Transcript Introduction - Watford Grammar School for Boys Intranet

P
E
R
I
O
D
I
C
Litmus Test
T
A
B
L
E
Deontological
Consequential
Approaches to Ethics
DEONTOLOGICAL
Intrinsic goods
(Nature of the act)
Absolute
Universal
NATURAL LAW
KANT
CONSEQUENTIAL
Instrumental goods
(Result of the act)
Relative
Particular
SITUATION ETHICS
UTILITARIANISM
©
D
I
V
I
N
E
C
O
M
M
A
N
D
N
A
T
U
R
A
L
T
H
E
G
O
O
D
L
A
W
DEONTOLOGIAL
V
I
R
T
U
E
E
T
H
I
C
S
P
R
O
P
O
R
T
I
O
N
A
L
I
S
M
C
O
N
S
C
I
E
N
C
E
S
I
T
U
A
T
I
O
N
I
S
T
U
T
I
L
I
T
A
R
I
A
N
E
X
I
S
T
E
N
T
I
A
L
CONSEQUENTIAL
©
So
Ab Ci
Pa Hu Ki
Mos Aq
Ti
Be Do
Er
Gr
Pl Ar Mc Mo Le Mi Ni
Lu
Lo Ka An Cu Bu Ro Ge Sa
Ca PVI Ros Ma Ho Ne
Fl
Si deB
Ba JPII Su
DEONTOLOGIAL
CONSEQUENTIAL
©
Click on any philosopher for
more information
DEONTOLOGIAL
CONSEQUENTIAL
Socrates (470-399 BCE)
Socrates changed the entire philosophical approach from
being one of scientific enquiry about the physical world to
focusing on ethics, the individual and self-knowledge.
Socrates went around the market streets
talking to the youths of Athens. The focus
of his message being that “The unexamined
life is not worth living.”
His method of bringing people to truth
was that of dialogue: Socratic questioning.
Socrates saw himself as a mid-wife; only
his questions were important in helping
people to think more deeply about life.
Socrates (470-399 BCE)
Socrates did not wish for people to
become his disciples, but rather to
think through issues for themselves;
in the pursuit of truth,
“Let him who would move the
world, first move himself.”
“If you will take my advice,
you will think little of Socrates
and a great deal more of truth.”
(Socrates)
Socrates’ Philosophy
1. When the Oracle at Delphi said “There is none wiser
than Socrates” Socrates replied “I know nothing
except the fact of my ignorance.”
2. In the Apology Socrates says the highest good is to take
care of your soul. Avoid materialism, deceit, pride.
One should pursue wisdom, truth and virtue.
3. Socrates saw himself as a gadfly who was sent by the gods
to sting the people of Athens into thought and action.
4. Virtue is knowledge. People do wrong out of
ignorance. “No one does evil voluntarily… The
unexamined life is not worth living.” (Socrates)
The Trial
of Socrates
Charges Against Socrates
• Impiety against
the gods (refusing
to worship the
Greek gods)
• Corrupting the
youth of Athens
(he encouraged
people to question)
However, in truth the charges were brought
against Socrates as he had conspired to bring
about a counter-revolution against the
Athenian democracy during the Peloponnesian
war. Even though the war was over, 4004 BCE,
the government still exerted pressure on
Socrates to leave Athens quietly.
The Death of Socrates
The jury at the trial were prejudiced, having been influenced
by Aristophanes’ caricature of Socrates. At the final verdict
360 of the 500 jurors found Socrates guilty as charged.
There was limited time for defendants to offer evidence
on behalf of Socrates – 1 minute was the time it took for
the judicial water cups to become full of water.
After Socrates was found guilty every opportunity was
given for him to pay a nominal fine or to leave Athens.
However, Socrates refused – accepted the legal
judgement of Athens; thinking it better to accept `justice`
than to damage one’s soul for eternity!
With his friends weeping by his side in prison Socrates
drank the apportioned cup of Hemlock and died.
Divine Command Theory
Abraham – The Father of Judaism
Moses – The Decalogue
Erasmus (1466-1536)
Martin Luther (1483-1546)
John Calvin (1509-1564)
Karl Barth (1886-1968)
Abraham – The Father of Judaism
Abraham is the Father of Judaism as he demonstrated
exemplary faith and trust in God; proving his worth.
Kierkegaard has called Abraham a `Knight of
Faith’ as he was prepared to follow the
commands of God and offer his only son,
Isaac, as a sacrifice to God.
Having been promised by God that he
would be the founder of Judaism
Abraham was still willing to offer
Isaac as a sacrifice, even though this
would mean the end of any promised
patriarchal genealogy.
Abraham – Whatever God Wills is Good
Abraham maintained his faith in God’s promise;
believing that whatever God wills is good.
Finally, seeing that Abraham was obedient to
God’s will, God intervened. Isaac was not
sacrificed and Abraham was duly appointed
the founder of Judaism, (cf. Genesis 22:12)
Kierkegaard termed Abraham’s act of faith
as `the teleological suspension of the
ethical’. Meaning, that as Abraham
believed there was an end purpose in
God’s command he was prepared to
show trust and faith and so suspend
his usual moral judgement.
Moses – The Decalogue (10 Commandments)
While tending his father-in-law’s flock Moses encountered a
burning bush that was not consumed by the fire. God
instructed Moses to return to Egypt and set free
the Israelites from Pharaoh’s rule.
Although naturally shy Moses followed
God’s command and eventually, following
the ten plagues that befell the Egyptians,
sent by God, Moses led the Israelites out
of slavery – crossing the Red Sea.
During their time in the wilderness Moses
received the decalogue from God on
Mount Sinai. A moral code by which to
live their lives under God’s theocracy.
Moses – The Decalogue (10 Commandments)
The Decalogue
Fundamentalist
Liberal
A construction
The decalogue is
of ethical
regarded as
immutable truths guidelines compiled
by a nomadic
from God as to
tribe to meet
how God’s
their specific
chosen people
requirements for
are to live their
living in community
lives.
Erasmus (1466-1536)
Christian Humanist
Challenged
scholasticism,
which he
thought
hindered
spiritual growth.
Believed in the
importance of the
Bible. In 1516 he
published the first
edition of the New
Testament in Greek.
“I wish that all communication
of the Christian would be of the
Scriptures.” (Erasmus)
Martin Luther (1483-1546)
Luther opposed the selling of indulgences
by the Catholic Church, “the pious
defrauding of the faithful.”
As a consequence Luther challenged the
Pope’s authority. Central to Luther’s
argument was the authority of scripture.
For Luther the Bible has divine authority
and so is the ultimate authority. Equally,
it should be made available to all
Christians so that they can read it
for themselves.
Luther’s Ninety-Five Theses
(Pinned to Wittenberg Castle Door, 1517)
Sola Scriptura
The Bible, not
the Pope, is the
final authority
for Christians.
Sola Fide
Salvation is
by faith
alone, not by
good works.
All Christians are
equal and have a
common status.
Clergy do not have
higher status.
Reformation
Challenge to Papal Authority
Catalyst: Selling of Indulgences
John Calvin (1509-1564)
Calvin adopted a strict approach to Christianity based not
upon ritual (as found in the Catholic Church) but upon the
supremacy of scripture.
Calvin shared Augustine’s
view in predestination. As
good works are futile it is
the sovereign will of God
which is responsible for
deciding who will go to
heaven.
Augustine
John Calvin
Karl Barth (1886-1968)
Karl Barth’s Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (2nd
edition) “landed like a bombshell in the playground of the
theologians.”
The early Barth, influenced by the writings
of Kierkegaard, was disillusioned with the
liberalism of the nineteenth century and
urged people to remember the qualitative
difference between God and man.
Kierkegaard
Central to Barth was the need
to let God be God. (“You
don’t say God by saying man
in a loud voice.” Barth)
Karl Barth (1886-1968)
Barth’s Theology is a Theology of the Word of God.
Barth saw himself in the reformist tradition of
John Calvin, calling for a return to scripture.
However, there is a crucial difference, as
Barth did not regard the Bible as a static
collection of doctrines and creeds but as
an event, creative and dynamic.
God’s revealed word is the event of God
speaking to man and revealing himself
through Jesus Christ.
Whilst the written word is prone to human
error it becomes God’s word when God
chooses to speak through it.
Karl Barth (1886-1968)
For Barth Theology is based on God’s word alone.
Barth completely rejected Natural Theology as a source of
authority and a way to God.
