MORAL THEORIES

LESSON 2

GEC 125 ETHICS

THEORY
> is a structured set of statements used to predict or explain a set of facts or a concept.

MORAL THEORY
> explains why a certain action is wrong or why we ought to act in a certain ways.

FOR THE STRATEGIST

> theory provides a way of understanding the dynamics of the complex { warning
signals of change/dealing with change }.
> or, theory is one’s notion of cause and effect.
CONSEQUENTIALISM
> hold that only the consequences, or outcomes, of actions matter morally.
> acts are deemed to be morally right solely on the basis of their consequences.

consequentialism based in two principles ;

1. Whether an act is right or wrong depends only on the results of that act;
2. The better consequences an act produces, the better or more right that act.
  it gives us guidance when faced with a moral dilemma;
- a person should choose the action that maximizes good consequences and it gives this
general guidance on how to live
- people should live so as to maximize good consequences.

BUT ---

Consequentialism - is sometimes criticized because, it can be difficult or even impossible to

know what the result of an action will be ahead of time.
MORAL SUBJECTIVISM
> morality is decided by the individual
> individuals is the measuring stick that decides right and wrong
> under moral subjectivism is moral subjective, they also based on personal tastes,
feelings, and also opinions.

8 different types of moral subjectivism ;

 SIMPLE SUBJECTIVISM
 INDIVIDUALIST SUBJECTIVISM
 MORAL RELATIVISM { or ETHICAL RELATIVISM }
 IDEAL OBSERVER THEORY
 ETHICAL EGOISM
 UTILITARIANISM
 DEONTOLOGY
 VIRTUE ETHICS
1. SIMPLE SUBJECTIVISM
> interprets moral judgments as statements that can be true or false
2. INDIVIDUAL SUBJECTIVISM
> there are as many distinct scales of good and evil as there are individuals in the world { PROTAGORAS }
3. MORAL RELATIVISM { or ETHICAL RELATIVISM }
> thing to be morally right is for it to be approved of by society, different things are right to people in different societies
and different periods in history
4. IDEAL OBSERVER THEORY
> the view that what is right is determined by the attitudes, that a hypothetical ideal observer
5. ETHICAL EGOISM
> right and wrong is determined by what is in your self-interest, or a immoral to act contrary to your self-interest
6. UTILITARIANISM
> it is a theory that holds that the best way to make a moral decision is to look at the potential consequences of
each available choice
> it is also known as CONSEQUENTIALISM, often summed up as a philosophy of “ The Greatest Good Of
Number “
> first popularized by British philosophers Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill in the 19 th century

7. DEONTOLOGY or DEONTOLOGIVAL ETHICS

> its focuses on the rightness or wrongness of actions themselves, as opposed to the rightness or wrongness of the
consequences
> derives from the Greek word ‘deon’ for duty and ‘logos’
> it is a duty-based moral theory
> society needs rules in order to function, and that a person can only be called moral
 IMMANUEL KANT
 KANT coined the following maxim, known as the Categorical Imperative
“ Act only according to that maxim by which you can also will that it would become a universal law”
 KANT deontology sometimes called deontological ethics

8. VIRTUE ETHICS
> virtue is an excellent trait of character
> virtue ethics states that the only good people can make good moral decisions
> its emphasizes an individual’s character as the key element of ethical thinking
> it is also a number of qualities that they believe are universal, and accepted in all cultures, they include; { wisdom,
loyalty, honesty, temperance, bravery, and justice }
 THREE MAIN ELEMENTS OF VIRTUE ETHICS
1. EUDAIMONISM
> it can be translated as “happiness, well-being, or good life”
> classical formulation of virtue ethics, its holds that the proper goal of human life is eudaimonism
> this goal can be achieved by a lifetime of practicing “arete” {the virtues}, in one’s everyday activities, subject to
the exercise of “phronesis” {practical wisdom}

ARISTOTLE
> argued that each of the moral virtues was a golden mean or a desirable ground, between two undesirable extremes.

