Chapter Two

2. Approaches to Ethics
Unit Objectives

After completing this chapter, students will be able to:

1. Discuss ideas about right or wrong, good or bad activities.
2. Explain about particular rules of right or wrong, good or
bad behavior for different groups and situations.
3. Analyze the various ethical rules or principles of behavior.
4. Examine the personal and community factors involved in
defining beliefs about what is right or wrong, good or bad
behavior.
5. Analyze how different contexts and situations influence
personal values, attitudes, beliefs and behaviors.
2.1 Introduction

• This Chapter aims to introduce you to various ethical

theories.
• All moral theories (views) address the questions of what is
Good, why it is Good, and where the Good is located or
found?
• It is the fact that there are only three basic kinds of moral
theories (views):
A) Theleological ethics theory,
B) Deontological ethics theory, and
C) Virtue-based ethics theory.
2.2 Normative ethics
• We may now begin our review of problems and views
in the area of normative ethics, starting with the theory
of obligation and then going on to the theory of moral
value and, finally, to the theory of non-moral value.
• The ultimate concern of the normative theory of
obligation is to guide us in the making of decisions
and judgments about actions in particular situations.
Normative ethics poses questions of the following kind:
• Are there general principles or rules that we could
distinguish between right and wrong? Or:
• Are there virtues and/or relationships that we can
nurture or encourage and develop, in order to behave
well?
In short, normative ethics;
o Normative ethics offers theories or philosophies of the best
way to live. These theories evaluate actions in a systematic way,
i.e., they may focus on outcomes or duties or motivation as a
means of justifying human conduct.
o It includes ethical theories or approaches such as utilitarianism,
deontology, virtue ethics, principlism, narrative ethics and
feminist ethics.
Activity:
• Are you the type of a person who usually ‘do the right thing
or action’ in your life?
• If yes, how do you know your action what you do is good or
write action?
2.2.1 Theleological or Consequentialist Ethics
(utilitarian or end based theory)

What is Theleological/Consequentialist Ethics theory

(utilitarian or end based ethics theory)?
• Theleological or utilitarian or Consequentialist Ethics theory is
referred to as “the end justifies the means.”
• Theleological approach or ethics theory looks to the
consequences or results or outcomes of an action in judging
whether that action is right or wrong.
• This theory stresses or focuses that the consequences of an
action determines the morality of the action.
• In our normal lives, we use utilitarian reasoning all
the time.
• According to this view or ethics theory, rightness and
wrongness are determined by pleasure and happiness
or pain that something produces.
• For example, If we give money to the 100,000 famine
victims, we would cause at least 3 million units of pleasure
or happiness but that giving the money to the Ethiopian
Coffee Club would cause less than 1,000 units of pleasure
and happiness.
• Thus, we would have moral obligation to give the money
to the 100,000 famine victims than giving the money to
the Ethiopian Coffee Club.
• There is something appealing about Bentham’s utilitarianism.
• It is simple in that there is only one principle to apply:
Maximize pleasure or happiness and minimize suffering or
pain.
• It is commonsensical in that we think that morality really is
about reducing suffering and promoting generosity,
kindness and support as well as promoting pleasure or
happiness.
• It is scientific that simply make quantitative measurements
and apply the principle impartially, giving no special
treatment to ourselves or to anyone else because of race,
gender, personal relationship, religion, etc.
The Strengths of Theleological ethics theory or Utilitarianism