Revelation through scripture,
and the event of
the incarnation is
essential to
understanding
God’s intended
purpose for
human
beings.
Aquinas
Natural Law
Cicero (106-43 BCE)
Thomas Aquinas (1225-75 CE)
Hugo Grotius (1583-1645 CE)
John Locke (1632-1704 CE)
Pope Paul VI (1904-78 CE)
Pope John Paul II (1934 - )
Cicero (106-43 BC)
Works: On Laws, On Duty, De Republica
• `The law will not lay down one rule in Rome and
another in Athens… There will be one law
eternal and unchangeable, binding at all times
upon all peoples.’ (De Republica 3:22)
• Cicero asserted that as all human beings are
rational, societies should be formed on the basis
of individuals exercising their freedom and
rights. Equally people should recognise their
b…natural responsibilities and duties to their
B……fellow human beings – as all share in the
……. spark of reason.
Thomas Aquinas (1225-75 CE)
• Following the crusades many of Aristotle’s
. works were translated into Latin.
• Aristotle deeply influenced Aquinas’
.views and Aquinas sought to bring together
Aristotle’s ideas with Christian teaching.
•
Aquinas argued that whilst all people
….. have access to natural law, due to
…… their rational abilities, nevertheless
….
it was God who was the author of
B…… natural law as God created the
….…. world and human beings imago dei.
Thomas Aquinas
(13th Century)
Developed Aristotles’
ideas
As God created world ,
ex nihilo, God is the author
of natural world
Inherent divine design in
nature may be discovered
through human reason.
Essentialist Foundation
Essence prior to existence
Imago dei (ideal plan for human
beings) exists within the
divine mind before creation
• Natural law is objective,
foundational & absolute
• Good: fulfil one’s essence
• Evil: privation of goodness
Falling short / missing the mark
Essence Precedes Existence
Christians believe that before the world and human beings
were created, ex nihilo, by God, there existed within the
divine mind an idea, or essence, of what it is to be fully
human.
Humans realise the `image and likeness of God’ when they
fulfil this essence by living a life according to God’s plan
which may be understood by:
(1) Reason reflecting on nature
(2) Being guided by the Bible (revealed word of God)
Sin is understood as a `falling short’ of this idea, or essence,
through the misuse of free will.
Thomas Aquinas’
Five Primary
Principles
•
•
•
•
To live
To learn
To reproduce
To live in an ordered
society
• To worship God
Thomas Aquinas
Aquinas believed that for human beings:
Life is the Supreme good – as it is the basis for all
other goods.
Education makes it possible for people to become
independent and fully adult.
Reproduction would ensure the continuation of the
human race.
Law and order would ensure that justice is upheld and
that individuals are able to interact without fear of
oppression.
Worshipping God, the creator and sustainer of the
world and humanity, offers fulfilment and love.
Order of Nature
Order of Reason
Order of Nature
Order of Reason
Aquinas
1. God is the author of nature
2. Reason comes from humanity
THEREFORE
3. Natural law should take priority
Nature Is Superior To Reason
Aquinas maintained that as nature is created by God,
ex nihilo, it has an inherent design which reflects the
will, purpose and goodness of the divine creator.
Therefore in the medieval period the natural order of
the world had greater status than human reason – as
God’s design is superior to human reason.
Furthermore, it was thought that a consequence of the
Fall was the corruption of human reason.
Hugo Grotius (1583-1645 CE)
Works: On the Law of War and Peace
Grotius was a humanist who pioneered
the ideas of `natural morality’ and the
social contract theory of the State.
• Natural law is independent of religion
and defines things as good or bad by
their own nature, through reason.
• Grotius was responsible for natural law
.. being applied internationally to states
… as a universal basis for a `just war’
b….tradition of ethics.
John Locke ((1632-1704 CE)
Two Treatises of Government
• According to Locke human beings have
inalienable rights as they are created by
God and have reason and conscience to
guide them in knowing right from wrong.
• The duty of the state is to protect the
natural rights of individual liberty and
private property.
• Locke challenged the idea that a
monarchy could dictate laws to citizens.
Citizens have the natural right to form
social contracts for themselves and
should not have laws imposed upon
them.
Pope Paul VI (1904-78 CE)
Humanae Vitae (Human Life) 1968
• Pope Paul VI condemned acts such as
abortion and the use of artificial
contraception as being intrinsically evil
as they are opposed to the teaching of
natural law.
• “…the direct interruption of the
generative process already begun, even
if used for therapeutic reasons, is to be
absolutely excluded as licit means of
procreation.” (Humanae Vitae)
Pope John Paul II (1934 - )
Veritatis Splendor (Splendid Truth)1993
Evangelium Vitae (Gospel of Life) 1995
John Paul II has repeatedly rejected a
“culture of death” that has permeated the
Western world with its emphasis on the
quality of life, individual autonomy and
campaigns to legalise abortion and
euthanasia.
Pope John Paul II has maintained an approach
of intrinsic goods and evils based on the
objective, universal and unchanging principles
of natural law.
The Good - Realists
Plato (420 – 347 BCE)
Immanuel Kant (1724-1804 CE)
Sir William David Ross (1927-71 CE)
Sir Lord Professor Sutherland (1934 - )
Plato (420 – 347 BCE)
• Pupil of Socrates.
• A Dualist: Plato believed in the
distinction between spirit and body.
• Two world orders:
• (1) Intelligible realm: timeless and
spaceless Platonic Forms, accessible
only by intelligence and reason
• (2) Sensible realm: the material,
tangible world of appearance
accessible through the senses.
Intelligible Realm: Timeless and Spaceless
Perfect Platonic Forms
TRUTH
GOOD
BEAUTY JUSTICE
Pre-existent formless matter
Sensible realm: existing in time and space
Plato’s demi-urge
(Lesser God) uses
the Perfect Forms
to mould, form and
shape the
pre-existent formless
matter, like a potter
using ideas to shape
and form clay at a
potter’s wheel.
The result is a
formed world,
existing in time and
space which
imperfectly reflects
the Perfect Platonic
forms
Intelligible Realm: Timeless and Spaceless, Perfect Platonic Forms which
being timeless are immutable (unchanging) and are not subject to decay
TRUTH
GOOD
BEAUTY JUSTICE
The Sensible realm:
1. Imperfectly reflect the Perfect Platonic Forms
2. The world of appearance exists in time and space, is subject
to change and decay, and so can never be perfect.
3. The sensible real of visible and tangible appearance can be
apprehended by opinion.
In contrast the intelligible realm can be
apprehended only by reason and intelligence.
Plato’s Two World Order
• Intelligible Realm
• Essential Ideas
• Timeless and Spaceless
• Perfect Platonic Forms
e.g. Truth, Beauty, Justice
• Immutable (unchanging)
• Apprehended only by
intelligence and reason.
•
•
•
•
Sensible Realm
World of appearances
Exists in time and space
forms imperfectly reflect the
Perfect Platonic Forms
• Changing – subject to time
and decay
• Known through visible and
tangible appearance,
apprehended by opinion.
Implications of Plato’s Cosmology
TRUTH
GOOD
BEAUTY JUSTICE
1. People should be critical of the sensible realm – as appearance
may distort what is real. Reasoned analysis is important.
2. Plato rejected relativism – as he believed there is an
objective foundation for morality: the Perfect Platonic
Forms which are discoverable, like the truths of mathematics.
3. As the intelligible realm may be apprehended only by
intelligence and reason moral truth will only be accessible to
an elite, highly intelligent and skilled few. Such thinking
influenced Plato’s political thought – advocating a monarchy
or oligarchy.
The Dawn of the Enlightenment
“Enlightenment is man’s emergence
from self-imposed immaturity.
Immaturity is the inability to use
one’s understanding without guidance
from another. This immaturity is selfimposed when its cause lies not in
lack of understanding, but in lack of
resolve and courage to use it without
guidance from another. Sapere Aude!
(Dare to Know) Have courage to use
your own understanding! That is the
motto of enlightenment.”
Kant, What is Enlightenment (1784)
Kant’s view of Human Nature
Kant’s understanding of human nature is best appreciated
within the context of:
Animals
Desires
Inclinations
Animals follow their desires
and inclinations only. They
have no reason, so behave in
accordance to the empirical
realm of cause and effect,
led by their appetite
and instincts.
