - The
site promotes positive tolerance and Active Citizenship with resources, stories, and links
running competitions. It has a race equality newsletter for Schools has been released.
Produced by CIRCLE that you can download. There are some specific notes for teaching
positive tolerance http://www.irespect.net/schools/Positive%20Tolerance/teachers-notes.htm
Cool Planet - http://www.oxfam.org.uk/coolplanet/index.htm - In their own words “Cool
Planet is primarily intended for teachers in England, Scotland and Wales and their
students. It aims to bring the global dimension to the classroom, using the concept of
Global Citizenship.” They have resources and suggestions for lesson ideas on topics
such as Children and Diversity, Countries and Continents, Disasters and Emergencies,
Food, Trade and Globalization, Peace and Conflict, Rights and Social Justice,
Sustainability CAFOD : http://www.cafod.org.uk/resources/schoolsteachers is the arm of the
Catholic Church concerned with development and again has freely downloadable
resource packs, lesson ideas, assembly ideas, some of which would only be appropriate
for Church schools, but others which could be used in secular contexts.
Citizenship education: the global dimension:
http://www.citizenship-global.org.uk/index.html has among other things the freely
downloadable Citizenship education: the global dimension as a PDF file. Other sections
of the site include Teaching ideas, Resources, Controversial Issues, Whole school
projects, Case studies, and a Citizenship Calendar.
Amnesty International: http://www.amnesty.org/ Amnesty’s site is extensive and has
numerous reports and resources including information about the AI teachers network and
how students can set up a school AI society.
The Standards Site
http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/schemes2/citizenship/?view=get - the site provides
suggested schemes of work for citizenship classes
Ethics Websites
These sites will be of use for those who are unfamiliar with ethical theories and ethical
issues.
Religious studies on the Web - http://www.rsweb.org.uk/ designed for A Level
religious studies it has in the ethics section links for a number of major ethical issues and
most of the ethical theories.
Ethics for Schools http://www.ethicsforschools.org/
- Welcome to ethicsforschools.org - a collection of articles written by Christian doctors
that have been reproduced here especially for those studying religious studies,
philosophy or ethics
Ethics Updates Magazine - http://ethics.acusd.edu/index.html
. Edited by Lawrence M. Hinman. "Ethics Updates is designed primarily to be used by
ethics instructors and their students. It is intended to provide updates on current
literature, both popular and professional, that relates to ethics." An excellent Ethics
website with many articles and links and forums for discussion, a fine ethics
glossary, case studies and much more.
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy hosted by Stanford Universityhttp://plato.stanford.edu/ - contains encyclopedic articles on philosophy topics.
11. General glossary of ethical terms
absolutism/absolute The belief in a value or good that always holds its value.
Expressed by the ancient Stoics as ‘Let justice be done though the heavens fall.’ An
absolute is a fixed moral principle.
agape love A Greek word meaning love but distinct from erotic love or familial love.
Important for Christians as it’s that kind of unconditional love which they must show their
neighbours. It’s also important for Joseph Fletcher’s situation ethics that claims that moral
decision-making must centre on determining the most agape-loving thing to do in a
situation.
agnosticism To believe that nothing is known or can ever be known about the existence
or nature of God or anything beyond the material world.
altruism ‘Other-centeredness’ - acting out of selfless concern for others. Christians are
commanded to love their neighbour as themselves. Altruism can be contrasted with
selfishness or egoism.
analytic statement A classic term used by Kant meaning a statement that is true by
definition. A statement is analytically true if the clauses or predicates within the statement
say something necessarily true of all instances of the subject. E.g. all spinsters are
women. It isn’t possible to be a spinster if one is not a woman.
antinomianism/antinomian ethics The view that there are no moral principles or rules
at all.
arête The Greek word for ‘excellence’ or ‘virtue’. The virtue of an Olympic swimmer is in
swimming well, and the virtue of a national leader lies in motivating people to work for the
common good.
argument A set of statements consisting of premises and a conclusion.
