Intrinsic Value and the Good Life
Moral Good versus the nonmoral good
What is the position of the good life
(nonmoral sense) , i.e., intrinsic value and
morality?
Nonmoral Values
Utility values - good because of usefulness.
Extrinsic values - good because are a means
to the good.
Inherent values - good because of
contemplating them.
Intrinsic values - good because of own
intrinsic properties.
Nonmoral values continued.
Contributory values - good because they
contribute to the good life or parts of it.
Final Values - the final standard, the
complete criteria for judging.
What is the criteria to decide?
Pleasure is good, the true goal of life is a
pleasurable life - what one should aim at...
Hedonistic theory of nonmoral value..a
theory about the good, not the right.
Hedonism
Pleasure is a term which refers to two
distinct but related views. One a thesis in
normative ethics, the other a generalization
about human psychology.
Frankena...mixed deontology
and hedonism
1. The good life is or should be a minister.
2. The good life is minister to self and
others.
The pursuit is not just the good life, or good
things, but to act justly, honestly, temperately,
and benevolently.
Virtue is its own reward.
Meaning and Justification
Frankena, Chapter 6 and other
thoughts and writers...
Metaethics..
Moral philosophy, at best what ought to be.
Past moral philosophers - gave guidance on
what to do, what to seek, and how to treat
others. Plato, Aristotle, Epicurus, Hobbes,
Spinoza and so forth tried to act as parish
priests.
Early Metaethicists
Give guidance
Task:
set forth systematic first principles and show
how it is possible to justify them.
Practical..how to live and how one ought to
live.
Goal…to actually become good.
Contemporary metaethicists
Study of words and concepts
Object is not practice but
knowledge…knowledge of the meaning of
moral concepts.
Analyze and discuss the meaning of fuction
of moral statements.
Metaethics
Philosophical Analysis
clarification and understanding
Important aka Frankena
any reflective person should have understanding of
the meaning and justification of one’s ethical
jugements, especially considering this age.
Metaethics...
What is the meaning or definition of ethical
terms or concepts like “right,”
“wrong”, “good” or “bad”?
What is the nature, meaning or function of
judgments in relation to these or similar
concepts?
What are the rules for the use of such terms and
sentences?
Metaethics..
2. How are moral uses of such terms to be
distinguished from nonmoral ones, moral
judgments from other normative ones?
What is the meaning of “moral” as contrasted
with “nonmoral”
Metaethics….
3. What is the analysis or meaning of
related terms or concepts like “action”
“conscience”, “free will” “intention”
“promising” “excusing”, “motive”
“responsibility”, “reason”, “voluntary”?
Metaethics...
4. Can ethical and value judgments be
proved, justified, or shown to be valid?
If so, how and in what sense?
What is the logic of moral reasoning and of
reasoning about value?
Metaethics in everyday life.
Legal
Moral
Professional
Legal
Guiding ethical behavior. Standards that are
stringently and strictly applied in all
situations and for all people.
Specific penalities or consequences for
actions which go against the rules.
The rules are clear about what is acceptable
and what is not. Either the referee or cop
monitors our behavior.
Moral/Social Acceptability.
Not as tight as legal, but provide society
with a relatively firm set of rules for right
and wrong.
What may be acceptable in LA may not be
acceptable in Moscow, ID.
the acceptable standards vary among
subcultures but usually have their own
standards.
Professional
Most professional associations have some
set of standards and guidelines for the
conduct of members.
May be legalistic and strictly imposed or be
loosely defined.
Standards reflect the values and beliefs of
that group.
Metaethical View of Teaching
Moral Thinking..
Lawrence Kohlberg
Piaget
Lickona
Components of Good Character
Moral Knowing
Moral Valuing
– Moral Awareness
– Knowing moral
values
– Perspective-taking
– Moral Reasoning
– Decision Making
– Self Knowledge
–
–
–
–
–
–
Moral Doing
- Competence
- Will
- Habit
Conscience
Self-esteem
Empathy
Loving the good
Self-Control
Humility
T. Lickona, 1990
A Schematic of the process of Character Development from learning to doing .....i
Learning
Past & Present Experiences.... Family, Friends, Teachers... Moral Instruction, moral reasoning...
Environment
Modeling
Informal Learning
Cognitive Dissonance
Formal Instruction
Moral Education
The Triad of Character Development*
Valuing
Copyright 1994, Sharon Kay Stoll, Ph.D.
