Ethics 1 Branches of Ethics: Meta-

ethics, Normative Ethics

and Applied Ethics.

Dr. Sreekumar Nellickappilly Religion and Morality:

Professor Divine Command Theory,
Department of Humanities & Existence of God as a
Social Sciences
moral question; Euthyphro
IIT Madras
(Plato)
 Ethics/Moral Philosophy
Deals with the ways of thinking philosophically about
morality.
Analyses the moral judgments we make.
Ethos (Greek) and Mores (Latin) are terms having to do with
“custom,” ”habit,” and “behavior.
Ethics is the philosophical study of morality.
It involves reflection.
Every society has morals, but ethics is a reflective endeavour.
 Morality
A set of principles that guide our behaviour that aim
at harmonious social living.

These principles have evolved over a period of time.

They try to bring order to both individual and

collective human living.
 Questions About Morality
• How do we decide what is moral?
• How to distinguish the moral from the immoral?
• Are moral principles always binding on us?
• Do we have to always respect the freedom of
individuals?
• De we need to be honest always?

• What do I gain by being moral?

 Morality and Ethics
A higher or more advanced mode of harmonization,
which can occur only after the earlier modes have
prepared for it through a long evolution.
An endeavour of the intelligent, foreseeing beings to
bring order and stability into their individual lives and to
harmonize with others and nature.
It is an effort of harmonization to mitigate the conflicts in
our relationships.
Private morality" is essentially an oxymoron or
contradictory notion.

Morality is a public phenomenon (Gert).

Other people: private and public

Public: Responsibility
 What is ethics?
What our feelings tell us is right or wrong. Is it just a matter of
following feelings?

Assumptions about right and wrong derived from religious beliefs.

What about people who do not believe in any religion?

Doing what the law requires. There are diverse laws and they
often contradict each other and change over time. Ethics and law
may overlap but not always.

Behavior as per social norms. How to know this? There are issues
where clear norms are absent.
 What is ethics?
Deal with standards of
right and wrong that
prescribe what humans
ought to do which are
reasonable.
Involves in the study and
development of one's
ethical standards: how they
are and can be reasonable?
Standards that impose the
reasonable obligations to
refrain from certain kinds of
action.
Standards that enjoin virtues
of honesty, compassion, and
loyalty.
Standards relating to rights,
such as the right to life, the
right to freedom from injury,
and the right to privacy.
 Different approaches
1. Metaethics

Talks about the nature of ethics and moral reasoning.

2. Normative ethics

Attempts to determine meanings of normative terms, e.g.

right, wrong, good, bad, ought, etc.
3. Applied ethics (how do we apply ethics to work and
lives?)
4. Moral psychology (the biological and psychological
bases of ethics)
 Metaethics
Talks about the nature of ethics and moral reasoning.

Discussions whether ethics is relative and whether we

always act from self-interest are examples of meta-
ethical discussions.
Metaethics: Cognitivism
Studies the language of ethics.

A statement that describes a moral characteristic (“war is

bad”) has the same sentence structure as a statement
about an object's physical characteristics (“trees are
leafy”).

Cognitivism claims that this similarity is valid, because

moral statements do describe moral conditions of things
(although the judgment expressed in the statement may
be wrong—war may not be bad, trees may have lost their
leaves).
Metaethics: Non-Cognitivism
Statements cannot describe true characteristics, because morality isn't real.

There is no moral truth to which language can refer.

So, however much like a physical description it may resemble, a moral statement
can only express emotion, preference, or some other subjective viewpoint.

Emotivism says they are emotions or preferences.

Prescriptivism says they are subtle commands, expressing what the speaker
wishes to happen in regard to a situation.

Norm-expressivism is like emotivism but insists moral statements represent the

feelings of a community.

Quasi-realism teaches that, although moral statements do not express any real
quality, it's best that we pretend they do.
 Normative Ethics
Also called philosophical ethics.

Interested in determining the content of our moral behavior.

It attempts to provide a general theory that tells us how we ought to live.

Search for norms, not in the sense of what is average, but in the sense of
authoritative standards of what it “ought” to be.

Normative ethical theories seek to provide action-guides; procedures for

answering the Practical Question ("What ought I to do?").

