Is citizen disobedience morally right?
Fung Ting Kwan
12210242
GCPS1005, Section 21
16th October, 2013
Mr Lau Cheuk Yan
Specific purpose: to explain three theories of normative ethics to help university students making moral
decision
Introduction
(attention getter)
I. Believe that none of you don’t know about the campaign “Let Love
and Peace Occupy Central”, do you? The most controversial part
would probably be the citizen disobedience. Agree?
(relate to audience)
II. As a citizen of Hong Kong, as well as a university students, we
inevitably face challenges that whether we support the campaign
and citizen disobedience or not. We have to think, not just
rationally, but ethically.
(background)
III.The campaign Occupying Central is initiated by the Associate
Professor of Law at the University of Hong Kong, Benny Tai Yiuting. This issue directly related to our moral judgment concerning
the citizen disobedience.
(reveal purpose)
IV.
Therefore, I hope to explain three theories of normative
ethics to support you, university students, to do moral decision.
(credibility)
V. As I’ve been studying ethics for three years in the secondary
school, I found materials that might be useful to you all in ethical
thinking and reasoning, for instances, reference book, text books
and online materials.
(preview structure)
VI.
In the following speech, I would introduce to you three
ethical theories,
A. Consequentialism
B. Deontology
C. Virtue ethics
(transition)
VII.
The first theory I’m going to introduce to you all is
consequentialism.
Body
I. Consequentialism
A. Definition of consequentialism
(definition)
(quotation)
i. By looking at the name, we can guess that we make moral
judgment by considering the consequences caused by an
action from the consequentialist perspective. A morally right
action should produce good outcomes and beneficial
consequences. One of the most well-known theories would
be utilitarianism.
“Consequentialist theories share the belief that the moral rightness
and wrongness of acts is determined by the non-moral value of
relevant consequences” (Gauthier & Candance C, 2003)
[This quotation clearly shows the standard of moral judgment of
consequentialism.]
(transition)
The most controversial part of the campaign “Let Love and Peace
Occupy Central” must be citizen disobedience.
B. Applying consequentialism to citizen disobedience
i. From the viewpoint of consequentialists,
disobedience might be morally wrong because
(example)
citizen
a) this act encourages people not to follow law which
threaten the authority of the government and social order
b) the campaign might cause social differentiation that
people with different standpoints may oppose each
other.
c) if the campaign successfully urged the government to
have universal suffrage, it would be a great step in Hong
Kong democracy progress. However, all of we know
how small is the chance that the government would
change their mind and put universal suffrage forward.
ii. Therefore, considering these possible outcomes, citizen
disobedience would be morally wrong, from the
consequentialist perspective.
(transition)
After going through the consequentialism, we come to deontology.
II. Deontology
A. Definition of deontology
(definition)
i. In Greek, the word “δέον” means duty.
ii. From a deontologist perspective, strive for moral rightness
is considered as the obligations and duties of everyone.
B. Ethical reasoning of deontologists
(example)
i. Determining whether an action is morally correct or not,
deontologist examines the action to see if it could be
universalized. A universalized action could be applied to
everyone. The attitude and value behind these actions, we
label them as the universal principles, including
a) principle of justice
b) principle of no harm
c) principle of loyalty
ii. Action obeying these universal principles would be morally
right from the deontologist perspective. Immanuel Kant, one
of the most famous philosophers standing for the
deontology theory. He thought that a morally right action
should be based on individual’s conscience and selfdiscipline instead of considering the consequence of the
action.
C. Comparison to consequentialism
(quotation)
i. “The basic difference is that deontologist rejects the notion
that moral standards are based on…outcomes or states.”
(Gauthier & Candance C, 2003)
(comparison)
(transition)
ii. In contrast to consequentialism, which considers the results
brought by an act, deontology focuses on the motive of the
doer and the nature of the act itself. The rightness of an
action would not change even if it causes bad consequences
Take the previous example for illustration.