Phenomenal Realm
Human Beings
God / Angels
Reason
Desires & Reason
Human nature experiences
the tension of desires
and inclinations
(their animal self)
versus the voice of
reason
(their God-like self)
God and angels are
perfectly rational beings,
without appetites and desires
to lead them astray from
following reason and
objective moral laws.
Phenomenal and Noumenal Realm
Noumenal Realm
Noumenal Realm
•Intelligible world
Kant’s view
•Inaccessible world of things in themselves of human
nature
•Constant and unchanging
(sharing the
`animal self’
of desires /
Kant worked within a Platonic
appetites and
tradition, and, like Plato,
an `angelic
believed in two Realms of
human existence: the
self’ of
intelligible World, the
reason)
Noumena; and the sensible
means that
Real, the phenomena.
humans have
access to both
the noumenal
and
Phenomenal Realm
phenomenal
•Sensible world
realm.
•The world as it appears to us
•Changing and transient
Noumenal Realm
Reason
Intellect
Senses
Inclinations
Phenomenal Realm
Autonomy (Self deciding)
Versus
Heteronomy (Different laws imposed upon you)
Kant believed that morally human beings are autonomous
Autonomy
Heteronomy
The individual decides
their own moral laws
People have laws
imposed upon them by others
e.g. the church, the state, one’s family
A priori (before experience)
A posteriori (after experience)
Reason
Desires / Inclinations
Freedom of the will
Noumenal realm
Governed by laws of nature
Phenomenal realm
Categorical Imperative
Hypothetical Imperative
“The GOOD WILL
shines forth like a
precious jewel”
(Kant)
Sole intrinsic good
No need of qualification
Autonomy
Freedom of will
Based on Reason
(not empiricism)
Motive of duty
“Duty for duty’s sake”
The Good Will chooses to
follow the moral law BECAUSE IT
IS THE MORAL LAW.
The Categorical Imperative
Versus
The Hypothetical Imperative
Kant believed that the Good Will follows the Categorical Imperative
Categorical Imperative
Hypothetical Imperative
An unconditional command
A conditional command
Willed as an end in itself
“Do `x’ for the sake of `x’”
Intrinsic goods
Willed as a means to an end
“Do `x’ if you wish to achieve `y’”
Instrumental goods
A priori, through reason
A posteriori, desires / inclinations
Universal
Absolute
Relative
Dependent / Contingent
Deontological
‘Duty for duty’s sake’
Consequential
‘The end justifies the means’
Kant’s Categorical Imperatives
(1) Act only on that maxim through which
you can at the same time will that it
should become a universal law.
(2) Treat other human beings as an end in
their own right, never as a means to an
end.
(3) Act as though you are a member of a
law making kingdom of ends.
Categorical Imperatives
(1) Act only on that maxim through which
you can at the same time will that it
should become a universal law.
•
This ensures that moral judgements are
impartial and objective and so avoids the
dangers of appealing to self-interest
•
Reason maintains that the moral law be
applied universally; to admit of
exceptions to the rule would be
inconsistent and therefore illogical.
Categorical Imperatives
•
(2) Treat other human beings as an
end in their own right, never as a
means to an end.
•
People should be treated with respect
and dignity as all human beings are
rational beings and therefore are
worthy of the respect of the moral law.
•
Kant deliberately asserts a moral law
that upholds equality and does not
treat people differently according to
class, wealth or race. Such an ethic of
equality was forward looking in the
eighteenth century.
Categorical Imperatives
•
(3) Act as though you are a member
of a law making kingdom of ends
•
Kant regarded the moral community
as a kingdom of people who should
apply moral maxims in such a way
that showed respect for others (based
on their rationality) and, in line with
reason, moral maxims should be
universal in application – thus
maintaining the justice of
impartiality.
Kant’s Moral Problem
R
A
T
I
O
N
A
L
Univers
e
Virtuous people
are happy
Wicked people
suffer
But in the world
I
R
R
A
T
I
O
N
A
L
Some virtuous
people suffer
Some wicked
people prosper
The Moral Law may be understood
a priori by reason, and requires us to
achieve the highest good
(Summum
Bonum)
Consequently
some
virtuous
people
suffer
Dietriech Bonhoeffer
But in the phenomenal world, of morally free
human beings, desires and inclinations tempt
people away from acting rationally
Therefore to maintain a belief
in a rational universe where
the highest good is achieved
Kant
postulates
1. The Existence of God
2. The immortality of the soul
3. Human beings have free will
are postulates of pure practical reason
Consequently
some
wicked
people
prosper
Machiavelli
Ross’s Prima Facie Duties
An antidote to Kant’s absolute and universal approach
Ross asserted that we have
Prima Facie duties “at first glance”
which we recognise intuitively
through reason
Prima facie duties are
Prima facie duties are
therefore more flexible than
conditional duties
Kant’s rigid, absolute and
and ought be followed,
universal moral maxims as
and so become actual duties,
they may change according
unless circumstances mean
to the particular contexts
that there is an over-riding
and likely consequences.
reason not to follow them
e.g. I ought not to lie, unless
W.D. Ross
lying might mean saving
Intuitionist
an innocent life.
So Ross, like Kant, believed that
morality is objective.
But, unlike Kant, Ross did not believe that
morality was absolute and universal.
W.D Ross: Prima Facie Duties
Prima Facie duties “at first glance” which the mature
person recognises intuitively through reason
What should one do when intuitions conflict? For example:
Do you lie to a gunman to protect the intended innocent victim?
Protect innocent
life.
Do not lie
W.D. Ross
Prima Facie Duties are conditional,
not absolute, and may change
depending on the situation.
W.D. Ross was an intuitionist who argued that the
person intuitively knows what is good.
mature
Morals, like the principles of mathematics, are self-evident.
Morality is objective, but morals are conditional – whether
they should be followed depends on which is one’s over-riding
duty in the particular situation.
W.D. Ross takes a deontological, not consequential approach,
“Besides the duty of fulfilling promises I have and recognise
a duty of relieving distress, and that when I think it is right to
do the latter at the cost of the former, it is not because I think I
shall produce more good thereby but because I think it the duty
which is in the circumstances more of a duty.” (W.D. Ross)
W.D. Ross
Six Prima Facie Duties
•
•
•
•
•
•
(Duties one ought to follow, intuitively
in the absence of an over-riding duty) •Ross does not rank
Fidelity – faithful to promises made. these duties in order
of importance.
Gratitude – appreciation for support
•The mature person
offered.
intuitively knows
Justice – impartial, equal treatment of
these prima facie
duties are true and
others and distribution of pleasure
may
follow
the
Beneficience – help for others.
appropriate duty
Self-improvement – self fulfilment
given the demands
Non-malificence - avoid harming
of the particular
situation.
others.
Power of Counter-intuitive Arguments
As an intuitionist W.D. Ross rejected
utilitarianism on the grounds that it
ignores intrinsic goods that are counter,
or contrary, to our intuitive, innate, sense
of right and wrong.
Even if it could be shown that happiness
was greatest by lying to people there
is something simply wrong about
lying and deception which would
make people wish to reject such an ethic.
W.D. Ross
Stewart Sutherland (1934-)
Christian Platonist
Sutherland denies
that Jesus is the
Son of God, as
accepted by
Christianity.
Sutherland does
think Jesus, the man,
is important as Jesus
shows what it is to
live the good life.
Sutherland re-interprets `eternal
life` as not living after bodily
death but as a different ethical
quality of life here and now.
The Good Life – Sub Specie Aeternitatis
Sutherland is within a Platonic, Kantian
tradition as all are Realists, believing in a
correspondence theory of truth. The good life
relates to an objective, metaphysical good.
The good life is one which is lived sub specie aeternitatis,
“from the perspective of eternity.” It is not defined by cultural
or historical relativism, but universally recognised by reason.
Thomas More
The good life upholds intrinsic goods
and cannot be trivialised. Sutherland
offers the example of Thomas More,
who was imprisoned and executed for
standing by his principles.
Sutherland: “More Kantian than Kant?”
Sutherland believes that the good life stands alone in its
own right. It has intrinsic value.
There is no life after death.
This has led some to think that
Sutherland is “more Kantian than
Kant” as the good life shows that
virtue really is its own reward.
The good life is one which cannot be trivialised. What is good
is, and always will be, good; irrespective of culture or time.
For Sutherland the good life is `eternal life’ – not in terms of
personal survival after bodily death, but in terms of a different
quality of life, the good life, lived here and now.
“A religious belief that runs counter to our moral
beliefs is to that extent unacceptable.” (Sutherland)
Abraham believed
God wanted him
to sacrifice his
son Isaac.
Bin Laden
believes he is
following the
will of Allah
Sutherland argues that morality can
keep in check religious fanaticism.
If religious fundamentalists claim to
be following the will of God and yet
their actions are contrary to Western
morality then Sutherland believes
the religious commands should be
rejected.
Sutherland believes the statement, “God is good” is
synthetically true; meaning goodness is independent of
God. Therefore God’s actions must conform to the
standard of goodness if God’s actions are said to be good.
Virtue Ethics
Aristotle (384-322 BCE)
Elizabeth Anscombe (1919 - )
Alasdair MacIntyre (1938 - )
Aristotle (384-322 BC)
Nicomachean Ethics
“We are not concerned to know what
goodness is but how to become good
people, since otherwise our enquiry
would be useless.” Nicomachean
Ethics, II 1103b 27-9
“The good for human beings is an
activity of the soul in accordance with
arete (virtue).”
(Aristotle)
How To Achieve Eudaimonia
(Human Flourishing)
Aristotle defined `GOOD’ as something
that fulfils its ends purpose
The telos (end purpose) of humanity is to
be rational
The ergon (function) of reason in practice
is virtue
“The good for human beings is an activity of the
soul in accordance with arete (virtue).” (Ethics p. 76)
Aristotle’s
Four Cardinal Virtues
• Justice
• Prudence
• Temperance
• Fortitude
(Determination in
the face of adversity)
G
O
L
D
E
N
M
E
A
N
“Virtue is concerned with emotions and actions, and
here excess is error and deficiency a fault, whereas
the mean is successful and commendable.
Excess
Deficiency
Virtue then is a state of deliberate moral
purpose consisting in a mean that is relative to
ourselves, the mean being determined by reason,
or as a prudent man would determine it.” Ethics
Doctrine of the Golden Mean
Excess
Mean
Deficiency
Rash
Courage
Cowardice
Profligate
Generosity
Tight!
Over-indulge
Temperance
Unimpressionable
Being Rude
Honesty
Lying
The Golden Mean and Eudaimonia
• Golden Mean does not entail a denial of emotions.
• Rather what is at issue is how, and to what extent,
reason permits the expression of emotions.
• Aristotle developed Plato’s tripartheid teaching
of the soul by attributing virtues to each feature.
Reason = Phronesis
(Wisdom)
Eudaimonia (human
flourishing) is when there
is balance within the soul.
Emotions = Courage
Reason is the executive,
deciding when to act upon
emotions through a
balanced appetite.
Appetite = Temperance
(Self–control)
Phronesis is practical wisdom, acquired
through experience and past judgements.
P
H
R
People
are
able
to
understand
their
human
nature
O
and recognise tensions between emotions and
N
reason.
E
S
Phronesis is therefore the exercising of
I a mature will which enables a person to act
S
with wisdom and discernment.
Golden Mean
Individual in Harmony
Phronesis – Emotions - Appetite
“It is easy to become angry,
anyone can do that; but to
be angry with the right
person, to the right extent,
at the right time, in the right
way, with the right aim; that
is not easy.” (Ethics)
H
A
B
I
T
U
A
T
I
O
N
• Habits form our character
• Habits are a skill which are acquired
through practice, like learning a
musical instrument.
• Takes a holistic approach
(Character viewed over a period of time)
•
“One swallow does not make a spring
so a short time does not make for a
fortunate or happy man.”
(Nicomachean Ethics)
M
O
S
E
S
Elizabeth Anscombe rejects the Divine
Command Theory where God is understood
as the source of morality e.g. Decalogue
In 1958 Professor Elizabeth Anscombe,
commented “in a secular age modern moral
philosophy is misguided because it rests on
the notion of a `law’ without a lawgiver.”
To follow a moral law out of a sense of
obedience belittles the status and integrity
of human beings.
Virtue should be its own reward, irrespective
of the source of authority or the desirable /
undesirable consequences (heaven or hell).
Elizabeth Anscombe
President Truman
After World War II Oxford University proposed honouring
President Truman, (a former American President)
However, Elizabeth Anscombe spoke against
the proposal on the grounds that it would be
wrong to honour the person who was
responsible for dropping two nuclear
bombs on Japan.
Anscombe knew that by
speaking out she would
make herself unpopular,
but showed courage and
fortitude.
The Crisis of Modernity
MacIntyre considers that since
the Enlightenment ethics has
been too pre-occupied with
autonomy and reason.
This is a serious mistake as ethics
is grounded in communal living,
forms of life.
Virtues such as loyalty, trust,
friendship arise out of communal
living, and is it to this that ethics
should return…
Problems of Rule Based Ethics
Often founded
on a theistic
belief – which
lacks relevance
in a secular age.
Can ignore
the spiritual
dimension to
the human
character.
Focuses too much
on the issue of
autonomy at the
expense of
communal life.
“We need to attend to virtues in the first place
in order to understand the function and
authority of rules.” MacIntyre After Virtue
Proportionalism
Richard McCormick
Charles Curran
Bernard Hoose
Late 20th
century
P
R
O
P
O
R
T
I
O
N
A
L
I
S
M
Charles
Curran
Bernard
Hoose
Richard
McCormick
Arose in the mid-1960s in response to conservative
Roman Catholic teachings on morality e.g Humanae
Vitae and its views on artificial contraception.
Proportionalism wishes to work within the Natural
Law tradition, but rejects the static, unchanging and
absolute interpretation held by the Roman Catholic
church.
Proportionalism
As a general rule
follow the
teachings of
the Roman
Catholic church
and natural law
Richard
McCormick
So that a greater,
proportionate, good
is achieved.
Occasionally
the situation
will demand
performing
ontic evils
Ontic Evils
(non-moral or pre-moral evils)
Ontic Evils
Evil which is
not morally
wrong
(so called
pre-moral or
non-moral)
The
frustration or
negation of a
good
e.g. pain or
mutilation
Ontic evil: a
surgical operation
may be the right
thing to do, but still
produce mutilation
and pain.
Whilst it is not possible to
avoid ontic evils they should
be kept to a minimum.
Ontic Goods and Ontic Evils
(non-moral or pre-moral goods and evils)
Examples of
Ontic Goods
and
Ontic Evils
•Dignity values
•Institutional
obligations
•Integrity
•Justice
•Pain
•Mutilation
•Damage to
property
•Injustice
Ontic goods and ontic evils are to be taken
into consideration when assessing the
proportionate good or evil of a moral action
Richard McCormick
Proportionalism Recognises that
Natural Law is Changeable
Roman Catholic Church
Pius XI
Natural law
A Blue print of God’s instructions
on how we are to live.
Unchanging and Unchangeable
Preserved by the Guardians
of Truth – the Magisterium
Static Natural Law
Artificial contraception
is contrary to natural law,
frustrates natural goal.
Paul VI
Proportionalism
McCormick
God given creative intelligence
and free will are an important
part of human nature.
It is possible, and natural, to
intervene with nature for the
well being of humanity.
Dynamic Natural Law
Contraceptive pills may be
no more unnatural and
artificial than tranquillisers.
Curran
Natural Law
Too Biological and Dualistic
Charles Curran
• Charles Curran argues that Natural law places too much
emphasis on biological or physical processes in order to
arrive at a moral theology.
• Such an approach is dualistic and sharply distinguishes
body and soul.
• Confusion arises when it is assumed that it is possible to
discover the moral, natural law by observing human
biological structure.
• Rather a holistic approach is required which truly respects a
person’s rationality and ability to interact with the natural
world order.
Natural Law
Too Biological and Dualistic
Charles Curran
Charles Curran considers that there has been a vast change in
outlook between the medieval period and the present day.
He argues that “before modern times people knew they
could not control nature, and therefore they thought
principally of conforming to it. Reason then became
identified with the order of nature. By contrast we live
in a scientific and technological society. We know of the
endless process of change in the natural world. And we
know that human beings can in many ways intervene in
natural processes and shape the world for greater
human happiness.”
Theology of Compromise
Analysis / Evaluation / Implications / Analysis / Evaluation / Implication
Curran takes seriously the view that
Original Sin pervades the world
Sometimes the best we can hope to
achieve in a fallen world is a `theology
of compromise’
e.g. In an examination where everyone
is cheating one may have to
compromise and also cheat!
Charles Curran
Takes Seriously The View
That We Live In A Fallen World
Augustine’s teaching on Original Sin,
Fallen World, Lesser of two evils.
Charles Curran’s `Theology of
compromise’
Sometimes evil may be
performed so that a greater,
proportionate good is achieved
Augustine
Ontic evils are inevitable,
but should be kept to a
minimum.
Curran
Proportionalism and
Natural Law
Proportionalism recognises the importance of reflecting on
our nature to reveal to us general moral principles as a
foundation for living. e.g. do not lie, do not steal.
However, Proportionalists do
not believe that nature law is
always, absolutely binding.
Aquinas
Sometimes the situation
will demand putting
natural law to one side for
the sake of the greater, Bernard
proportionate, good.
Hoose
Proportionalism and
Situation Ethics
Proportionalism is similar to Situation Ethics in so far as
they recognise the particular demands of the situation may
call for a different moral judgement.
Unlike Situation Ethics Proportionalists
prefer to draw upon the wisdom which is
passed down through the natural law
tradition, to act as a guide in their moral
decision making.
Agape, love, is too
subjective & anti-nomian
Bernard
Hoose
Joseph
Fletcher
Proportionalism Is More Practical
Than The Principle of Double Effect
Principle of Double Effect
Proportionalism
Roman Catholic teaching where
only the reason for the act
intended is morally significant.
Indirect consequences are morally
justifiable – as they are unintentional
Proportionalists consider
the distinction between
Direct and Indirect killing
to be totally unsatisfactory.
e.g. in a therapeutic abortion to
save the mothers life (e.g due to
a cancerous uterus) only the
saving of the mother’s life is
intended; the killing of the
foetus is unintended.
Rather the crucial question
to be asked is whether or not
there is a proportionate
reason which makes it right
to kill the foetuses?
Conscience
Thomas More (1478-1535 CE)
Joseph Butler (1692-1752 CE)
John Henry Newman (1801-1890 CE)
Thomas More (1478 – 1535)
Sir Thomas More was Lord Chancellor of England, during
the reign of Henry VIII.
However, being guided by his conscience
More refused to sign an oath which
declared King Henry VIII’s marriage to
Catherine of Aragon to be invalid.
Encouraged to sign the oath Thomas
More refused; he found it inconceivable
that anyone could possibly act against the
dictates of their conscience.
More resigned as Lord Chancellor, but
was imprisoned in 1532, before being
tried and executed in 1535.
Thomas More (1478 – 1535)
“I thank the mighty mercy of God – I
never in my mind intended to consent to
do anything, even though it mean
enduring the uttermost, that in my own
conscience would damnably cast me in
the displeasure of God.”
(Thomas More, letter to his daughter
Margaret, written from the Tower
of London, 1534.)
Joseph Butler (1692 - 1752)
Conscience is the distinguishing feature of human beings.
“There is a principle of reflection in
men by which they distinguish between
approval and disapproval of their own
actions…this principle in man is
conscience.” (Sermons)
Butler held conscience in high esteem,
as it “magisterially exerts itself…
without being consulted.”
Conscience was regarded as being
intuitive. A God given guide which
people should always follow.
Joseph Butler (1692 - 1752)
For Butler conscience is the ultimate
moral authority, “Had it strength, as it
has right; had it power as it has
manifest authority, it would absolutely
govern the world.” (Sermons)
Due to the importance of reflection
Butler’s view of conscious promotes
formation of character. Over a period
of time patterns should begin to
emerge within the individual.
John Henry Newman (1801 - 1890)
Newman takes an intuitive view of conscience which all
people possess innately.
Conscience is more than simply a law
of the mind as conscience is regarded
as having divine authority, “the voice
of God within.”
For this reason conscience is regarded
as having greater authority than civil
law. Newman famously saying, “I’ll
drink to the king, but I’ll drink to
conscience first.”
Situation Ethics
Paul (6-65 CE)
Paul Tillich (1886-1965 CE)
C.S. Lewis (1898-1963 CE)
John Robinson (1918 -
CE)
Joseph Fletcher (1905 – 1991 CE)
St. Paul (4 – 65 CE)
• “Owe no one anything, except to love
one another.” Romans 13:8
• “We love because he first loved us”
• “Faith working through love”
Galatians 5:6
• For the whole law is fulfilled in one
word, “You shall love your neighbour
as yourself.” Galatians 5:14
• “Speaking the truth in love.”
Ephesians 4:15
“Theology moves back and forth
between two poles, the eternal
truth of its foundation and the
temporal situation in which the
eternal truth must be received.”
Systematic Theology I:3
The demands of the situation
over-ride deontological rules,
“Principles are only tools in
God’s hands, soon to be
thrown away as unserviceable.”
(Paul Tillich, Ethics,p.8)
Paul Tillich
(1886-1965 CE)
Paul Tillich
“The law of love is the ultimate law because it is the
negation of law; it is absolute because it concerns
everything concrete… The absolutism of love is its power
to go into the concrete situation, to discover what is
demanded by the predicament of the concrete to which it
turns. Therefore love can never become fanatical in a
fight for the absolute, or cynical under the impact of the
relative.”
Paul Tillich Systematic Theology, Vol 1,p.152
C.S. Lewis (1898-1963 CE)
An Oxford University don and acclaimed novelist.
Famous for The Tales of Narnia.
Central to C.S. Lewis’ Christian faith was
his belief in God as a God of Love
“Among our Gift-loves those are most
God like which are boundless and
unwearied in giving. Their joy, their
energy, their patience, their readiness
to forgive, their desire for the good of
the beloved all this is a real and all
adorable image of the divine in life.”
(The Four Loves, Introduction)
C.S. Lewis (1898-63)
C.S. Lewis
It is important to realise the demands of love
Love entails human growth, from childhood to
adulthood, by encountering the world and greeting
it in a loving manner. This is not always easy.
The book, and subsequent film, Shadowlands, is a
biography of C.S. Lewis’ life.
Shadowlands recounts the life of C.S. Lewis as an Oxford
don, his marriage to Joy Davidson, and their life together.
It explores the way in which they grow in love and faith –
particularly when faced with the tragic news that Joy is
suffering from terminal cancer.
As a lecturer C.S. Lewis recalled that on 4th December 1951
24 marines were killed when a bus drove into them. He comments:
Where was God on that December night? Why
didn’t He stop it? Isn’t God supposed to be good?
Isn’t he supposed to love us? Does God want us to
suffer?… I’m not sure God wants us particularly to
be happy. I think he wants us to love and be loved.
God wants us to grow up.
I suggest to you that it is because God loves us that
he makes us the gift of suffering. Pain is God’s
are
like
megaphone to rouse a deaf world.We
blocks of stone from which the sculptor carves the
form of men…the blows of his chisel which hurt
us so much are what make us perfect.
Bishop John Robinson
Honest To God (1966)
• Author of Honest to God, which sold
an astonishing 2 million copies in 1966.
• Robinson claimed that “there is no one
ethical system that can claim to be
(1919 – 84 CE) Christian.”
• Honest To God – Rejection of Church dogma,
Scriptural authority, natural and secular law.
• Individual has sole authority – acting on love.
• “Situation Ethics: An ethic for man come of age.”
Joseph Fletcher, Situation Ethics
(1905-1991 CE)
“The new morality is not exactly
new, in method or content, its
roots lie securely, if not
conventionally, in the classical
tradition of Western Christian
morals.”
“At the same time it is a radical departure from the
conventional wisdom and prevailing climate of
opinion. Situation ethics is not particularly Catholic or
Orthodox or Protestant or Humanist. It extricates us
from the odium theologicum.” (Situation Ethics, p13)
AGAPE
• A ltruistic (Caring for the sake of caring)
• G od is love – foundation for loving.
• A ttitudinal (Not emotional)
• P hilanthropist – non-preferential (all human beings)
• E goism – rejected (non-reciprocal / nothing return)
Four Principles
of Situation Ethics
Personalism
Pragmatism
Positivsm
Relativism
PERSONALISM
First-order concern
Similarity with
Kant’s maxim
“Treat people as
ends, never as a
means to an
end.”
PERSONALISM
God is personal:
Human beings
created in the
imago dei for
a love
relationship.
“Love God, love your neighbour”
“How can you love God who you cannot see
If you do not love your neighbour who you can see.”
PRAGMATISM
(American Pragmatists)
John Dewey
William James
Practical Approach
Rejected
Cartesian
European
rationalism
PRAGMATISM
“the more
interactions we
ascertain the more
we know about
the object in
question.”
(John Dewey)
“Pragma, not dogma: Church teaching rejected
SE: the fruit of a rejection of the doctrinaire
and the dogmatic.” (Fletcher)
THEOLGICAL POSITIVISM
God is love
“Love
is an
ontological
dimension
of the universe.”
PERSONALISM
“Our hearts are
restless until
they find their
rest in thee.”
(Augustine)
(Paul Tillich)
“We love because he first loved us” (St Paul)
“Faith working through love” (Galations 5:6)
P
O
S
I
T
I
V
I
S
M
God is love
God is love
God is love
God is love
God is love
God is love
Relativism
One Moral
Absolute
AGAPE
R
E
L
A
T
I
V
E
Love, sole intrinsic
good, is absolute, and is
able to go
into the concrete
(relative) situations and
be applied differently
e.g. voluntary euthanasia.
“Love relativises the absolute,
it does not absolutise the relative.” (Joseph Fletcher)
Joseph Fletcher’s
Six Propositions
1.Only one thing 2. The ruling
is intrinsically
norm of
good; namely Christianity is
love, nothing .love: nothing
else
else.
4.Love wills the
5. Only the
neighbours
end justifies
good, whether
the means;
we like
nothing else.
him or not.
3. Love and
justice are the
same, for justice
is love
distributed.
6.Love’s decisions
are made
situationally, not
prescriptively
(1) Love Only is Always Good
• Unlike all other principles love alone is
always good and right in every situation
• Love is the only intrinsically good and the
only universal.
• Note the similarity between agape and
Kant’s good will.
• Agape is not something we have or are but
something we do. (Agape is active – a verb)
(2) Love is the only Norm
• Jesus and Paul replaced the Torah with agape
• Love gives people freedom – encourages them to
grow up, to respond to life, to be responsible
• Decision “is a risk rooted in the courage of
being” free. (Paul Tillich, Systematic Theology I)
• Love, unlike law, sets no limits on obligation
(3) Love and Justice are compatible
• Fletcher argues that agape means standing up for justice
and representing those who are oppressed.
• e.g. The prophet Amos denounces those who take
advantage of the poor by paying them low wages.
• e.g. In South Africa Archbishop Desmond Tutu chaired
the Truth and Reconciliation Commission which
investigated the evils of Apartheid (segregation of races).
Tutu expressed the importance of rehabilitative justice to
uphold the love of people who were oppressed.
(4) Love wills the neighbour’s good
Love wills the good of the neighbour: as agape is
a selfless love one is called to love other people
without the desire for reward; there is no
personal interest. Jesus remarked, “You have
heard of old, love your neighbour, but I say to
you, “Love you enemies and pray for those who
persecute.” Such is the demand of love!
(5) The End Justifies the Means
`Right’ does and can mean nothing but
“cause of a good result”
No action which is not justified by its
results can ever be right.
(G.E Moore)
Does this suggest that Situation ethics
collapses into utilitarianism?
(6) Love’s decisions are made
situationally
“The absolutism of love is its power
to go into the concrete situation.”
The demands of the situation over-ride
deontological rules, “Principles are only
tools in God’s hands, soon to be thrown
away as unserviceable.”
(Paul Tillich, Ethics,p.8)
Utilitarianism
David Hume (1711-1776 CE)
Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832 CE)
John Stuart Mill (1806-1873 CE)
G.E. Moore (1873-1958 CE)
Peter Singer (1946 CE - )
David Hume was an empiricist, who rejected the authority of the church
and those pertaining to metaphysical foundations, “Take in hand any
volume of divinity or school of metaphysics…and let us ask: Does it
contain any abstract reasoning concerning quantity or number? No.
Does it contain any experimental reasoning concerning matter of fact
and existence? No. Commit it then to the flames for it can contain
nothing but sophistry and illusion.”
Rather, Hume thought that morality was founded
upon emotions, and in particular feelings of
sympathy with fellow human beings. This is what
Hume means by the term passion, when he says,
“Reason is and ought to be the slave of the passions.”
David Hume
(1711-76 CE)
Utilitarianism develops Hume’s empirical
approach, rejecting God as the author of
morality, and expands the notion of sympathy to
include the `Greatest pleasure / happiness for
the greatest number.’
A Hedonistic Utilitarian
A radical empiricist
Psychological Hedonism
Principle of Utility
Felicific Calculus
Morality: could be
scientifically proven
Pioneer of social reform
Jeremy Bentham
(1748-1832 CE)
The Principle of Utility
Pleasure
Pain
The Principle of Utility
The good is that which will bring
about the greatest sum of pleasure,
or the least sum of pain, for the greatest number
Jeremy Bentham
Principle of Utility
“Nature has placed mankind under the governance
of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is
for them alone to point out what we ought to do,
as well as to determine what we shall do.”
An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation
Foundation for the Principle of Utility
is Bentham’s Psychological hedonism:
Pleasure and pain determine how people act.
Jeremy Bentham: Reductive Empiricist
Bentham was a reductive empiricist
Principle of utility will replace
metaphysical beliefs
According to Bentham talk of abstract
`inalienable rights’ was “nonsense on
stilts.”
Only the principle of utility offers an
understanding of rights based on
concrete, observable verification
PLEASURE
All types of pleasure and pain can be measured on
the same scale.
Pleasures can be
compared
quantitatively
because there is no
qualitative difference
between them
Bentham once said that
"quantity of pleasure
being equal, push-pin
[a simple child's game]
is as good as poetry".
What is good and bad for each person (i.e. what brings
them pleasure or pain) is a matter for each person to decide
by following the Felicific Calculus
The principle of utility offers an understanding of rights
based on concrete, observable verification
Scientific and Ethical Revolution
N
E
W
T
O
N
Newton’s laws of
science explained
how the world is
governed by
universal laws of
nature which
causally determine
action.
B
E
N
T
H
A
M
Bentham reasoned
that ethics was a
science; where
`good’ could be
scientifically proven
according to the
principle of utility,
felicific calculus.
D
A
R
W
I
N
Darwin challenged
the fundamentalist,
literal, understanding
of the Genesis
creation story with
his scientific theory
of evolution, natural
selection.
Bentham’s Felicific Calculus
Pleasure can be `scientifically’ calculated according to the
following 7 criteria of the Felicific Calculus
1. DURATION
How long will it last?
2. INTENSITY
How intense is it?
3. PROPINQUITY
How near or remote?
4. EXTENT
How widely it covers
5. CERTAINTY
How probable is it?
6. PURITY
How free from pain is it?
7. FECUNDITY
Lead to further pleasure?
Bentham’s Felicific Calculus
The Felicific Calculus
Democratic
and
Egalitarian
“Everybody is to
count for one, and nobody
for more than one.”
“No one person’s
pleasure is greater
than another’s”
In keeping with Enlightenment thinking the
Felicific Calculus was a rational and scientific
way to measure pleasure. Bentham claimed that
goodness could be empirically proven.
Penal Reform
Analysis / Evaluation / Implications / Analysis / Evaluation / Implication
e.g. abolition of
debtors prisons.
Bentham campaigned for the
reform of the Penal System, based on
Psychological Hedonism
(People respond to pleasure/pain)
Punishment
should be
sufficient to
deter others
from offending
but punishment
should not
cause
unnecessary
suffering.
Bentham: Animal Welfare
“The day may come when the rest of the animal creation
may acquire those rights which never could have been
with-holden them but by the hand of tyranny.”
“The French have already discovered that the blackness of
the skin is no reason why a human being should be
abandoned without redress to the caprice of a tormentor.
It may one day be recognised that the number of the legs,
the villosity of the skin, or the termination of the os sacrum
are reasons equally insufficient for abandoning a sensitive
being to the same fate.”
“The question is not `Can they reason?’ `Can they
talk?’ But `Can they suffer?’”
A Eudaimonistic Utilitarian
A Weak Rule utilitarian
Advocated classical liberalism
Greatest Happiness Principle
Quality, not Quantity
Happiness, not pleasure
Pioneer of social reform
John Stuart Mill
(1806-73 CE )
Mill’s utilitarianism has been referred to as being
eudaimonistic (human well being) utilitarianism, as
opposed to Bentham’s hedonistic (pleasure) utilitarianism.