The moral theories of Kant and Bentham are examples of normative

theories that seek to provide guidelines for determining a specific course
of moral action.

Think of the Categorical Imperative in the case of the former and the
Principle of Utility in the case of the latter.
 Normative Ethics
Consequentialism Nonconsequentialism

Morality of an action is determined by its

consequences
Hedonism Morality of an action depends on
its intrinsic nature, on its
Utilitarianism – Hedonistic, balance of motives, or on its being in accord
pleasure over pain with some rule or principle.

Ideal (Social) Utilitarianism – Non- Divine command theory

hedonistic, emphasis on more good – will of God
Self-Realization (Perfectionism)- Non- Kantian theory –
hedonistic, full development of man
Deontologism –
Egoism – self-interest, best interest of Universal law.
the person.
Situationism – depends on situation
 Applied Ethics
Attempts to deal with specific realms of human action
and to craft criteria for discussing issues that might
arise within those realms.

Business Ethics, Computer Ethics, and Engineering

Ethics, Bioethics, Medical Ethics are examples.
The Different Theoretical
Frameworks of Ethics
Evolutionary ethics Eudaimonist Ethics:
Relativism virtue ethics

Subjectivism Ethics of duty

Divine Command Ethics of Care

Natural Law

Social Contract

Egoism
http://www.str.org/articles/euthyphro-s-dilemma#.V53
-S452UYc

http://www.philosophyofreligion.info/christian-ethics/
divine-command-theory/the-euthyphro-dilemma/

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-arguments-god/
RELATIVIAM,
SUBJECTIVISM AND
EMOTIVISM
You have your way, I have my way. As for
the right way, it does not exist.
Friedrich Nietzsche
 Relativism
Ethics is relative to individuals, groups, cultures etc.

No moral absolutes

They ail to account for moral progress.

We cannot compare different codes

Then moral effort is meaningless

Just because people believe something does not make it right: Sati,
dowry etc.

Self-defeating

No man is better than another; Jesus is no better than Hitler!

 Santhara or Sallekhana
Jain studies scholar Manish
Modi : "It is deeply
disappointing to hear of this
judgement. Santhara or
Sallekhana is an integral
practice, custom and tradition
of the Jain religion and has
been so for the past thousands
of years."
Santhara: a person gives up
food and water till death by
starvation
The Rajasthan high court
has equated Santhara with
suicide while deciding on a
petition which likened it to
sati.
 Female Infanticide
Certain Eskimo groups were reported to practice
female infanticide in the belief that the time spent
suckling a girl would delay the mother's next
opportunity to bear a son.

Males being preferred to females because of their

future role as providers in a hunting economy. 

Economic conditions.
 Moral Relativism
The truth or justification of moral judgments is not absolute, but relative to
the moral standard of some person or group of persons.

Moral truth or justification is relative to a culture or society.

Morality arises when a group of people reach an implicit agreement or

come to a tacit under- standing about their relations with one another.
[Gilbert Harman]

It is wrong of someone to do something makes sense only in relation to an

agreement or understanding.

An action may be wrong in relation to one agreement but not in relation to

another.

It makes no sense to ask whether an action is wrong, independent of any

relation to an agreement.
 Subjectivism
There are no objective values.
 SUBJECTIVISM
Morality is based on feelings.
No one is wrong

EMOTIVISM
SIMPLE
SUBJECTIVISM Moral language is about influencing
other peoples’ behaviour
Hume: Morality is about
what you approve of it Some statements are not true or false

Cannot account for true

or false moral statements
 Subjectivism
When I say an action is right all that I mean is that I like
that action.

Here there is a confusion: it expresses a state of mind and

means the object of the state of mind.

When I say X is a (not a) terrorist, it certainly expresses my

attitude (of moral approval or disapproval) towards him, but
the fact remains true or false apart from my attitude to it.

Is there such a fact?

If yes, how do I find it?
 Three Views on Subjectivism : A.C.Eving

1. Moral judgements refer to mental states of the person

who makes it.

2. Moral judgements are not judgements at all, but of

the nature of commands, exclamations or wishes:
This action is right means, a command to do it.