2. ETHICS OF CARE
> It was developed by Feminist writers Annette Baier {1987} second half of 20 th century, and motivated by the idea
that men think masculine is for justice and autonomy. While women, thinks feminine is caring.
> it holds that moral action centers on interpersonal relationships and care or benevolence as a virtue. It also
emphasizes the importance of solidarity, community, and relationships rather than universal standards and impartiality.
 AGENT - BASED THEORIES
> developed by recently by Michael Slote {1993}
> give an account of virtue based on our common-sense intuitions about which character traits are admirable {e.g.
kindness, compassion, etc.}
> the evaluation of action is dependent based on ethical judgment about the inner life of the agents who perform
those actions

THE THEORY OF NATIONAL RIGHTS

> believes that in every person is endowed with certain inalienable rights, such as the right to life, property, and
liberty.
> the theorists argue that right to life is self-evident, and the reason is they are essential of human happiness.
 LOCKE
By property, Locke meant more than land and goods that could be sold or given away, Locke believed most basic human
law of nature is the preservation of mankind, because individuals have both a right and a duty to their own lives. He also
argued that individuals should be free to make choices to their own lives.
According to Locke, purpose of government is to secure and protect the God-given inalienable natural rights of the
people.

3. MORAL RELATIVISM
> it is a theory which states that no one person’s morals are better or worse than others
> RELATIVISTS argue that a person’s moral code is shaped by the society in which is raised
> it is also the opposite end of the continuum from moral absolutism, says that there is always right answer to ethical
question
> RELATIVISTIC positions specifically see moral values as applicable only with certain cultural boundaries
> NORMATIVE MORAL RELATIVISM is the idea that all societies should accept each other’s differing moral
values
 MENTAL FRAMES
LESSON 3
Organization leaders use mental frames to to simplify the world they are observing and to make the decision-making
process more efficient.
Mental framing is a selective, reductive excessively narrow way by which a question or even information used to take
a decision is expressed or presented.
Some framing is done due to pure reasoning errors, logical fallacies, confusions, and bogus.

ACCORDING TO;

GOFFMAN {1974}
Frames as principles organization which govern events at least social ones and our subjective involvement in them.
Frames are the “schemata of interpretation” that allow individuals to locate, perceive, and identify.
 GITLIN {1980}
suggests that “frames are principles of selection, emphasis, and presentation composed of little tacit theories about
what exists, what happens, and what matters.

SHON {1983}
describes framing as a mental device that sets the boundaries of our intention, while AHN and ERGIN {2006}
model frames in terms of different levels of awareness.

BRUBAKER, LOVEMAN, and STAMATOV {2004}

suggest that cognitive perspectives are not things in the world but ways of seeing the world.

KAHNEMAN and TVERSKY {1979}

incorporate framing as an essential part of their prospect theory, where they distinguish two discrete phrases in a
decision-making process.
later studies {1981-1986} have documented large and systematic changes in an individual’s preference caused by
variations in the framing.
 KAHNEMAN, et.al, {2000}
a basic notion underlying much of the literature on heuristics is that these mental shortcuts are many times
systematically biased.

MENTAL FRAME
is a frame through which we view the world, we attend to what is inside our frame, oblivious sometimes to
what occurs outside our frames, which can lead to dangerous blind spots.

FRAMES
can be useful insofar as they direct our attention toward the information we seek, they can also constrict our
peripheral vision.
 THE FRAMING BIAS
Framing becomes easily a damaging mental bias, which distorts the perception and analysis of an issue and the
whole decision-making process.
Framing bias gives as a selective {framed} and simplistic picture of reality.

THIS HAS SOME RELATION WITH HEURISTIC;

1. Representativeness heuristic in which we take simplified stereotypes as models, and;

2. Availability heuristics such as our first perception/interpretation of things, or the memory of a recent event or
data seen as a similar, but often unrelated.

Biased mental frames can result from a kind of cognitive myopia a narrow mental selectivity, or a
representation that deliberately reductive.
 THE CONSEQUENCES OF DECIDING WITH
BLINDERS
To use narrow, selective {or wrong} data, explanations, ideas and approaches about either an issue
{i.e. stressing gains or losses} or the facts themselves;

1. Thwart the ensuing reasoning, conclusions, and decisions.

2. Those flawed decisions bring dubious, damaging or at least “anomalous” practical effects.