atheism/atheist The belief that God does not exist. Philosophers who were atheists
include Karl Marx, Friedrich Nietzsche, Bertrand Russell and Jean-Paul Sartre.
autonomy/autonomous To freely determine one's own course in life . Etymologically,
it’s made up of autos meaning self and nomos meaning rule. Autonomy was central for
Kant. Without autonomy, people can’t be morally responsible for their actions. Others
usually contrast it with ‘heteronomy’ meaning the rule. To believe people are autonomous
is a position opposed to Determinism.
belief system A combination of the following: A fixed coherent set of beliefs, usually
religious, which form a pattern of religious opinions and rules; ritual and habitual
behaviour; group or community organizations and structures (hierarchy, leadership,
buildings etc); with a basis in key texts such as the Bible for Jews and Christians and the
Koran for Muslims. There’s usually a sense of the other, the supernatural or the ultimate
in these systems although not always. Secular belief systems such as humanism and
communism don’t have this transcendental aspect. See also Value system, World View.
beneficent/beneficence To do good, to be actively kind.
benevolent/benevolence To be helpful, friendly.
bigamy Marriage to a second wife when a previous marriage is in force. A crime in
western countries but more common in Middle Eastern cultures.
business ethics The application of ethics to the roles and responsibilities of persons
connected to the modern business corporation.
bioethics/biomedical ethics The application of ethics to biological sciences, medicine,
genetics, healthcare and public policy with regards to these areas. Judaism and Roman
Catholicism have strong traditions regarding Bioethics and issues such as abortion,
euthanasia, reproductive technologies, organ transplantation and human cloning are all
included in this topic.
blameworthy If someone is blameworthy they are morally responsible.
categorical imperative An unconditional command which, for Kant, told us our duty by
pointing to actions which were good in themselves, and in the pursuit of the summum
bonum (the supreme good). For Kant this included his universalisability maxim "Always
act in such a way that the maxim of your action can be willed as a universal law."
civil disobedience To disobey or resist the state because of a point of ethical principle.
Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King stand out as examples of leaders who practised
civil disobedience against the British in India and civil rights for black people in the USA
respectively. Henry David Thoreau is associated with this and his influential essay ‘Civil
Resistance’, ‘Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his
conscience to the legislator? Why has every man a conscience then? I think that we
should be men first, and subjects afterward ... The only obligation which I have a right to
assume is to do at any time what I think right.’
civil rights Legally enforced and protected rights belonging to people by virtue of their
citizenship of a state. Examples of civil rights are freedom of expression and of religious
belief. Ethical debates included whether these rights proceed from human rights or
natural rights. Great civil rights activists include Mahatma Ghandi and Martin Luther King.
compatible/compatibilism The belief that it’s possible to maintain both determinism
and free will because while some aspects of our nature are determined, our ability to
make moral decisions is not.
conditional egoism The form of egoism proposed by Adam Smith who believed that
unbridled commercial activity should be allowed if it has a trickle down beneficial impact
on the wider community.
conscience Aquinas called it ‘the mind of man making moral judgments’. It’s variously
understood as meaning the voice of God within us (Butler), our sense of moral right and
wrong or our super-ego enforcing the rules of behaviour implanted within us when we
were young (Freud). Ethical issues surrounding conscience include the conflict between
state law or religious belief and individual conscience (civil disobedience), the justification
of conscience as a reason for moral behaviour and the difficulties in defining and relying
on conscience as a guide for moral behaviour. Cardinal Newman said ‘I toast the Pope
but I toast conscience first.’
counter-example An example that undermines or refutes the principle or theory against
which it’s advanced.
cultural relativism The form of relativism which maintains that that which is good or
bad, right or wrong, for a person varies in relation to the culture in which the person lives.
These different values are equally valid because there are no moral absolutes (or no
discernible moral absolutes). For example, polygamy is permitted in some Islamic
societies but a criminal activity in most western societies. Neither position is more valid
than the other. See also Relativism.