3. Moral judgements are either always false or incapable

of being proved true.
Moral judgements are mental states

This action is right = I like this action

So when two people while talking about an action; one say

it is right and the other it is wrong – they are not
contradicting.

They make statements like; I like sugar in my tea and

“I do not like sugar in my tea”.

When two people say “speaking truth is right”, they mean

different things – both A and B assert that they like a
certain action.
Moral Judgements are just Commands or Wishes

Held by the logical positivists.

Genuine judgements are verifiable, moral judgements

are not.
 Criticism
We are always right

Unable to handle moral disagreements

When someone assert that an action is right or wrong, he

tries to assert something more than his mental state.

There is a reason for his approval or disapproval.

To say an action is right is same as a command is against

the common usage of language.

It is not just about my wish or desire.

 Natural Law Theory
What is natural is good.

God built certain features into nature.

What is natural is not always good.: tsunami, volcano,

diseases etc.

Just because something is in a certain way does not

mean that they ought to be so.
 Social Contract Model
Highlights the service orientation factor

Professional as a guardian of public trust.

Inspired by the Social Contract theorists like Thomas

Hobbs and John Locke

Locke, John (1632–1704)

 Social Contract
A social contract is implicit in the very nature of the
relationship a professional has with the society.
There exists an unstated agreement and
correspondingly a set of mutual expectations.

Thomas Hobbes, 1588-1679.

 Social Contract
May not be
Promotes rules
always
that beneficial
support harmonious
to all people.
living.
Says be
May whyseen
we as
should
an imposition.
follow rules.
Says what is morally demanded of us.
 EGOISM

PSYCHOLOGICAL
EGOISM
ETHICAL EGOISM
People ultimately do what they want
We ought to pursue our self-interest
Self-interest rules
Morality of selfishness
People ought to act selfishly
 Ethical Egoism
Many other moral theories require that an agent give
weight to the interests of others and sometimes
require uncompensated sacrifices

It is necessary and sufficient for an action to be

morally right that it maximize one's self-interest.

What brings the highest payoff to me is important to

an ethical egoist.
 Egoism against Altruism
Altruism is self- Endorses wickedness
defeating: denies the self
Logically inconsistent
Compatible with
commonsense morality It is arbitrary: my conflict
 Naturalism
Morality is derived from the nature of man as a
natural being.

Man’s needs and interests stem from his/her

unchangeable biological and psychological makeup.

The realization of these needs is the purpose of life.

Morality is a continuation of of the natural process in

man.
 NATURALISM

EETHICAL
HEDONISM EUDAIMONIS UTILITARIANIS
M M

Psychologica Ethical
l

Egoistic Altruistic

Cannot account for true

or false moral statements
 Hedonism
The Greek hedone: pleasure, delight.

Derives morality from the distinction between

pleasure and unplesantness which is immediately
perceived.

Chief purpose of morality is to teach man to enjoy

life.

Lead a full life through seeking pleasure

 Eudaimonism
Not just physical pleasure.

Physical and spiritual.

More comprehensive.

Aristotle, Aquinas, Democratus, Epucurus etc.

 Utilitarianism
Originated from the Sophist school of Antiphon and
Thraymachus.

The basis of ethics is utility, which is associated with

the individual’s natural striving for pleasure and
avoidance of suffering.
Egoistic Ethical Hedonism
Based on psychological hedonism

Thomas Hobbes: man is naturally selfish and egoistic

and all higher emotions spring from self-love.
Criticism of Egoistic Ethical Hedonism

Self-sacrifice is not less primordial than self-

preservation.

Altruism like egoism also has its roots in human

nature.

Egoistic hedonism fails to give us a uniform standard

of morality as pleasure which is the standard is often
subjective
 Utilitarianism
Morality is about making the world as happy as possible

Maximalism: maximum utility-happiness to the

maximum number

consequentialism: it is about balancing good and bad

and hence consequences matter

No references to abstract ideas or supernatural entities

Jeremy Bentham (act utilitarianism)J S Mill (rule

Utilitarianism) are the main champions.
 Utilitarianism
Consequences matter in evaluating the merit of an action

Consequences of an action to benefit the majority of the

people

The morally right action is the action which will maximize

utility

46
 Utility
Utility is a property in an object that produces benefit,
advantage, pleasure, good or happiness or prevent the
happening of pain evil, or unhappiness to the party
whose interest is considered

Utility is happiness, and happiness is pleasure minus

pain, well-being of individuals

47
 The Principle of Utility
The greatest (maximum) happiness of the greatest
(maximum) number of people who are affected by
performance of an action

48
 Bentham – Act
1.
Utilitarianism
In any given situation, the act utilitarian would ask: “how much pleasure or pain would
result if I did this action now?”