Center for ETHICS*
Knowing
Doing
*See, T. Lickona, Educating for Character
The Process of Developing Character through....
Cognitive Dissonance
Formal Reasoning Process
–
–
–
–
–
A Strong Philosophic Base
Moral Reasoning Process
Supported by Moral Development Theory
Focused Toward A Content Area
Proved, Pedagogical Skills
– Instructor Education Program
» Teaching methodology
» Total curriculum
» Assessment
» Specific classes
Copyright 1994, Sharon Kay Stoll, Ph.D.
Center for ETHICS*
Cognitive MD based on:
What is considered right and fair?
What are the reasons for doing the
right?
What are the underlying social-moral
perspectives?
Cognitive Developmentalists
Piaget, Kohlberg, Lickona...
Piaget’s Theory
Stage
Perspective
Heteronomous: Morality of
Constraint/Coercive Rules
Universal obedience to authority
& established rules; right &
wrong seen as black & white
Autonomous: Morality of
Cooperation Rational Rules
Individual deelops amore
subjective sense of autonomy &
reciprocity; Right & wrong not
absolute; respect & cooperation
with peers
Kohlberg’s Stage Theory
Level 1 = Preconventional
Level 2 = Conventional
Level 3 = Postconventional
Preconventional Level
S ta g e
W h a t is
R ig h t
R ea so n s fo r
d o in g r ig h t
S o c ia l
P e r s p e c t iv e
O ne
P u n is h m e n t/o b e A v o id a n c e
d ie n c e
P u n is h m e n t
E g o c e n tr ic
V ie w
Two
F o llo w ru le s
T o s e rv e o w n
fo r o w n
needs
in te r e s ts a n d le t
o th e r s d o th e
sam e
C o n c re te
In d iv id u a lis tic :
R ig h t is re la tiv e
Conventional Level
S ta g e
W h a t is
R ig h t?
R e a so n s fo r
D o in g R ig h t
S o c ia l
P e r s p e c tiv e
S ta g e T h re e
G ood B oy N ic e G irl
R e a c ts to
e x p e c ta io n s o f
p a re n ts , p e e rs ,
a u th o ritie s
S ta g e F o u r
S o c ia l S y s te m
and
c o n s c io u s m a in te n a n c e
D u ty to s o c ia l
O rd e r, s o c ie ty
T h e G o ld e n
R u le (n o
g e n e ra liz e d
s y s te m
p e rs p e c tiv e ).
R espect
a u th o rity ,
fo llo w ru le s ,
m a in ta in
s o c ia l o rd e r.
C o n s id e rs
in d iv id u a ls
p la c e in th e
s y s te m .
Post Conventional or Principled
Level
Stage
What is Right
Five
Contract &
Personal Values
Individual Rights & Opinions with
a view for
constitutional &
democratic
processes
Universal Ethical Based on
Principles
consistent,
universal ethical
principles
Six
Reasons for
Doing Right
Social
Perspective
Obey laws for
good of society;
preserve the
rights of one’s
self & others
Individuals
accept principles
as their own
Relativism…the constant ????
Frankena’s descriptive, metaethical and
normative…
usually thought of in two senses.
ethical relativism
cultural relativism
Ethical relativsm
Because ethics is indefinable by its very
nature, and because definitions lie in word
usage, we really cannot understand the
essence of the “moral” life. Because it can
not be understood, therefore attempting to
develop guidelines is senseless and
illogical.
Cultural relativism
…each and every culture has a different set
of demands and expectations of its moral
community life. Because of such diversity,
no standard set of guidelines or rules are
possible. To develop such rules would
violate the essence of the diverse world.
Frankena’s summation...
The Moral Point of View, pp. 113.
1. One is making normative judgments about
actions, desires, disposition, intentions,
motives, persons, or traits of character. (Chapter
one and two)
2. One is wiling to universalize one’s
judgments. (Chapter three)
Moral Point…
3. one’s reasons for one’s judgments consist of
facts about what the things judged do to the
lives of sentient beings in terms of promoting
or distributing non-moral good or evil.
(Chapters 3 and 4)
4. when the judgment is about oneself or one’s
own actions, one’s reasons include such facts
about what one’s own actions and dispositions
do to the lives of other sentient beings.
(Chapters 4 and 5).
Why be moral?
1. What are the motives for doing what is
morally right?
2. What is the justification for doing what
is morally right?
3. What is the motivation for adopting the
moral point of view and subscribing to the
moral institution of live?
4. What is its justification?