Decalogue Name for the Commandments, the traditional core ethical values for Jewish
and Christian moral laws.
democracy Rule by the people either directly (where each citizen votes on policy and so
sovereignty rests with them) or representational (where citizens elect politicians and give
them authority to make decisions of policy thereby giving sovereignty to the elected
group).
deontology/deontological ethics Actions are intrinsically right or wrong. They are right
or wrong in themselves and irrespective of their consequences. They are traditionally
associated with Kantian duty but can also be linked to ethical systems that uphold
absolute moral norms and human rights. Deontologists hold that one can’t undertake
immoral acts like torture of spies even if the outcome is morally preferable, such as the
early ending of a war. It’s contrasted with teleological/consequentialist ethical theories.
descriptive ethics A term for ethics which doesn’t advocate a particular moral outlook
(as prescriptive ethics do) and doesn’t seek to determine the rightness or wrongness of
moral actions (as normative ethics do). Descriptive ethics simply identifies and compares
different ethical systems existing in different cultures. It’s anthropological in this sense.
divine command theory The ethical theory that maintains that actions are right or
wrong depending on whether they correspond to God’s commands or not.
duty A motive for acting in a certain way which indicates moral quality. It’s important in
Kantian ethics where doing good means rationally determining and then following duty.
For W. D. Ross, the prima facie duties are a set of ultimate moral obligations that, if
followed, will ensure that we’re acting morally. Duty was also important for the naturalist
F. H. Bradley who also felt that being good meant doing one’s duty.
emotivism A descriptive ethical theory, which holds that all moral judgments are simply
expressions of positive or negative feelings and that as such, all moral statements are
meaningless as they can’t be verified. Made prominent by logical positivists and the
Vienna Circle, in particular, A. J. Ayer and C. L. Stevenson.
ego Psychological phrase for the self. Important for egoism and Freudian views of
conscience.
egoism/ethical egoism ‘Self-centeredness’ - a moral theory that commonly states that
each person ought to act in his or her own self-interest.
ends and means Some moral systems evaluate the goodness and badness of actions
solely by examining their means (actions), while others examine the consequences, the
ends produced by those actions. See Teleological ethics, consequentialism, utilitarianism
and deontology.
ethics (sometimes known as moral philosophy) includes the following sorts of questions:
How should we live? What’s right and what’s wrong? What do we mean by the word ‘right’
and the word ‘good’? How can we measure goodness and badness? Are some things
always wrong or does it depend on the point of view or situation? Ethical theory examines
the different philosophies or systems used to explain and make judgments about
right/wrong/good/bad. Practical or applied ethics is more focused on subjects that invite
ethical questioning such as abortion and euthanasia.
extrinsically good actions/extrinsic good Something which is good, not within itself
but because of the goodness/badness of the effects or consequences it has. Opposite to
intrinsically good.
fate/fatalism Fate is the concept that there’s a force or law influencing or controlling
human affairs. A religious variant of determinism.
freedom/free will Freedom is a pre-necessity of moral responsibility. You must arguably
be free to act to be morally responsible for your actions. Libertarians hold that we’re free
to act morally.
Golden Rule Theory The maxim that we should act morally as we would expect to be
treated. It’s found in various ancient and modern sources, most notable Christian: ‘Do
unto others as you would have them do unto you.’ Thomas Hobbes held that we only act
morally because we don’t want to be acted against in an immoral way. Moral behaviour
has selfish roots.
good/goodness Ethics that questions definitions of the Good are known as meta-ethics.