2. For Bentham, pleasure and pain are the only consequences that matter in determining
the moral worth of an action. This aspect of Bentham's theory is known as hedonistic
utilitarianism

3. For any given action, from the possible consequence, that which achieves maximum
pleasure for maximum people = right action

4. Hedonistic value of any human action can be calculated by considering:

Intensity
Duration
Certainty
Immediateness

49
Fruitfulness (one pleasure giving rise to other pleasures)
Purity (freedom from pain)
Extent (the number of people affected)
 Bentham’s Theory
Nature has placed mankind under the governance of
two sovereign masters; pleasure and pain.

It is to them alone to point what we ought to do.

Because we do desire pleasure, therefore we ought to

desire pleasure.

Ethical hedonism is based on psychological

hedonism.
 How to decide?
A hedonistic calculus is proposed.

Weigh pleasure and pain and see where the excess is.

Excess of pleasure over pain is preferred.

Rightness consists in pleasurableness and wrongness in

painfulness.

It is gross utilitarianism: no considerations of quality.

It is altruistic: concerned about the number of people

affected.
Bentham’s Democratic Principle of Justice

Man is naturally egoistic.

Man will never serve another man unless he benefits

from it.

Each is to count for one and no one for more than one.

The moral standard is not the greatest pleasure of the

individual but the greatest pleasure of the greatest
number.
Arguments against Act Utilitarianism

We desire certain objects and their possession may be accompanied

by pleasure. Pleasure is not the goal.

Paradox of hedonism: the more we seek pleasure the less we get it.

Even if we naturally seek pleasure it does not follow that we ought to

seek it.

If we naturally seek pleasure then there is no point in saying that we

ought to seek it.

Pleasure and pain are subjective states of the mind of individuals and
cannot be quantified.

How can we measure the pleasure of others?

 Arguments against Act Utilitarianism
No qualitative difference between different kinds of pleasures:
alcohol consumption and reading a book.
Morally wrong to waste time on leisure activities such as
watching television, since our time could be spent in ways that
could produce greater social benefit, such as charity work. Is this
reasonable?
It seems that specific acts of torture or slavery would be morally
permissible if the social benefit of these actions outweighed the
disadvantages!
Besides, what about acts which foster loyalty and friendship

54
which do not always yield the pleasure principle?
Egoism and altruism may not go together.
 J S Mill – Rule Utilitarianism
Agreed with Bentham on the basic principles of Utilitarianism,
but made further significant improvements to it.
Recognized qualitative differences between different kinds of
pleasures (physical / Intellectual)
Focus shifted from consequences emanating from the action to
those emanating from a rule
Individual actions are evaluated on the basis of whether they
conform to a justified moral rule
Thus, an action is right provided they are permitted by rules the

55
general acceptance of which would maximize utility in the
agent’s society and wrong only if it (action) would be prohibited
by such rules
 Rule Utilitarianism

Stealing is wrong
Adopting a rule against theft clearly has more favorable
consequences than unfavorable consequences for everyone
The same is true for moral rules against lying or murdering.

Rule-utilitarianism, then, offers a three-tiered method for

judging conduct:
An action, such as stealing my friend’s watch is wrong since
it violates a moral rule against theft
The rule against theft is morally binding because adopting this

56
rule produces favorable consequences for everyone
Arguments against Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism is concerned almost exclusively about
consequences, not intentions
We cannot foresee the possible consequences of our
action.
By concentrating exclusively on consequences,
utilitarianism makes the moral worth of our actions a
matter of luck. We must await the final consequences
before we find out if our action was good or bad.
Who is to judge what is best?
The British felt they wanted to do what was best for
India, but were they really the ones to judge what that

57
was for Indians?
 Virtue Ethics
About virtues: about character
Whether the person acting is expressing good character (moral virtues)
or not

What kind of person ought I to be?

