Ethical theories - Ethical relativism, Utilitarianism, Kantianism Flashcards
(43 cards)
Describe the ‘always right’ objection to Ethical Relativism
Implies that any individual’s or group’s beliefs must always be right, but there have been incorrect moral beliefs, so this must not be true.
Explain Kant’s conception of a Good will
Actions ought to be judged based on their intentions, not their outcomes; right acts are motivated by a desire to do one’s duty
What are the two objections to the humanity test?
- incompleteness
2. wrong answers (means only vs. significant harm)
Define utilitarianism
The right act in a situation is the one that promotes the greatest pleasure and the least pain, with everyone’s concerns given equal weight
Describe the Experience machine objection to hedonism.
“experience machine” - go in and have any experiences desired, indefinitely -> most pleasurable
Hedonism suggests this is the best life, but it is devoid of meaning, relationships, accomplishment, and is based on lies
Describe the wrong answers objection to the humanity test.
In cases where treating a rational being as a means only is the only way to prevent significant harm to a rational being, the test appears to give the wrong answer.
Describe the promises objection to consequentialism.
Suggests that promises ought to be broken if fulfillment would not produce the best results (e.g. donate money instead of paying for service)
Define an perfect duty.
A duty which must always be followed (Violations would fail the universal law test because of a contradiction in thought)
Define hedonism
The sole ultimate good is pleasure, and the sole ultimate bad is pain.
Ethical Relativism (define)
The idea that there is no objective truth in ethics; moral truths are entirely relative to the individual’s or group’s beliefs.
What are the two arguments for Cultural relativism?
- Cultural imperialism
2. Empirical verification of moral claims
Define deontology
The right action is doing one’s duty
Define a contradiction in willing (w.r.t. the Universal law version of the categorical imperative test)
If converted to a universal law, the law will contradict what the person will (later) want - law is conceivable, but wouldn’t want it to be a law
Describe the too demanding objection to equal consideration
Denies the importance of special relationships, and suggests that we ought to give away all surplus time & money, etc. -> impossible
Explain the empirical verification argument for cultural relativism, and describe two objections.
Moral claims cannot be empirically verified, and thus cannot be judged to be objectively true/false. They are more like tastes/preferences - need no justification.
- Not all objectively true statements are empirically verifiable
- They are different from preferences in that they require rational justification (-> objective)
What are the two objections to Cultural Relativism?
- everyone always right
2. everyone equally right
Describe the incompleteness objection to the humanity test
Does not explain our moral duties to animals or non-rational humans
Define a categorical imperative
A rule which ought to be followed regardless of one’s goals, preferences, desires, etc.
Describe the objections to rule utilitarianism
- The best rule is to follow the rule unless the best results are obtained by ignoring it
- If this is considered too flexible to be a rule, why should we follow rules that do not produce the best results (rule worship)
Define consequentialism
The right act is determined entirely by its consequences
What are the two Kantian tests of categorical imperatives?
Universal Law
Humanity
Describe a contradiction in thought (w.r.t. the Universal law version of the categorical imperative test)
If practiced by everyone, all the time, the practice would be self-defeating or self-contradictory
Explain the response to the justice objection to consequentialism
The counter-examples given are unrealistic, so our intuitive principles (developed for realistic situations) cannot be expected to give sensible results
How does Utilitarianism challenge traditional moral values?
Makes counter-intuitive suggestions:
- euthanasia morally permissible even if illegal, provided it gives best outcomes
- promises should be broken if better outcome
- children ought to be adopted rather than biological
- organ donation should be required/opt-out