Plato held that the good was an absolute that existed in a truer form than the things we
perceive around us. Relativists hold that goodness is determined by the traditional value
system of a given culture. Trying to define and determine what the good is, is the
preoccupation of the student of ethics.
hard determinism The belief that people don’t have free will to act in moral situations,
that all moral actions have uncontrollable prior causes. Determinism has the difficulty that
if people aren’t free to act morally then it seems unreasonable to hold them responsible
for their actions.
hedonism The belief that pleasure is the chief ‘good’.
idea/form Plato absolutes which he thought were the real things in the universe and
were immortal and beyond our senses. For Plato the good life involved the pursuit of
these ideas or forms, using philosophical enquiry. By pursuing them we would eventually
perceive goodness itself, the supreme.
ignorance Aquinas thought that you were not morally responsible for your actions if you
could not reasonably know that what you do is wrong.
immoral/immorality An immoral act is one that is considered bad or wrong.
impartiality A position which treats everyone equally or objectively. Impartiality is
arguably an essential component of the moral point of view so that in judging moral
actions or situations human beings should be treated equally.
individualism Theories that centre on the importance, rights or centrality of the
individual as opposed to communitarianism that focuses on those of the group. Margaret
Thatcher famously said ‘There is no such thing as society’ to emphasis the importance of
the individual in commerce. The United States embodies rights of the individual in its
Constitution. In ethics the distinction between the two is important in discussions on the
purpose of Justice. Individualism is also an issue in religious and cultural studies
(compare American individualism with the Japanese Group ethos, or the Christian search
for individual salvation and the Islamic concept of the rights of the community).
inclination The word that Kant used to refer to our feelings, emotions, and desires that
contrast with reason. Inclination was seen as physical, causally determined, and
irrational, while reason was portrayed as non-physical, free and obviously rational.
integrationist A position that attempts to reconcile apparently conflicting tendencies or
values into a single framework or system. Integrationist positions are contrasted with
separatist positions, which advocate keeping groups (usually defined by race, ethnicity,
or gender) separate from one another. The apartheid regime in South Africa was
separatist, advocating separate communities for blacks and whites, separate public
transport systems, etc.
intention In ethics questions can be asked about whether intentions make a difference
to the moral value of the action. If they do that it could be argued that to give to charity to
show off to gain praise is a right but bad action. For consequentialist theories of ethics
intention is important as intention is what you hope to achieve by the action - arguably all
moral actions have an element of this. For Kant, intention can make all the difference as
acting out of feelings is wrong, while acting using reason to perceive duty is right.
intrinsically good - Good in itself, without reference to consequences. see extrinsically
good.
intuitionism/ethical non-naturalism A meta-ethical theory which states that moral
truths are known by intuition, a special kind of perception.
justice Ethical debates in this area surround the definition of justice and how to make
justice operate effectively in the community. There are two main theories. Individualistic
theories maintain that communities are made up of individuals and therefore justice
should preserve the rights of individuals. Communitarian theories hold that society is
more than the sum of its parts and has some organic dimension. Plato recognised the
importance of community in his city-state. Marx, MacIntyre and John Rawls developed
communitarian theories of justice.
legalism/legalistic ethics An ethical system, which contains rules for every situation
and/or the association of doing good with simply following those rules.
libertarianism The view that humans are free to make moral choices and are therefore
responsible for their actions. An opposite stance to determinism.
logic The study of argument and reasoning. The study of whether certain conclusions
follow from their premises and if so why.
logical positivism The view that the only real things are those which are either
empirically provable (we can test them) or logically necessary (1 + 1 = 2). All religious,
superstitious and supernatural statements are meaningless. This philosophy was
propagated by a group called the Vienna Circle and later came to be associated with A. J.
Ayer and emotivism.
means Another term for actions. In ethics, ‘means’ are often contrasted with ‘ends’ so
that some ethical theories focus on the intrinsic goodness of an action while others look at
the consequences of actions.
meta-ethics The study of the meaning of ethical statements and terms such as ‘good’,
‘bad’, ‘right’ and ‘wrong’.
morality comes from the Latin word moralis - concerned with which actions are right and
which are wrong, rather than the character of the person. Today morality and ethics are
often used interchangeably.
natural law/natural moral law Ethical theories that hold that there’s a good natural
order to the human world that ought to be adhered to. The natural order is determined
either by a deity or some other supernatural power. The origins of natural law in the west
go back as far as the ancient Greeks (Sophocles, Antigone) but it is developed by St
Thomas Aquinas, who deduced that the fundamental natural law was to protect oneself
and protect the innocent and that from these can be derived the rules, to live, to procreate,
to create a civil society and to worship God. The Roman Catholic Church is a prominent
exponent of natural moral law today and this is manifested in its teaching against the use
of artificial contraception.
naturalism The ethical theory that moral values can be derived from sense experience.
