Ethical and Moral Philosophy
Sources of Our Moral Values
Family
Moral
Values
Sources of Our Moral Values
Education
Religion
Family
Moral
Values
Sources of Our Moral Values
Education
Religion
Family
Moral
Values
Culture
Personality
Sources of Our Moral Values
Education
Religion
Family
Moral
Values
Culture
Personality
Leadership
/Mentors
Sources of Our Moral Values
Education
Religion
Experience
Culture
Family
Moral
Values
Personality
Leadership
/Mentors
Sources of Our Moral Values
Education
Religion
Experience
Family
Moral
Values
Personality
Leadership
/Mentors
Culture
Reflection
Ethical Systems
Rule Based:
Deontology
Ethical Systems
and Schools of
Thought
Deontology
Deontological ethics (from the Greek Deon meaning
obligation) or Deontology is an ethical theory holding that
decisions should be made solely or primarily by considering
one's duties and the rights of others. Deontology posits the
existence of a priori moral obligations, further suggesting
that people ought to live by a set of permanently defined
principles that do not change merely as a result of a change
in circumstances.
Ends-Based:
Teleology
Care-Based:
Situational
Ethical Systems
Rule Based:
Deontology
Care-Based:
Situational
Ethical Systems
and Schools of
Thought
Ends-Based:
Teleology
Teleology
Teleological moral systems are characterized primarily by a focus on the
consequences which any action might have (for that reason, they are often
referred to as consequentalist moral systems, and both terms are used here).
Thus, in order to make correct moral choices, we have to have some
understanding of what will result from our choices. When we make choices
which result in the correct consequences, then we are acting morally; when we
make choices which result in the incorrect consequences, then we are acting
immorally.
Ethical Systems
Rule Based:
Deontology
Ends-Based:
Teleology
Ethical Systems
and Schools of
Thought
Care-Based:
Situational
Ethic of Care
The ethics of care is one of a cluster of normative ethical theories that were developed by
feminists in the second half of the twentieth century. While consequentialist and deontological
ethical theories emphasize universal standards and impartiality, ethics of care emphasize the
importance of relationships. The basis of the theory is the recognition of: 1) The
interdependence of all individuals for achieving their interests; 2) The belief that those
particularly vulnerable to our choices and their outcomes deserve extra consideration to be
measured according to the level of their vulnerability to one's choices and the level of their
affectedness by one's choices and no one elses; 3) The necessity of attending to the contextual
details of the situation in order to safeguard and promote the actual specific interests of those
involved.result in the incorrect consequences, then we are acting immorally.
Ethical Systems
Rule Based:
Deontology
Ends-Based:
Teleology
The Grand
Mean
Utilitarianism
Categorical
Imperative
Ethical Systems and
Schools of Thought
Egoism
Justice
Devine
Command
Cultural
Relativism
Care-Based:
Situational
Situational
Relativism
Our Personal Code of Ethics
Moral
Values
Ethical Systems and
Schools of Thought
Personal
Code of
Ethics
Professional
Ethics
Law
Making a Difference Through Leadership
Business Ethics
Personal
Code of
Ethics
Leadership
Corporate
Citizenship
Social Change
Ethical Systems
Ethical Perspectives

Teleology

Deontology

Moral Relativism
The Relativist Perspective

Defines ethical behavior subjectively from the
experiences of individuals and groups



Relativists use themselves or those around them as their
basis for defining ethical standards
A positive group consensus indicates that an action is
considered ethical by the group
Acknowledges that we live in a society in which people
have different views

There are many different bases from which to justify a
decision as right or wrong
Deontology
Aristotle and the Ethics of Virtue
Kant and the Categorical Imperative
Divine Command
Adapted from: Lawrence M. Hinman, Ph.D. http://ethics.sandiego.edu/
Deontology



Focuses on the rights of the individual, not consequences
(considers intentions)
Believes in equal respect and views certain behaviors as
inherently right
Proposes that individuals have certain inherent freedoms


Rule deontologist


Freedoms: conscience, consent, privacy, speech and due process
Conformity to general moral principles
Act deontologists