D. Applying deontology to citizen disobedience
(example)
i. Citizen disobedience might require social costs and produce
unfavorable consequences, but these are not taken in
deontologists’ consideration nonetheless.
ii. Concerning citizen disobedience, the affirmative side
focuses on the need to fight against the injustice election
system and evil social structures while the negative side
high-lights the wrongness of disobeying law as well as the
legal system. This illustrates the conflict between two
universal principles
a) principle of justice
b) principle of loyalty
iii. The conflicts between principles are unsolvable unless the
principles are prioritized according to personal standard and
orientation.
iv. Personally, principle of justice is prior to loyalty and,
therefore, citizen disobedience is morally correct to me from
the deontologist perspective
(transition)
After introducing consequentialism and deontology, we now come to the
last theory, virtue ethics, a new perspective
III. Virtue ethics
[“What is the goal of human life?” asked by Aristotle, one of the sources of
virtue ethics, what is your answer? Would it be virtue?]
A. Definition of virtue ethics
(definition)
i. In virtue ethics, more attention is paid to the kind of virtues
displayed in an action, than that to the action itself and the
motive of the doer.
B. Ethical reasoning of virtue ethics
i. One action is considered as right only if it shows more
valuable virtues, such as
(example)
a) obedience
b) courage
c) freedom
(quotation)
“Ask what a virtuous person or a person with a particular virtue
would do in a particular situation.” (Gauthier & Candance C,
2003)
[This is the question proposed by virtue ethics.]
C. Applying virtue ethics to citizen disobedience
i. Back to the example of citizen disobedience, most of the
opponents argue that citizen disobedience goes against
virtues of
(example)
a) legality
b) obedience
c) peace
[Undoubtedly, their argument is right.]
ii. On the other hand, citizen disobedience demonstrated
virtues of
(example)
a) justice
b) courage
c) love
iii. Additionally, the nonviolent approach of the campaign
displays virtue of peace as well.
(example)
iv. Struggling in between the virtues proposed by opponents
and the supporters, I remember words from Dietrich
Bonhoeffer who is a pastor, as well as a theologist, living in
the time of Nazism, saying “in one situation, that is the total
absence of any laws…, we need to break the
Commandment.” He believed it is worse to become evil in
prioritization to sin and breaking the Commandment.
v. Facing injustice sovereignty, we have to go against it in
order to avoid being evil. This reveals a comparison
between virtues, obedience to commandments and being
morally good. Bonhoeffer chose the latter one and so do I.
vi. Therefore, it’s morally right to support citizen disobedience
in the context of campaign “Let Love and Peace Occupy
Central”.
Conclusion
(transition)
I. Within eight minutes, we’ve gone through three theories of
normative ethics and here comes to the conclusion of the speech.
(simple summary)
II. To summarize, the three theories of normative ethics I’ve
introduced today are:
A. Consequentialism
B. Deontology
C. Virtue ethics
[which help you think ethically with rational]
(call to action)
III.During my speech, I give my own opinion towards the campaign as
well as citizen disobedience, instead of delivering neutral
information. This is because what I’ve shared with you is not just
knowledge, but skills and perspectives for thinking which require
your own effort in applying them in your reasoning and thinking.
Hope you not just think about the social issue by instinct, but be
more conscious to your value orientation and ethics.
List of reference:
1. Gauthier & Candance C (2003). Consequentialism. Stuides in religion, 32(1-2), 200-202.
2. Curriculum Development Council and the Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment
Authority (2007). Personal, Social and Humanities Education Key Learning Area: Ethics
and Religious Studies. Retrieved from http://334.edb.hkedcity.net/doc/eng/ers_final_e.pdf
3. 練乙錚 (2013, October 10). 基督信仰與「佔中」何干？—簡介潘霍華. Posted to
http://vicsforum.blogspot.hk/2013/10/blog-post_10.html
4. 李忠謙 (2004). 圖解哲學. 台北: 易博士文化
5. Lo, Wai-ming (2013, March 27). Manifesto, Occupy Central with Love and Peace.
Posted to http://oclphk.wordpress.com/2013/03/27/english/