• Theleological ethics theory or Utilitarianism has three positive

features or aspects.
• The first strength is that it is a single principle, an absolute
system with a potential answer for every situation: Do what
will promote the most utility or the most helpfulness or
support and relief !
• It is good to have a simple, action-guiding principle that is
applicable to every occasion even if it may be difficult to apply.
• Its second strength or quality is that utilitarianism seems to get
to the substance of morality/moral goodness.
• It is not merely a formal system that simply sets forth broad
guidelines for choosing principles but offers no principles such
as the guideline “Do whatever you can universalize.”
• Rather it has a material core: We should promote human
(and possibly animal) flourishing (relief) and reduce
suffering.
• Its third strength or quality of utilitarianism is that it is
particularly well suited to address the problem of posterity
(future generation) namely, why we should preserve scarce
natural resources for the betterment of future generations of
humans that do not yet exist.
• Expressed verbally, the question is “Why should I care about
posterity (future generation)?”
• “ What has posterity (future generation) ever done for me?”
Criticisms with Formulating Utilitarianism
(Theleological or Consequentialist Ethics theory)
• The first set of criticism or problems occurs in the very
formulation of utilitarianism: “The greatest support or
happiness for the greatest number.”
• Notice that we have two “greatest” things in this
formula: “happiness” and “number.”
• Whenever we have two variables, we invite problems of
determining which of the variables to rank first when
they seem to conflict.
 To see this point, consider the following example:
Dear Students;
• Suppose that I am offering a $1,000 prize to the person who
runs the longest distance in the shortest amount of time.
• Three people participate: Abebe runs 5 km in 31 minutes,
Kelbesa runs 7 km in 50 minutes and Obang runs 1 km in 6
minutes. Who should get the prize?
• Abebe has fulfilled one part of the requirement (run the
longest distance), but Obang has fulfilled the other
requirement (run the shortest amount of time). This is
precisely the problem with utilitarianism.
Three-Step Action Formula
• Utilitarianism might be construed as offering a three-step action
formula for action:
1. On the basis of what I know, I must project the
consequences of each alternative option open to me
(e.g., taking different kinds of actions or taking no action).
2. Calculate how much happiness, or balance of happiness
over unhappiness, is likely to be produced by anticipated
consequences of each action or none.
3. Select that action which, on balance, will produce the
greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of
people affected.
• Generally, Theleological ethics theory or utilitarianism is a
moral theory which takes into account how the consequences
or outcomes of an act will affect all the parties involved.
• Moral rightness depends on the consequences for all affected
people.
• The fundamental principle of utilitarianism is the principle of
utility or support or convenience and helpfulness for affected
parties involved.
The principle of utility or usefulness
 The morally right action is the one that produces the
best overall consequences (outcomes) with regard to
the utility or welfare or usefulness of all the affected
parties.
 Jeremy Bentham’s slogan about utility or usefulness:
• The right act or policy is the one that causes ‘the
greatest happiness of the greatest number’ that is,
maximize the total utility or welfare of the majority
of all the affected parties.
 Question for Students:
• ‘The end justifies the means’. Some commentators think that this
policy allows morally wrong or bad acts to be committed with the aim
of achieving good ends.
A. On the basis of your experience, do you think that this habit of
carrying out unjust or dishonest act as means to achieve good ends is
so unusual?
B. What about a doctor’s effort and determination to avoid breaking bad
news to a very depressed patient?
• What about prescribing antibiotics for infection symptoms at the
request of a patient?
C. What does the fairly common occurrence of such events tell us?
• That utilitarianism is well-suited to human behavior?
• According to the Theleological ethics approach, the
utilitarian school of thought (utilitarian or end based ethics
theory), the greatest utility (helpfulness and support) is the
consequences of an action.
• Utilitarian or end based ethical theory holds that no action by
itself is good or bad, the only factors that make actions good
or bad are the outcomes, or the end results or the
consequences of an action.
2.2.2 Deontological Ethics theory (Duty or rule-
Based ethics theory)
What is Deontological Ethics (Duty or rule-Based ethics theory)?
Deontological (Duty or rule-Based ethics theory) is referred as “the means
justifies the end.”
• In contrast the Theleological ethics theory, Deontological ethics theories is Non-
Consequentialist Ethics view).
• Deontological ethics theory denies or does not support the Theleological ethics
theory.
• The Deontological ethics theory asserts or stresses or focuses that a duty or rule-
based moral obligation besides the goodness or badness of its consequences.
• This theory proposes that the rightness or wrongness of an action depends on
the nature of the act or rule rather than its consequences or outcome.
• This theory holds or believes that you are acting rightly when you act according to
duties and rules.
• This is a theory that the rightness or wrongness of moral action is
determined, at least partly with reference to formal rules of conduct rather
than consequences or outcomes of an action.
• It is an emphasis on the intentions, motives, moral principles or performance
of duty and rules rather than outcomes, as the sign of right action/morality
and immorality.
• Deontological Ethics (Duty or rule-Based ethics theory) is a duty and rule
based rather than consequences of an act.
• According to this theory, the consequences or outcomes of an action have
nothing to do with their rightness or wrongness.
• This theory holds that you are acting rightly when you act according
to duties and rules.
• Responsibility arises from these moral facts of life (from duties or
rules).
• The theory denotes that duties and rules are the correct measuring
factors for evaluating an action.
• One place where such factors are presented in codes (rules) of
professional ethics. E.g. informed consent and respect of a patient.
• Deontology is an ethical action, which must be guided above all by