Evaluate ethicalness based on the act
Virtue




Strength of character
(habit)
Involving both feeling
and action
Seeks the mean between
excess and deficiency
relative to us
Promotes human
flourishing
Aristotle
Virtues and Spheres of Existence
Sphere of Existence
Deficiency
Mean
Attitude toward self
Servility
Self-deprecation
Proper Self-Love
Proper Pride
Self-Respect
Attitude toward
offenses of others
Ignoring them
Being a Doormat
Attitude toward good
deeds of others
Suspicion
Envy
Ignoring them
Indifference
Remorselessness
Downplaying
Anger
Forgiveness
Understanding
Gratitude
Admiration
Attitude toward our
own offenses
Attitude toward
our friends
Indifference
Agent Regret
Remorse
Making Amends
Learning from them
Self-Forgiveness
Loyalty
Excess
Arrogance
Conceit
Egoism
Narcissism
Vanity
Revenge
Grudge
Resentment
Over indebtedness
Toxic Guilt
Scrupulosity
Shame
Obsequiousness
Spheres of Existence--2
Attitude toward our
own good deeds
Attitude toward the
suffering of others
Attitude toward the
achievements of
others
Attitude toward death
and danger
Attitude toward our
own desires
Attitude toward
other people
Belittling
Disappointment
Sense of
Accomplishment
Humility
Self-righteousness
Callousness
Compassion
Self-satisfaction
Complacency
Competition
Cowardice
Admiration
Emulation
Pity
“Bleeding Heart”
Envy
Courage
Foolhardiness
Anhedonia
Temperance
Moderation
Respect
Lust
Gluttony
Deferentiality
Exploitation
Two Conceptions of Morality

We can contrast two approaches to the moral life.

The childhood conception of morality:




Comes from outside (usually parents).
Is negative (“don’t touch that stove burner!”).
Rules and habit formation are central.
The adult conception of morality.



Comes from within (self-directed).
Is positive (“this is the kind of person I want to be.”).
Virtue-centered,often modeled on ideals.
The Purpose of Morality


Both of these conceptions of morality are
appropriate at different times in life.
Adolescence and early adulthood is the time when
some people make the transition from the adolescent
conception of morality to the adult conception.
Rightly-ordered Desires

Aristotle draws an interesting contrast between:



Continent people, who have unruly desires but manage to
control them.
Temperate people, whose desires are naturally—or
through habit, second-nature—directed toward that which
is good for them.
Weakness of will (akrasia) occurs when individuals cannot
keep their desires under control.
The Goals of Moral Education


Moral education may initially seek to control unruly
desires through rules, the formation of habits, etc.
Ultimately, moral education aims at forming rightlyordered desires, that is, teaching people to desire
what is genuinely good for them.
Virtue As the Golden Mean

Strength of character (virtue), Aristotle suggests,
involves finding the proper balance between two
extremes.



Excess: having too much of something.
Deficiency: having too little of something.
Not mediocrity, but harmony and balance.
Virtue and Habit


For Aristotle, virtue is something that is
practiced and thereby learned—it is habit
(hexis).
This has clear implications for moral
education, for Aristotle obviously thinks that
you can teach people to be virtuous.
Courage

The strength of character necessary to
continue in the face of our fears

Deficiency: Cowardice, the inability to do what is
necessary to have those things in life which we need
in order to flourish



Too much fear
Too little confidence
Excess



Too little fear
Too much confidence
Poor judgment about ends worth achieving
Courage


Both children and adults need courage.
Without courage, we are unable to take the risks
necessary to achieve some of the things we most
value in life.



Risk to ask someone out on a date.
Risk to show genuine vulnerability.
Risk to try an academically challenging program such
as pre-med.
Courage and the Unity of the Virtues

To have any single strength of character in full
measure, a person must have the other ones as well.



Courage without good judgment is blind, risking without
knowing what is worth the risk.
Courage without perseverance is short-lived, etc.
Courage without a clear sense of your own abilities is
foolhardy.
Courage
Excess
Mean
Deficiency
Underestimates actual
danger
Correctly estimates
actual danger
Overestimates actual
danger
Overestimates own
ability
Correctly estimates own
ability
Underestimates own
ability
Undervalues means,
what is being placed at
risk
Overvalues goal, what
the risk is being taken
for
Properly values means
that are being put at risk
Overvalues the means,
what is being placed at
risk
Properly values goal that Undervalues goal, what
is being sought
the risk would be taken
for
Compassion






Etymology: to feel or suffer with…
Both cognitive and emotional
Leads to action
Excess: the “bleeding heart”
Deficiency: moral callousness
Contrast with pity
Compassion as an Emotion

Emotion is often necessary:

to recognize the suffering of others


emotional attunement
part of the response to that suffering

others often need to feel that you care
Cleverness and Wisdom


The clever person knows the best means to
any possible end.
The wise person knows which ends are worth
striving for.
Self-Love


Involves feeling, knowing, and acting
Characteristics of loving another person:



Feelings of tenderness, care, appreciation, respect
toward that person
Knowing that person (infatuation usually does not
involve knowledge)
Acting in ways that promote the flourishing of that
person
Self-Love: Principal Characteristics
Characteristics of self-love




