Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Pojman ethics 8e_ppt_ch08
Similar to Pojman ethics 8e_ppt_ch08 (20)
More from dborcoman
More from dborcoman (18)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Pojman ethics 8e_ppt_ch08
- 1. Ethics: Discovering Right and Wrong Louis P. Pojman and James Fieser 8th edition
- 2. Chapter Eight: Kant and Deontological Theories Revisit the millionaire’s dying request to donate $5 million to the Yankees and your temptation to donate it to a charity instead. The utilitarian would donate to the charity, which advances the greatest good for the greatest number. The deontological answer is to fulfill the dying request because truth telling and promise keeping are right even when they may cause harm and lying and promise breaking are wrong even when they have good consequences. © 2017 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved.
- 3. Deontological Theories Deontological theories say it is not the consequences that determine the rightness or wrongness of an act but certain features in the act itself or in the rule of which the act is a token or example. The end never justifies the means. Acting unjustly is wrong even if it will maximize expected utility. © 2017 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved.
- 4. Kant’s Influences Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) developed his moral theory against the backdrop of the seventeenth- and eighteenth-century debate between rationalism and empiricism. He was also influenced by the natural law intuitionist theories that dominated moral philosophy. © 2017 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved.
- 5. Rationalism Pure reason could tell us how the world is, independent of experience. Experience opens our minds to metaphysical ideas, such as God’s existence, but they are innate ideas. Rationalists include René Descartes, Baruch Spinoza, Gottfried Leibniz, and Christian Wolff. © 2017 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved.
- 6. Empiricism Empiricists denied that we have any innate ideas and argued that all knowledge comes from experience. Our minds are a tabula rasa, an empty slate, upon which experience writes her lessons. Empiricists include John Locke, David Hume, Francis Hutchinson, and Adam Smith. © 2017 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved.
- 7. Rationalism and Empiricism Debate about moral knowledge: Rationalists—Our knowledge of moral principles is a type of metaphysical knowledge, implanted in us by God, and discoverable by reason. Empiricists—Morality is founded entirely on the contingencies of human nature and based on desire. Kant—Morality is not contingent, but necessary, and it is grounded in our rational will, not desires. © 2017 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved.
- 8. Act- and Rule-Intuitionism Act-intuitionism—Each act is a unique ethical occasion. Decide what is right or wrong by consulting your conscience or intuitions or by making a choice apart from any rules. Rule-intuitionism—Acts are correlated with rules. Decide what is right or wrong by consulting moral rules received through intuition. © 2017 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved.
- 9. The Categorical Imperative(1 of 2) Actions are only morally valuable if done by a good will. Moral duties command categorically. The categorical imperative is a command to perform actions that are necessary in themselves, without reference to other ends. It contrasts with hypothetical imperatives, which command actions not for their own sake, but for some other good. © 2017 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved.
- 10. The Categorical Imperative(2 of 2) The categorical imperative procedure: Consider the underlying maxim of our proposed action. Consider whether the maxim could be universalized to apply to everyone. Accept the successfully universalized maxim or reject the unsuccessful maxim. © 2017 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved.
- 11. Three Formulations of the Categorical Imperative 1. The principle of the law of nature: Act as though the maxim of your action were by your will to become a universal law of nature. 2. The principle of ends: So act as to treat humanity, whether in your own person or in that of any other, in every case as an end and never as merely a means. 3. The principle of autonomy: So act that your will can regard itself at the same time as making universal law through its maxims. All these formulations are tied together by the theme universalizability. © 2017 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved.
- 12. The Principle of the Law of Nature: Four Examples The heart of this formulation is a “contradiction.” Four examples that fail the universalizability criterion Making a lying promise Committing suicide Neglecting one’s talent Refraining from helping others © 2017 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved.
- 13. Counterexamples to the Principle of the Law of Nature Counterexample 1: Mandating trivial actions Counterexample 2: Endorsing cheating Counterexample 3: Prohibiting permissible actions Counterexample 4: Mandating genocide © 2017 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved.
- 14. The Principle of Ends Each person has dignity and worth, so he or she must never be exploited or manipulated. Problems with this principle: Kant sets a high value on rationality. People should be treated in exact proportion to their ability to reason. It doesn’t tell us what to do in situations where two or more moral duties conflict. © 2017 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved.
- 15. The Principle of Autonomy We do not need an external authority to determine the nature of the moral law. The opposite of autonomy is heteronomy. Milgram’s experiments illustrate problems with this principle: The average citizen acts less autonomously than we might expect. Did these experiments violate people’s autonomy by deceiving them? © 2017 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved.
- 16. The Problem of Exceptionless Rules Kant’s categorical imperative yields unqualified absolutes. It generates universal and exceptionless rules. It is your duty to obey commands, not to reason about the likely consequences. This absolutism seems counterintuitive. We may write qualifications to the universal principles, but this is infinite and time consuming. We can follow Ross’s prima facie duty approach. © 2017 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved.
- 17. Ross and Prima Facie Duties (1 of 2) Three components of Ross’s theory: His notion of “moral intuition” Our intuitive duties constitute a plural set that cannot be unified under a single overarching principle. Seven duties: Promise keeping, fidelity, gratitude for favors, beneficence, justice, self-improvement, and nonmaleficence Our intuitive duties are not absolute. © 2017 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved.
- 18. Ross and Prima Facie Duties (2 of 2) Prima facie duties: Prima facie is Latin for “at first glance.” The moral duties are tentatively binding on us until two duties conflict. Then, the weaker one disappears and the stronger one becomes an actual duty. © 2017 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved.
- 19. Kant and the Prima Facie Solution Many moral philosophers adopted Ross’s prima facie component to resolve dilemmas. It can transform Kant’s absolutism into a modest objectivist system. To resolve the conflict between two competing principles, Ross used moral intuitions, while Kant would use reason and possibly his principle of ends. © 2017 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved.
- 20. Conclusion: A Reconciliation Project Utilitarianism catches the spirit of morality’s purpose, but undercuts justice. Deontological systems emphasize the importance of rules and justice, but become rigid or lose focus on morality’s purposes. William Frankena’s “mixed deontological ethics” reconciles these two types of theories. The principle of beneficence The principle of justice © 2017 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved.