Historical Background Plato and the Ring of Gyges Republic II No man would keep his hands off what was not his own when he could safely take what he liked out of the market or go into houses and lie with any one at his ID: 786901
Download The PPT/PDF document "Introduction to Ethics How did thinking ..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Introduction to Ethics
How did thinking on Morality start?
Historical Background
Slide2Plato and the Ring of
Gyges
Republic II
“No man would keep his hands off what was not his own when he could safely take what he liked out of the market, or go into houses and lie with any one at his
pleasure
, or kill or release from prison whom he would, and in all respects be like a God among men. Then the actions of the just would be as the actions of the unjust; they would both come at last to the same point.” (Plato, Republic)
Slide3Plato
and the
Republic (Over 2300 years ago)
Socrates
and his pupil
Glaucon
/ Debate
The ring of
Gyges
(the king of Lydia
)
G
. Men restrained from unjust behaviors because of law and society (two rings, one for the just and another for the unjust (the impact of power
)
How would the virtuous man behave?
G. unlimited powers blur the difference between just and unjust
Slide4Questions to think of…
Why
shouldn’t a person do what he pleases?
Why shouldn’t we do what we think is best for ourselves?
What, if anything, justifies us in believing we “morally ought” to act in certain way and not the other?
Slide5Cultural Relativism
(The truth depends on one’s point of view)-No objective right and wrong
Herodotus
the Greek
historian/ right
or wrong are the products of ones society and costumes (all a matter of social conventions
What
is moral in one culture might be considered immoral in another
Examples; Should
we eat the bodies of the dead or burn them
?
Greeks Vs.
Callatians
.
Consider the Eskimos
.
Marriage and Infanticide
The
men often had more than one wife,
they share
their wives with guests, lending them for the night as a sign of hospitality.
A
dominant male might demand and get regular sexual access to other men's
wives. Female babies were especially liable to be destroyed with no social stigma attached to it. Old people also, when they became too feeble to contribute to the family, were left out in the snow .to die.
All in all, the Eskimo practice was a volatile scheme that bore little resemblance to what we call marriage
.
Slide6CR continued
In those examples of cultural relativism there is no objective reason why some practices are more superior than others
In some other practices, there are some good reasons why some are superior. For example: honesty and respect for human life are desirable, slavery and racism are undesirable
When we can support our judgment about these matters with rational argument, we do not have to consider them as merely the expression of our particular society’s moral code
Slide7Divine Command
Socratic debate
M
oral
living consists in obedience to divine commands
If this is the case then
Gyges
should
not be able to get away with what he did.
To Socrates the
right does not mean what the Gods demand
. Time frame of the Divine Scriptures and contemporary
issues (global warming, environmental preservation, should resources be allocated to AIDS research etc…)
To Socrates there are two ways: either God’s have a reason for the instructions they give or they don’t.
If they do not and instructions are merely arbitrary, they are like tyrants
If they have good reasons, this means there is a standard of rightness independent of their commands/a standard that they refer to in deciding what to require of
us.
Therefore, rightness and wrongness cannot be understood according to their conformity to divine prescriptions.
Aristotle and the Virtues
Relativism
and
DC
were not
popular
to morality students
.
Aristotle offered a
detailed account on
virtues: main character traits
people
need
to do well in life : Courage, prudence, generosity, honesty etc….
The most imp. Virtue is happiness.
To Aristotle, everything
in nature exists for a
purpose, “
nature belongs to the class of causes which act for the sake of something”
.
Things we make or even natural causes have purposes. (Rain , animals etc…)
To him the world is an orderly, rational system.
Quote
p
.
6
Slide9Natural Law Ethics (Saint Thomas Aquinas 1225-1274) Catholic theologian
Christian
thinkers
. For a complete picture, the
addition of God was
imp
All is because of God’s intention and what God made them for.
The world
is created according to a divine plan.
At an ethical level the view affirms a supreme value of human
life. Humans are
entitled to do what they please with the
rest
of nature
There is a way of how things ought to be, so when moving away form such natural purposes things
become right
or wrong
Example:
decayed teeth that cannot be used for chewing are
defective, drought that
deprives plants of rain is evil
YET: Consequences
for human action: (some forms of human behaviors are natural, others are not
)
Examples: Purpose
of sex organ is for procreation hence homosexuality is wrong? marriage and reproduction is right
Supporters
within Catholic
church not many outside.
Slide10Modern Science view on Morality
NLE replaced with outlook of modern science (Galileo, Newton, and Darwin) natural phenomena without an evaluative notion.
Rain
does not fall for the plants, plants get typically the amount of water they need because each species evolved, by natural selection, in the environment in which such amount of water is available.
Nature does not involve purpose-involving principles.
Hence Aristotle’s
final causes and Christian Gods have nothing to do in explaining nature.
This view condemned by the church.
Slide11The Social Contract
( A basic project in moral philosophy in the 17
th
century) Thomas Hobbs a British philosopher
Based on the above theory, The
world has no values of its own.
If
there is no moral facts and
no God
, what happens to morality
?
Ethics is a human phenomena that stems from the humans needs, products and desires.
Good
and
bad are
names for things we like and
dislike/ disagreement is bound to happen.
Since we are
self
interested creatures who care about living well, ethics arises in
figuring
out what to do
and how to live
well.
We are better off living in cooperative society.
Without social cooperation we lose all of the benefits.
Slide12Social Contract cont’d
To achieve a cooperative society, adoption of certain rules of behaviors is necessary Example:
Telling truth => communication
Keeping promises =>good division of labor, economical development
Assurances against murder assault etc…=> security.
A need to establish mechanism for enforcing rules, legal sanctions that help obey rules.
This social contract is the basis for morality and morality is “the set of rules that rational people will agree to obey, for their mutual benefit, provided that other people will obey them as well”. P. 9
Social contract explains why we should care about ethics and solves
Gyges
’ issue. If there is no God to punish us, why should we care about doing what is right if it is not in our advantage.
Assignment: Please read pages 9 and 10 for Thursday answering why social contract is more appealing than other frames of moral thought discussed so far?
We will continue with historical background this week; Altruism and self-interest, Utilitarianism, Impartiality, and Kant.
Slide14Utilitarianism
Is social interaction based solely on self-interest?
Hume, we have social sentiments/feelings that make care about the welfare of others
Right and wrong are measured by the true interest of mankind
Slide15Utilitarian Basic principles
We should always do whatever will produce the greatest possible happiness over unhappiness for everyone who will be affected by our action.
Based on the principle of utility combination of three ideas)
To know what to do, we should be guided by the consequences of our actions
To determine what is best, we should do whatever causes the most happiness and least unhappiness
POFU, each individual’s happiness is equally as important as everyone's else's.
Impartiality
As part of the utilitarian thought.
Although the goal is actions that cause more happiness than unhappiness…
Principle of Impartiality states that: “From an objective view point, each one of us must acknowledge that our own perspective-our own particular set of needs, interests, likes, and dislikes-is only one among many and has no special status.”p.17
Slide17Kant
Morality is product of pure reason
Morality stems from one ultimate principle “doing one’s
duty
”,
called
categorical
Imperative,
which is not calculated by consequences.
You have to contemplate the rule you will be following to do a certain act (called the “maxim” of the act)
Then ask yourself if you would be willing for that rule to be followed by everyone all the time (making it a universal law)…. If yes follow if not act is not permissible.