A person's character is the totality of his character traits
Character traits are deeply engrained dispositions
Our character traits can be good, bad or somewhere in between.
Character traits can be admirable or not
The admirable character traits are called virtues, their opposites are
vices
 Virtue As the Golden Mean
Doctrine of the mean, often interpreted to insist that moral behavior consists in
always acting moderately
A virtuous action involves a response appropriate to a particular situation in which
one finds oneself in
Appropriate = neither over-reacting nor under-reacting = finding the proper
balance between two extremes:
Excess: Over-reacting
Deficiency: under-reacting

Most virtues fall at a mean between more extreme character traits

Courage: between rashness and cowardice
If I have too much courage I develop the disposition of rashness which is also a
vice

59
Otherwise I am a coward.
 Deontologism

From the Greek word deon, or duty

Sometimes called non-consequentialist since actions
follows from certain principles that are obligatory,
irrespective of the consequences that might follow
from our actions

60
 What is duty?
Duty is not just following orders

In Kant’s terminology it is an act which one ought to

do – action which is beyond one’s personal likes,
dislikes or any external compulsions

61
 Kantian Moral Theory
Only those actions that arise from the right motive are
morally praiseworthy
motive = that which induces the self to act / idea of an
end
intention = the commitment to execute a particular
action / Idea + means to achieve the idea
Three kinds of motives from which action springs:
Self Interest: I help others because that way people will
think highly of me
Inclination: I help others because I feel sorry for them
Duty: I help others because it is my duty towards those

62
less fortunate than me
 Acting from duty?
By asking “can I also will that the maxim of my action become a
universal law?”
Maxim: a subjective principle of action – a rule of action that
one follows as part of his / her own policy of living irrespective
of what rules of living other people may have / follow
Example:
“it is alright to cheat when you need to”

Can the above maxim be universalized?

People should only adopt as rules of living for themselves rules

63
that they can will should be always followed by everyone
 Categorical Imperative
Morality is a system of categorical Imperatives
Categorical Imperative is the foundational principle of duty
that encompasses our particular duties
The categorical imperative is fundamentally different from
hypothetical imperatives that hinge on some personal desire
that we have
Example,
"If you want to get a good job, then you ought to have
a 6 point CGPA"

64
By contrast, a categorical imperative simply mandates an
action, "You ought to do X" irrespective of one's personal
desires
 Deontologism
Categorical imperatives are unconditional and
objectively necessary without making any reference
to a purpose / having another end.
One ought to tell the truth because it is the right
thing to do, not because you desire to achieve certain
ends.
If a person simply told the truth because he believed
that it will have good consequences he has not
performed a morally praiseworthy action

65
Criticism of Deontologism
How do we determine which duty to fulfill when we
are faced with conflicting duties?
Example: duty not to let my family starve and duty not
to steal

Kantian Ethics only yields absolutes – no room for

contingent life situations
Example: Lying is always wrong on the Kantian ethics,
even when it would be used to save a person life (what
if it is my duty to save a person’s life)

66
American Oil Companies in the Apartheid South
Africa

Criticized for supporting the inhuman regime and

practices.

They do not follow racial discrimination within the

company.
 The Argument of the
Companies
Equality inside the Co. –No discrimination.

Economic Development of the Blacks – if the US

companies stop functioning, the blacks will suffer
more.

Business has its own priorities.

Utilitarian analysis
The Argument of the Critics
Contributing to maintain the status co.

Oil Co.s have to give 25% of reserves to the Govt –

helping the regime.

Tax to the Govt.

Deontologism
 Character of People
Inviolved
White Party leaders:No respect to human rights

Desmund Tutu : Brave, courageous, concern for

the suffering humanity. Integrity of character.

Nelson Mandela: Courageous, truthful, dedicated

to the goal, committed to the ideal.
 Comparative Analysis
Utilitarianism and Deontological theories – Focus
only on the action.

Virtue theory focus on the Character of people –

Agent based ethics.