Having feelings of care, appreciation, and respect
for others
Valuing yourself--flows from feelings of self-love
Knowing yourself--a long, often arduous, and
never completed task
Acting in ways that promote your genuine
flourishing
Self-Love: Deficiency
Deficiency




Too little feeling: self-loathing
Too little self-valuing: self-deprecating
Too little self-knowledge: unwilling or unable to
look at one’s own motivations, feelings, etc.
Too little acting: not taking steps to insure one’s
own well-being
Self-Love: Excess





Excesses of self-love take many forms: arrogance,
conceit, egoism, vanity, and narcissism are but a few
of the ways in which we can err in this direction.
Too much caring: self-centeredness
Too much self-valuing: arrogance, conceit
Too much self-knowledge: narcissistic
Too much acting for self: selfishness
Forgiveness

This, too, is a virtue indispensable for human
flourishing



In any long-term relationship (friendship, marriage, etc.),
each party will do things that must be forgiven by the
other.
Long term relationships are necessary to human
flourishing.
If we cannot forgive, we cannot have continuing long
term relationships
Forgiveness: Excess and Deficiency

Excess: the person who forgives too easily and too
quickly



may undervalue self
may underestimate offense
Deficiency: the person who can never forgive


may overestimate his or her own importance
usually lives a life of bitterness and anger
Concluding Evaluation


Virtues are those strengths of character that
enable us to flourish
The virtuous person has practical wisdom, the
ability to know when and how best to apply
these various moral perspectives.
Divine Command
We will consider three different accounts of the relationship
between religion and reason in ethics:
 Religion takes priority over reason:





Divine command theories
Teleological suspension of the ethical
Compatibilist theories
Autonomy of reason theories
These theories claim that something is right because God
wills it.
Compatibilist Theories

Compatibilist theories say that reason and
religion can never contradict one another


Strong: they are saying the same thing
Weak: they say different things, but not
contradictory things
Weak Compatibilism
Thomas Aquinas believed that
reason and faith could never
contradict one another, but faith
may reveals truths beyond the
react of reason.
Rationalistic Theists
Immanuel Kant believed
in God, but felt that even
God was subject to the
dictates of reason.
A Crucial Distinction

Distinguish two questions:


Content. Can reason provide us with adequate
guidelines about how we should act? The answer
appears to be “yes.”
Motivation. Can reason provide us with adequate
motivation to do the right thing? Here the answer
appears to be “no.”
Possible Relationships between
Religion and Reason in Ethics
Supremacy of
Religion
Compatibilist
Theories
Supremacy of
Reason
Strong version
All morality based on
divine commands
Fundamentalism
Reason and religion are
identical
Hegel
Ethics based only on
reason; atheistic or
agnostic
Russell
Weak version
Teleological Suspension
of the Ethical
Kierkegaard
Reason and religion may
be different but do not
conflict
Aquinas
Even God must follow
dictates of reason
Kant
God’s Relationship to the World
God’s Interaction with the World

In this view, God interacts with the world
in several ways:




God creates the world
God is in contact interaction with the world
God’s creative act (esse) continually sustains
the world in its existence
God gives the world a final purpose or goal or
telos toward which it strives
Overview
We will consider three different accounts of the
relationship between religion and reason in
ethics:
 Religion takes priority over reason:




Divine command theories
Teleological suspension of the ethical
Compatibilist theories
Autonomy of reason theories
Divine Command Theories

These theories claim that something is right
because God will it.



Augustine and the voluntarist tradition
Clear in Islam, where the will of Allah is the
measure of all that is right
Also characteristic of much of
fundamentalism in all religions.
Criticisms of Divine Command Theories



