1 / 7

How Actions Can Be Morally Evaluated

How Actions Can Be Morally Evaluated. Teleological Ethics. Teleological Ethics: morality is the means to achieve what is identified as good or valuable Deontological Ethics: the good or valuable is doing our duty (the morally right, obligatory)

edena
Download Presentation

How Actions Can Be Morally Evaluated

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. How Actions Can Be Morally Evaluated Teleological Ethics • Teleological Ethics: morality is the means to achieve what is identified as good or valuable • Deontological Ethics: the good or valuable is doing our duty (the morally right, obligatory) • Divine Command $Natural Law $Kant $Buddhism Motive/Intention (Character) ACT Consequences Deontological Ethics

  2. Divine Command Theory The good is whatever God commands (as identified in the Scriptures) because it is God’s command Objections: • What God wills can be arbitrary • Scriptures conflict and need interpretation • The theory does not appeal to non-believers & lacks rationalpersuasiveness (circular)

  3. Natural Law Theory Thomas Aquinas Epictetus • Natural Law: we should follow reason and our God-instilled inclinations (Stoics, Aquinas) • Objections: inclinations sometimes conflict • Reply: principle of double effect: our intention should always be to do the good • Counter-replies: $natural is not always good $people differ on what is natural $even double effects are intended

  4. Kant’s Ethics (Formalism) • The essential feature of morality is obligation; you are obligated only if everyone else is too; the form of moral obligation is its universality • Moral obligation does not vary from person to person. It is not a hypothetical imperative (ifyou want Y, you ought to do X); rather, the imperative is categorical (you must do X) • Your intention must be to do your duty, to act for the sake of doing your duty

  5. Kant: Objections to Consequentialism, Divine Command & Natural Law Theories • If we are naturally oriented to seek happiness, we are not free and thus cannot be morally obligated to seek happiness: ought implies can • Because opinions differ about what happiness is, we could never agree on moral principles • Consequences are often out of our control, so we cannot be held responsible for our actions • We can hold ourselves responsible only if the moral law is self-imposed (“autonomous”)

  6. Kant: The Categorical Imperative • Always act only on maxims (rules) that you could will everyone universally to adopt • Two tests for universalizability: • Consistency: a maxim must be universalizable without contradiction • Acceptability: a universalized maxim must be acceptable Objection: moral rules often conflict

  7. Kant’s Categorical Imperative (continued) • Because human beings can act rationally, they can act for the sake of doing their duty; that is, they can act on the basis of a “good will” • Rational beings are capable of self-obligating behavior; we should therefore treat others as ends-in-themselves, freely consenting agents Objection: humans are not simply rational

More Related