The rationale of Mill’s eudaimonistic utilitarianism is
found in the writings of Aristotle.
Aristotle distinguished between pleasure and happiness.
Life of Material
Pleasure
Life of contemplation
offering Happiness
Held by the many
Held by the few
For Mill the difference in happiness over pleasure is significant;
happiness having a higher qualitative edge over the quantity of lower,
bestial, pleasures.
Quantity or Quality?
Analysis/Evaluation/Analysis/Evaluation/Analysis /Evaluation
BENTHAM
QUANTITY
of pleasure.
All pleasures
are of equal
value.
“Push-pin [a
simple child's
game] is as
good as
poetry”
J.S. MILL: Higher and Lower Pleasures
H
I
G
H
E
R
L
O
W
E
R
INTELLECTUAL
For Mill
QUALITY of pleasure
intellectual
pleasures are
“…better to be a
dissatisfied human being intrinsically
than a pig satisfied; and more valuable
than physical
better to be a Socrates
pleasures.
dissatisfied than a fool Those who have
satisfied”
felt both kinds
will prefer
PHYSICAL / BESTIAL intellectual
pleasures.
J.S. MILL: Higher and Lower Pleasures
Analysis/Evaluation/Analysis/Evaluation/Analysis /Evaluation
H
I
Is Mill right? G
Or merely an H
intellectual E
R
snob?
Do you agree
with the
ranking of the
following
pleasures?
L
O
W
E
R
INTELLECTUAL
Studying Philosophy
Reading Shakespeare
Does Mill show
that he is not a
strict utilitarian?
By bringing in
quality of
Going out with your partner pleasures does
Mill not bring in
Playing pub darts
additional
factors other
Drinking 5 pints of beer
than pleasure?
PHYSICAL / BESTIAL
Listening to Mozart
Nineteenth Century Social Reformer
As an M.P. Mill campaigned for
sexual equality; proposing the right
for women to vote. His companion,
Harriet Taylor, was of great support in
his campaign for social reform.
On Liberty (1859)
Freedom of the individual, other
than when it harms anyone else.
“Your liberty to swing your arm
ends where my nose begins.” (Mill)
J.S. Mill: Weak Rule Utilitarianism
Three Key Influences on Mill’s Philosophy
Aristotle and Wilhelm von
the Lake Poets
Humboldt
Classical
liberalism
Weak Rule Utilitarian
Influences on Mill: Aristotle and the Lake Poets
Following his nervous breakdown at the age of 20 Mill was heavily
influenced on his path to rehabilitation by the writings of:
Aristotle
The Lake Poets
Wordsworth, Byron, Shelley
Emphasis on a well rounded
Through an appreciation of natural
individual through:
beauty Mill came to realise that the
Phronesis
utilitarianism of his father, James Mill,
(practical wisdom)
working in accordance with and Jeremy Bentham was too restrictive
as their narrow and mechanical
Emotions put into practice
through a `Golden Mean’ conception of humanity missed the vital
importance of individuality, self
Appetite – leading to
cultivation and the inner life in the
Eudaimonia – individual
promotion of happiness.
human flourishing.
Influences on Mill: Wilhelm von Humboldt
Wilhelm von Humboldt
German philosopher and educationalist
Perceived that, “as the demands on each man’s nature are
so special and peculiar, so each man’s happiness has
features that are unique and which distinguish it
from any other man’s.”
(John Gray, Plato to Nato, p.152)
Mill adopted classical liberalism for social policy which
respected the rights and individuality of each person.
Influences on Mill: Classical liberalism
In On Liberty (1859), Mill defends individual freedom of
thought, association and life-style on the grounds that only
in a context of liberty in which competing `experiments of
living’ may be tried can each of us hope to seek and find
his own distinctive happiness.
On Liberty is directed against repressive laws which
inhibit voluntary association and are oppressive to the
expression of human spirit and individuality.
Classical liberalism: Mill’s criticisms of legal moralism
and state paternalism altered public opinion and have
informed legal reforms in the field of votes for women,
divorce, censorship and homosexuality.
Mill: Weak Rule Utilitarian
WEAK
RULE
Mill respected the sovereignty of
the individual over himself and
the importance of an individual’s
freedom to express themself, so
long as it was not detrimental to
society.
Equally, J.S. Mill argued that people
should come up with, and be guided
by, general principles which over
the passage of time have promoted
the greatest happiness.
Summary
Generally speaking people should follow rules which have stood the test
of time in promoting the greatest happiness of the greatest number.
However, individuals should have the right to self expression and the
freedom to pursue their own creativity.
e.g. “If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, and only one
person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more
justified in silencing that one person, than if he had the power, would
he be justified in silencing mankind.” (Utilitarianism 229)
An Intuitionist or an Ideal Utilitarian?
G.E. Moore is famous for his analysis of ethical language in Principia
Ethica, 1903, where he famously asserted that: Good is a nondefinable property. This led to Moore being labelled an intuitionist, as
“We know what`yellow’ is, and can recognise it whenever it is seen,
but we cannot actually define it. In the same way we know what `good’
means but cannot define it.” (Ethica, 1903)
However, closer analysis reveals that, “it seems self
evident that our duty is to do what will produce the best
effects upon the whole, no matter how bad the effects
upon ourselves may be and no matter how good we
ourselves may lose by it.” (Ethica, p.143)
As an Ideal utilitarian Moore suggests that there are
three intrinsic goods: Pleasure, Friendship, Aesthetic
Appreciation – and so right actions are those which
G.E. Moore
increase / promote these in the world for the most people. (1873-1958)
Peter Singer’s Moral Philosophy:
Four Simple Claims?
• 1. Pain is bad.
• 2. Most non-human animals feel pain.
• 3. When taking life we should look not at race,
sex or species but at other ethically relevant
characteristics of the individual being killed.
• 4. We are responsible not only for what we do
but also for what we could have prevented.
Analysis / Evaluation / Implications / Analysis / Evaluation / Implication
The above may sound simple and appealing. But, think
how Singer’s philosophy would change your life?!
Peter Singer’s
Ethical Earthquake
Challenging the
Sanctity of Human
Life Ethic
Maldistribution
of Wealth
Animal
Liberation
Personhood
Secular Age
Benevolence
Sympathy
Speciesism
Sentience
The 5 Old and 5 New Commandments
Analysis / Evaluation / Implications / Analysis / Evaluation / Implication
• 1. Treat all human life as •
if it is of equal worth.
•
• 2. Never intentionally
take innocent life.
• 3. Never take your own
•
life and try to prevent
others from taking theirs
•
• 4. Be fruitful and multiply
• 5. Treat all human life as
always more precious
•
than any non-human life.
1. Recognise that all worth
of life varies.
2. Take responsibility for
the consequences of our
decisions.
3. Respect a person’s desire
to live or die.
4. Bring children into the
world only if they are
wanted.
5. Do not discriminate on
the basis of species.
Personhood
Ethically Relevant Characteristics
The criteria for personhood should replace the sanctity of human life
• Rational
• Self-conscious
• (Biographical as opposed
to merely biological)
• Sentient
• Act intentionally
• Communicate
• Establish relationships
Peter Singer
Philosopher
(Periodic Table)
Hu
Be
Mi
Wa
Ha
Contribution
Peter Singer’s
Application
•“Reason is and ought to be •Sympathy (feeling) fosters
the slave of the passions.” idea of others, Expanding
•Empiricist
Circle. Rejection of theism.
• “The question is: not can •Sentience applies to animals
it reason, can it talk, but so they have interests and
can it suffer.” (Bentham) are ethically significant.
•Maldistribution of wealth!
•Qualitative differences
between pleasures / pain. Superficial pleasures do not
outweigh 3rd world suffering
•Vindication of the Rights •Singer is counter-cultural:
of Women 1792 –
Animal Liberation – global
oppressed group of society pioneer of animal rights
•Ethical self-interest
•Individuals find meaning in
requires universalization, their lives when they focus
promotes welfare for all. on others / larger goals
Existentialism
Soren Kierkegaard (1813-1855 CE)
Fyodr Dostoyevsky (1821-1881 CE)
Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900 CE)
Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980 CE)
Simone de Beauvoir (1908 – 1986 CE)
Soren Kierkegaard (1813-55) Father of Existentialism
Kierkegaard was a brilliant philosopher and
theologian, and yet, ironically, he despised
abstract, academic philosophy and ridiculed the
Danish Lutheran Church for having watered
down the demands of Christ’s teaching.