Naturalists believe moral statements are statements of fact and imply moral obligation
(ought). The contrary ethical position is ethical non-naturalism or ethical non-cognitivism.
See also naturalistic Fallacy.
nihilism The belief that there’s no value or truth, a belief in nothing (Latin nihil).
non-cognitivism The belief that moral judgments or exclamations don’t have truth value
and therefore can’t be known. An example of this is emotivism.
objective moral norms A phrase meaning the same as ethical absolutes (see
absolutism).
objectivism Truth is objectively real irrespective of individual or cultural viewpoint or
value system. Things that are right and wrong are absolutely right and wrong.
obedience/disobedience To follow orders or instruction. In ethics there are dilemmas
about obedience to authority and when not to obey (civil disobedience and conscientious
objection) and obedience to conscience.
pacifism The belief that acts of violence are wrong. Some forms allow self-defense but
the stronger varieties don’t believe any violence action is morally acceptable.
particularity Can be contrasted with universality and impartiality. Ethical discussions
debate how adequate recognition can be given to the particular which refers to close
allegiances, friendships, loyalties and individual hopes and desires in life. These
particulars are usually seen as morally irrelevant to the rational moral self.
personalism The ethic that demands that human beings are not treated as ‘means’
(Kant) but are subjects. Personalism argues that human are inter-relational social beings,
part of the physical and spiritual world. Personalism affirms self-conscious experience.
Ultimately it puts the person in the centre of any moral or ethical dilemma.
pluralism The theory that there are many valid perspectives on an issue that,
individually , holds part but not all of the truth. In ethics, moral pluralism holds that different
moral theories each capture part of truth about moral life but not all of it. It’s distinct from
relativism as it doesn’t necessarily give equal validity to all theories and nor does it rule
out of the possibility that there’s one truth, simply that the truth is spread throughout a
number of theories.
practical, or applied, ethics The study of ethical issues such as abortion, justice, as
opposed to purely ethical theories like natural moral law and utilitarianism.
prescriptivism An ethical theory which contains that moral statements are not simply
describing an opinion but have and intrinsic sense that others ought to agree and follow
that moral view. Contrasts with descriptive ethics and to some extent emotivism.
proportionality/proportionalism The concept of proportionality is found in St Thomas
Aquinas’ consideration of just war theory. He argued that warring activity should be
proportionate to the aggression made and not excessive to that aggression. It’s present in
modern formulations of just war theory and questions actions like the atomic bombing of
Hiroshima and Nagasaki during the Second World War. It’s also found in the Roman
Catholic teaching on euthanasia which holds that while euthanasia is wrong, the
excessive or overburdensome treatment of terminally ill patients may be wrong especially
if the pain caused is disproportionate to the result of the procedure. Proportionalism as an
ethical theory is a relatively new theory that tries to bridge the gap between the traditional
Christian natural law ethic and the modern relativist Christian ethic, situationism. It
maintains that there are basic moral laws that are only broken in extreme circumstances.
See also Situationism, Natural moral law.
psychological egoism The doctrine that all human motivation is ultimately selfish or
egoistic.
Quakers/Society of Friends
A pacifist religious group connected to Christianity.
rationalism A theory popular in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries which holds
that it’s possible to determine what truly exists by reason alone, and that all things are
explicable using reason. In more recent times it’s associated with the rejection of religious
beliefs, faith or any belief system considered irrational. See also Logical Positivism,
Emotivism.
realism Traditionally, ethical realism holds that moral facts exist. The term also
describes the theory that in fact it’s never possible to make good choices as sin is present
in all people and therefore we ultimately have to choose between the lesser of two evils.
realism and war The belief that personal moral codes of conduct do not apply to
international politics. The defense of the community allows for individual moral principles,
such as ‘Do not kill’, to be ignored.
