1
Theory of Knowledge II
Vanier College, H08
By “the saint”
1.
Ethics as an AOK: the knowledge issues
We have to situate Ethics within the TOK paradigm. That is we have to zero in on the linkage between ethics and an inquiry into knowledge. So what knowledge issues are raised by ethics and ethical inquiry?
(a) justification: by what means do we justify our moral judgements and positions
(b) knowing: what is “moral knowledge”; how do we know what morality is and what is good/bad or right/wrong
(c) belief: what leads us to believe in one set of moral claims as opposed to another? What is the basis or grounds of our beliefs that such and such is the right or wrong thing to do?
(d) Truth: Is there absolute truth in ethics? Is there an absolute right or wrong? Are the facts on which we base our moral judgement true facts?
Van de Lagemaat suggest that “moral reasoning” as at the centre of the knowledge dimension of ethics. Moral reasoning consists in the justifications and the reasons we give for the “value judgements” we make (judgements that such and such is good or bad, right or wrong). (pp. 364-65)
Moral reasoning also involve the formulation of arguments that are action guiding and are derived from commonly held moral principles. In our debates, discussions and personal reflections on good or bad character, right and wrong actions the appeal to and reliance on reason demands consistency (being consistent in the judgements we make) and evidence (that is basing our action and decision on true or reliable facts). (p. 365)
2. An “ethics as an AOK” analysis grid
Parameter of analysis
Objective(s)/purpose of ethics and ethical inquiry
To determine what is right and wrong or good and bad with respect to actions and character.
Normative/prescriptive ethics: determines and prescribes what should/ought to be; affirms and proposes normative normative value judgements: “capital punishment is always wrong”
Metaethics or analytical ethics: (a) analyzes ethical language: what do we mean when we use the words good, goodness, right, just, free, happiness; (b) seeks to determine the rational basis for ethics; involves the analysis of ethical
TOK II, H08
Ethics Analysis Grid
Aboud

2
Nature of knowledge claims in ethics:
What criteria are used as a basis for asserting moral knowledge? On what grounds would claims to moral knowledge be made? These grounds can be expressed in the form of a statement that says why one knows what the right thing to do is: “I know what is right/I know I have done right because…”
Bases/sources of truth in ethics: how does a moral claim arise as true or gain the quality of truth? systems and theories of what it means to be ethical and what constitutes “the ethical” or
“the moral”.
-- we (our society/culture) have agreed on this moral principle;
-- the evidence or the facts of the case show me what is right;
-- I have a sense of what is right or wrong
(intuitionism);
-- I have been faithful to my principles;
-- I have conducted myself in a way that is consistent with impartiality;
-- God has set this down as a rule of conduct;
God has commanded that such and such is wrong; (religious ethics)
-- It is in my interest to do/not do/have this;
(ethical egoism)
-- it is a universal law/rule that people should/should not do this in these circumstances; (deontological ethics)
-- I know what contributes to the happiness/good of the greatest number of people; (utilitarianism)
-- it is universally accepted;
-- it applies to all cases and at all times (it is in a sense eternal);
-- it is objectively verifiable; the empirical evidence demonstrates who or what is wrong in this instance and what the proper/appropriate ethical stance should be
(A’s paper is identical in many respects to a paper published by someone else, so A’s paper is plagiarized) ;
-- it comes from nature or is consistent with the laws of nature;
-- it derives from divine/supernatural will; it is written in the sacred texts;
-- it is the law;
-- it is part of our customs;
-- it is consistent with reason or rationality
(deductive logic)
TOK II, H08
Ethics Analysis Grid
Aboud

3
The knower: what qualifies someone as knowledgeable in the area of ethics? What makes an ethical person?
Scepticism and the limitations of ethical knowledge: in what ways is ethical knowledge put into question? What are the limits of certainty and truth in ethics?
-- consistency: being consistent in one’s moral stances—a proper moral agent would be someone who is consistent in application of moral rules and in the principles he/she holds;
-- impartiality: being impartial in ones conduct with respect to other— one does not give partial preference to one person or group over another, within reason (one does not contribute to the suffering of one’s child in order to be impartial towards all children);
-- one conducts and carries oneself in a way that is consistent with an ethical self;
-- a person has thought about and cultivated an ethical demeanour a particular ethos of conduct that is consistent with care of the self and care of others; a person who develops an ethos of care for oneself seeks to improve and build knowledge, examine critically his/her conduct and that of others and to be, in ones affairs, both regarding of oneself but also of others.
“moral values and judgements are just a matter of taste” (v de Lagemaat, 364); scepticism is the doctrine that says there is no real way of knowing what the ultimate rules or values are; relativism:
ethics is really just rules of our own making and the rules may be made in different ways at different times.
Therefore, there is no truth, but just different truths of different people.
Any particular set of standards is purely conventional, implying that there are other, equally acceptable ways of doing things, we just happened to have settled on one of them.
Excessive relativism becomes subjectivism: the view that each individual has a right to their opinion on what should/should not be done;
TOK II, H08
Ethics Analysis Grid
Aboud

4
Relativism in ethics can be grounded in racism or prejudice or be a mask for racism as in the view that a people engaged in civil war are a barbaric people and settle their difference through violence;
Egoism or Self-interestedness:
Humans are selfish animals and are incapable of genuinely thinking about others
-
Our acts of “goodness” or of concern for others are a sham or simply self-interest disguised as charity, benevolence etc.
Determinism:
Biological or genetic determinism will say that our actions and decisions are the product our programming; we are not acting good or bad because we choose to, but because we are made that way
Social/sociological determinism: our social setting or context shapes our sensibility to being self-obsessed or to being other-regarding and we can’t change what our environment or context conditions us to be.
- One version of determinism suggests that the values we hold are “determined” by the ruling class (they are ruling class values) and serve ruling class or dominant class interests. But, a Marxist version of this kind of determinism would see room for resistance and an eventual conflict of ruling and working class values.
TOK II, H08
Ethics Analysis Grid
Aboud