How can we know God’s will?
Does divine command theory undermine
human autonomy?
Can be used to subjugate the masses.
Abraham and Isaac
In the old Testament, God commands Abraham to sacrifice his
only son, Isaac.
The Story of Abraham
Genesis, 22:1-10
And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham: and he
said, Behold, here I am.
And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah;
and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of.
And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and saddled his ass, and took two of his young men with him,
and Isaac his son, and clave the wood for the burnt offering, and rose up, and went unto the place of which
God had told him.
Then on the third day Abraham lifted up his eyes, and saw the place afar off.
And Abraham said unto his young men, Abide ye here with the ass; and I and the lad will go yonder and
worship, and come again to you.
And Abraham took the wood of the burnt offering, and laid it upon Isaac his son; and he took the fire in his
hand, and a knife; and they went both of them together.
And Isaac spake unto Abraham his father, and said, My father: and he said, Here am I, my son. And he said,
Behold the fire and the wood: but where is the lamb for a burnt offering?
And Abraham said, My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so they went both of them
together.
And they came to the place which God had told him of; and Abraham built an altar there, and laid the wood
in order, and bound Isaac his son, and laid him on the altar upon the wood.
And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son.
The Story of Abraham
Genesis, 22:11-19
And the angel of the LORD called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham, Abraham: and he
said, Here am I.
And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I
know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me.
And Abraham lifted up his eyes, and looked, and behold behind him a ram caught in a thicket
by his horns: and Abraham went and took the ram, and offered him up for a burnt offering in
the stead of his son.
And Abraham called the name of that place Jehovahjireh: as it is said to this day, In the mount
of the LORD it shall be seen.
And the angel of the LORD called unto Abraham out of heaven the second time,
And said, By myself have I sworn, saith the LORD, for because thou hast done this thing, and
hast not withheld thy son, thine only son:
That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the
heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his
enemies;
And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my
voice.
So Abraham returned unto his young men, and they rose up and went together to Beersheba;
and Abraham dwelt at Beersheba.
The Issue


God’s command that Abraham should kill
his only son as a sacrifice to God seems to
go against reason and morality
The issue: can God ask us to do things that
go against reason and morality? Which
takes precedence, God’s command or
reason?
Immanuel Kant
and the Ethics of Duty
Two Conceptions of Duty

Duty as following orders




Duty as freely imposing obligation on one’s own self




The Adolph Eichmann model
Duty is external
Duty is imposed by others
The Kantian model
Duty is internal
We impose duty on ourselves
The second conception of duty is much more morally
advanced than the first.
Duty and Inclination

Kant was mistrustful of inclinations
(Neigungen) as motivations


This was part of his view of the physical world as
causally determined
Saw feelings as



Unreliable
Passive
Phenomenal
Types of Imperatives

Hypothetical Imperative:



“If you want to drive to UCLA from San Diego,
take the 405 freeway.”
Structure: if…then…
Categorical Imperative


“Always tell the truth”
Unconditional, applicable at all times
The Categorical Imperative


Most of us live by rules much of the time.
Some of these are what Kant called
Categorical Imperatives—unconditional
commands that are binding on everyone at all
times.
“Always act in such a way that the maxim of
your action can be willed as a universal law of
humanity.”
--Immanuel Kant
Categorical Imperatives: Respect

“Always treat humanity, whether in yourself
or in other people, as an end in itself and
never as a mere means.”
--Immanuel Kant
Categorical Imperative: Publicity

Always act in such a way that you would not
be embarrassed to have your actions described
on the front page of The New York Times.
Conclusion


Kant saw that morality must be fair and
evenhanded.
The Kantian path offers a certain kind of
moral safety in an uncertain world.
Teleology


Considers acts as morally right or acceptable if
they produce some desired result such as
pleasure, knowledge, career growth, the
realization of a self interest, or utility
Assesses moral worth by looking at
the consequences for the individual
Categories of Teleology

Egoism
Right or acceptable behavior defined in terms of consequences
to the individual
 Maximizes personal interests
Enlightened egoists take a longer term perspective and allow for the
well being of others.


Utilitarianism



Concerned with consequences
Considers a cost/benefit analysis
Behavior based on principles of rules that promote the greatest
utility rather than on an examination of each situation (greatest
good for greatest number of people)
The Relativist Perspective

Defines ethical behavior subjectively from the
experiences of individuals and groups



Relativists use themselves or those around them
as their basis for defining ethical standards
A positive group consensus indicates that an
action is considered ethical by the group
Acknowledges that we live in a society in which
people have different views

There are many different bases from which to
justify a decision as right or wrong
Three Types of Justice

Distributive justice


Procedural justice


An evaluation of the outcomes or results of a business
relationship (evaluating benefits derived/equity in rewards)
Based on the processes and activities that produce the outcomes
or results (evaluating decision making processes and level of
access, openness and participation)
Interactional justice

Based on an evaluation of the communication processes used in
business relationships (evaluating accuracy of information and
truthfulness, respect and courtesy in the process)
Cognitive Moral Development

Kohlberg’s model consist of 6
stages:






Punishment and obedience
Individual instrumental purpose and
exchange
Mutual interpersonal expectations,
relationships, and conformity
Social system and conscience
maintenance
Prior rights, social contract or utility
Universal ethical principles
Kohlberg’s Model

Kohlberg’s 6 stages can be reduced to 3
different levels of ethical concern:



Concern with immediate interests and with
rewards and punishments
Concern with “right” as expected by the larger
society or some significant reference group
Seeing beyond norms, laws, and the authority of
groups or individuals