reason Plays a central role in some ethical theories. Kant and Aquinas believe that
moral behaviour means acting in accordance to reason as opposed to emotion. Aquinas
believes conscience is reason making moral decisions.
relativism takes several forms. Descriptive ethical relativism maintains that different
cultures and societies have differing ethical systems. Normative ethical relativism claims
that each culture’s beliefs or value system are right within that culture, and that it’s
impossible to validly judge another culture’s values externally or objectively. As such
there are no absolute moral norms. Some relativists hold that moral absolutes may exist
but that they are unknowable. J. L. Mackie is a famous contemporary Relativist
philosopher.
retribution The theory that punishment should in some way repay the damage done by
the crime.
rights Entitlements to do something without interference from other people, granted by
divine, natural or secular authority by virtue of being human or being the citizen of a state.
self-evident truth - A truth that requires no external proof or justification.
sentiment A word used by Hume to describe the source of moral opinions, separate
from factual knowledge or information.
situation ethics/situationism An alternative Christian ethical theory promulgated by
Joseph Fletcher in the 1960s that rejected legalistic codes of ethics in favour of a more
relativist model. Fletcher argued that the morally right thing to do was that which was most
loving in that particular situation. The love Fletcher meant was agape or unconditional
love. The theory has been rejected by some Christian Churches, including the Roman
Catholic Church. Proportionalism is a more moderate form of situation ethics.
slippery slope argument In ethics this is used to describe the dangers of theories that
allow for moral laws to be broken in certain circumstances. The dangers are stated as
being that once lesser moral laws are broken, greater ones are then broken and ultimate
all moral absolutes are abandoned. Situation ethics is identified as a theory that could
over-step certain ethical boundaries. In applied ethics, some argue that to legalise
euthanasia would eventually lead to the justification of all sorts of dubious moral practices
including infanticide.
social contract An arrangement whereby all members of a community agree to restrict
their freedoms so as to allow the most liberty for everyone.
state of nature The original state that human beings lived in. Identified by Hobbes as
being a state of aggressive war that must be overcome by a social contract and
conversely argued to be a state of pre-civilised paradise by Rousseau.
subjective/subjectivism An extreme version of relativism, which argues that each
person's values and beliefs are relative to that person alone and can’t be judged
externally or objectively.
teleological/teleological ethics Ethical theories that establish the rightness or
wrongness of a given act by consideration of the consequences. See consequentialism,
utilitarianism.
universalisability A moral law which can be obeyed every time everywhere. Kant
maintained that the only maxims that are morally good are those that can be
universalised.
universal law A belief that moral rules apply universally, in all situations, and to all
people. Found in prescriptivism and Kantian ethics.
utilitarianism/utility theory/utility
A teleological theory that maintains that an action is right if it produces the greatest good
for the greatest number. Formulated by Jeremy Bentham and developed by John Stuart
Mill. Utilitarianism measures the potential goodness produced with the hedonic calculus
and thereby draws conclusions about which action is the best. Deontological theories are
contrary to this theory. Critics point out that it provides no justice for minorities and ignores
the possibility of intrinsically bad acts like torturing babies. See also Act utilitarianism,
Rule utilitarianism, Consequentialism..
value system A fixed set of ethical and moral beliefs and practices usually associated
with a worldview of truth, life and death. It may be part of a religious belief system or a
secular ideology.
values/value judgment A value is traditionally known as a good, a moral principle. A
value judgment is an estimate of the moral worth of an action..
virtue/virtue ethics To habitually do what is right. Virtue ethics is a theory that claims
that being good requires the practice of a certain kind of behaviour.
Aristotle advanced virtue ethics and it has been recently redefined by Alasdair MacIntyre.
Debates range on how we determine what these ethical virtues are and whether being
good is something we can practice at all.
worldview A collective term for all systems of belief be they religious (Christian, Hindu
etc.), or secular (communist, humanist, vegetarianism). Usually worldviews have
accompanying value systems.