“The thinker who can forget in all his thinking
also to think that he is an existing individual,
will never explain life. He merely makes an
attempt to cease to be a human being.”
Concluding Unscientific Postscript)
Kierkegaard’s message was intended to
awaken the individual to make a choice.
“I stick my finger into
existence – it smells of
nothing. Where am I?
What is this thing called
the world? Who is it who
has lured me into this
thing, and now leaves me
here? Who am I? How
did I come into the
world? Why was I not
consulted?”
Soren Kierkegaard (1813-55)
Kierkegaard’s Rejection of Hegelian Philosophy
Kierkegaard strongly opposed
Hegel’s philosophy – as Hegel made
concepts and abstractions more
important than the individual and
the particular.
Hegel
Kierkegaard rejected the Hegelian
dialectical process whereby the
individual was subsumed into the
world historical process of thesis,
anti-thesis and synthesis.
Rather the individual
and their personal
choice is everything!
“What the World Needs is a New Socrates”
(Kierkegaard)
Kierkegaard saw himself in the tradition of Socrates,
playing the role of a midwife: bringing people to truth,
through indirect communication, so making their own choice.
Three Choices for Living:
1. The Aesthetic: A life of beauty and pleasure,
like the life of the reflective seducer, Don Juan.
2. The Ethical: Following a sense of duty.
“Only in the ethical is there eternal life.”
3. The Religious: Not the conventional church, but
a commitment which requires “a leap of faith.”
“Truth is Subjectivity”
Whatever choice the individual makes, be it
the aesthetic, ethical or religious life, it is
important that the individual makes truth
subjective and passionate. “The thing is to find
a truth which is true for me, to find the idea
which I can live and die.” (Journals)
For Kierkegaard such truth was found in the
incarnation of God, whist recognising its rational
offence and absurdity.
Yet for Kierkegaard to live a Christian life should
be identical with shouldering the greatest
insecurity of man before God. It entails
taking a leap of faith and trusting.
“Leap of Faith”
(Kierkegaard)
Kierkegaard famously asserted that,
“Life can be understood backwards,
But it must be lived forwards.”
At the time of making a decision one can never be
sure that the decision is right. The present
does not offer the benefit of hindsight!
Occasionally the individual is asked to stake their
whole life on a claim one cannot be entirely sure
about. For Kierkegaard, such claims are not irrational
(illogical) but supra-rational (going beyond reason).
Fyodr Dostoyevsky
(1821-1881)
Dostoyevsky was a highly acclaimed Russian novelist who
embraced seriously existential ideas of human life: sin,
guilt, despair, forgiveness, love and salvation.
Dostoyevsky is perhaps best known for
his work The Brothers Karamazov,
which explores the tension between the
state, church and individual autonomy.
Perhaps the most famous line from The
Brothers Karamazov is that of
Smerdyakov, who declares, “If God is
dead then everything is permitted.”
“If God is dead then everything is permitted.”
If there is no God then there is no foundation for morality
and so the individual is free to assert their own will and
choose their moral code.
However, The Brothers Karamazov follows the
inner journey of Ivan, the rational philosopher,
who becomes acutely aware of the implications
of living a life in rebellion against God.
Although Ivan rejects God on the moral
grounds of innocent suffering (a powerful
form of atheism!) nevertheless the novel
ends with a cautionary message….
Everything, you said is permitted and look how
frightened you are now!….. (Smerdyakov to Ivan)
It dawns on Ivan that his rational philosophy has played a
part in Smerdyakov justifying the murder of their father.
At the same time Dostoyevsky offers the lives of
the other brothers for the reader to contemplate:
sincere Alyosha (novice monk), Smerdyakov
(bastard son, pathological avarice) and Dimitri
(aesthetic life of eroticism and gambling.)
Dostoyevsky offers no solutions in his
novels. His existential message is to
disturb, so that the reader forms their own
judgements and reflects on his/her own
choices on life’s journey.
Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900)
Nietzsche is famous for the parable of the madman who
searched for God, declaring, “Where is God gone? I mean
to tell you! We have killed him. You and I! We are all his
murderers…. God is dead! And we have killed him.”
For Nietzsche God is an oppressive figure who
denies people the opportunity to express their
own will, creativity, authority and power.
In order to become fully human there is a need
for deicide, to kill God, as this is the only way
that human beings can fulfil their potential;
unhindered by the Christian God and the
churches’ virtues of humility and obedience
which are oppressive to the human spirit.
Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900)
Nietzsche rejected metaphysical foundations, “The apparent
world is the only one: the `real world’ is merely a lie!” Twilight
of the Idols
Equally false is the idea of absolute truths;
which Nietzsche proclaimed to be great lies.
Rather people have an obligation to construct
their own values. Nietzsche calls upon people to
be themselves, “Do not let your existence be an
accident.”
In order for this to happen the individual must
strive to become the ubermensch, the superman,
or more correctly translated, the over-man.
(Who may be male or female.)
Thus Spoke Zarathustra (1883-5)
In Thus Spoke Zarathustra Nietzsche offers his vision of
the ubermensch, superman, figure who will emerge through
an act of will to transcend the herd mentality and be a
leader of people.
The Superman is not of a higher class, rather it
is a person who is prepared to assert their will
and confront the suffering and hardship of life,
a person who has `will to power.`
Hardship and suffering will be channelled in a
positive way to promote greater self
understanding and a richness of life.
However, a necessary step is to rid oneself of
the “slave morality” of Christianity.
The Slave Morality of Christianity
Christian morality is oppressive and impoverishes the
human spirit.
Virtue is Vice
Vice is Virtue
Christian virtues of
The vice of pride,
humility and
condemned by St Paul, is
obedience are
to be regarded as a
detrimental to the
virtue; for without pride
human spirit,
humanity will remain
individuality and the
subservient and fail to
evolutionary need for
fulfil their
self-assertion.
potential.
“I as a philosopher had to seize a hammer and pound
new values into the world.” (Nietzsche)
John Paul Sartre
(1905-1980)
Sartre’s Existentialism is a reaction to Platonic Essentialism
Essence precedes
existence
Metaphysical
foundation
Absolute, abstract
moral principles
Existence precedes
essence
Empirical
Constructivist
Relative, constructivist
approach
“Man is condemned to be free”
Authentic Living
Inauthentic Living
To let others influence
your decision so that
you are not true to your
beliefs.
To be autonomous
and use one’s
freedom in making
choices
En soi
Pour soi
Mauvais Foi
Being in itself
A being for itself
(Bad Faith)
An object in
To live an inauthentic
Consciously
life.
another’s
making one’s
To allow oneself to
conscious world
own choices
become an en soi object,
not a pour soi being.
Nausea / Detachment
Individual is detached from the crowd
This brings with it a sense of anxiety,
the fear of nothing, the void.
This brings us face-to face with our
boundless, terrifying freedom and
responsibility.
Faced with the possible
meaninglessness of existence the
individual may contemplate suicide.
Jean-Paul Sartre
Meaninglessness of Existence
Innocent Suffering
Man can master, in himself, everything that should be
mastered. He should rectify in creation everything that
can be rectified. And after he has done so, children will
still die unjustly, even in a perfect society. The injustice
and the suffering will remain, and no matter how limited
they are, they will not cease to be an outrage.”
(Albert Camus, The Rebel)
In spite of all the innocent suffering in the world the
individual should revolt against the absurdity of life.
The individual should assert their freedom of will, live an
authentic life and so construct one’s own meaning and purpose
Simone de Beauvoir (1908 – 86)
De Beauvoir is famous for her philosophical account of the
patriarchal Western society and its subjugation of women, in
her work, The Second Sex, 1949.
As an existential philosopher de Beauvoir
asserted the importance of each individual
to use their freedom, “A living being is
nothing else but what it does… essence
does not precede existence.… what defines
the situation of women in a remarkable
way is that while being an autonomous
person she discovers herself and chooses
herself in a world where men oblige her to
accept herself as the `Other’.” (The Second Sex)
Central to de Beauvoir’s writing is the ability of
women to use their autonomy to free themselves from
the social structures of oppression.
She is highly critical of the patriarchal
institutions, such as marriage, which
through its social expectation is a cause
of female suffering and oppression.
It is interesting and significant to note that
de Beauvoir distanced herself from
Feminist Groups which attacked men.
She maintained that it is a woman’s
responsibility not to consent to oppressive
patriarchal structures and tyranny.