adherence to clear principles, such as respect for free will of a patient.

• In contemporary bioethics, the idea of autonomy has been of central

importance.

• This approach or theory is a system of ethical decision making that is

based on moral rules and principles.

• It is not the results or outcomes or consequences of an act that make it

right or wrong unlike the Theleological/Consequentialist Ethics theory.

• Deontological ethics theory judges that the morality of an
action is based on the duties and rules to adhere.
• This ethical action or decision is done depend on the intentions
or plans of moral principles rather than the outcomes or results
or consequences.
• In short, “Deontology” does not look primarily at
consequences of actions, but it examines a situation for the
essential moral value of the intention of act or rule-based
ethics of rightness or wrongness of the action.
• Butts, J. B., & Rich, K. L. (2008) indicated, Deontology
holds that the most important aspect of our lives are
governed by certain unbreakable (undisruptable) moral
rules.
• Deontologist hold that these rules may not be broken,
, even if breaking them may improve an outcome.
• Deontological theory proposes that do the “right” things,
even though the consequences of that action may be
“good.”
• The famous Deontological philosopher, Immanuel Kant is
often identified within this theory.
• Kant’s Categorical Imperative (command)
• The name of the German philosopher, Immanuel Kant (1724-
1804) is identified with the moral theory known as deontology.
• Kant was adamantly opposed to the idea that the outcome of an
action could determine its moral worth.
• For deontologists, it is not consequences or outcomes which
determine the rightness or wrongness of an act, but, rather, the
intention of the person who carries out the act or rule-based
principle.
• Deontologists maintain that there are some moral obligations
which are absolutely mandatory or obligatory, no matter what
consequences or outcomes are produced.
2.2.3 Egoism Ethics and psychological altruism
Ethics Theory
2.3.3.1 Egoism Ethics (self-centered) Ethics Theory
• We usually assume that moral behavior or being ethical, has to
do with being overly concerned with oneself.
• In other words, in this theory selfishness is assumed to be
acceptable attitude.
• The egoism ethics theory implies that we ought to be
selfish. Or, to put it more gently (kindly), we ought to be
self-interested ethics theory.
• It just means that egoism ethics is a theory that advocates
or promotes egoism (self-centeredness) as a moral rule.
• That means, egoism ethics theory believes that you should
look others after yourself.
• Egoist ethics theory insisted that if you don’t take advantage of a
situation, you are foolish.
• Egoists claim that it makes good sense to look after yourself, and
morality is a result of that self –interest.
• Thus, Egoists say that we do it for ourselves, not for others.

More formally, the argument of egoism ethics is the following:

1) We all always seek to maximize our own self-interest.
2) If someone cannot do an act, one has no obligation to do an act
• In Butler's terms, this means that "self-love" is the only basic
"principle"
• in human nature; in one set of contemporary terms, it means
that "ego-satisfaction" is the final aim of all activity or that
"the pleasure principle" is the basic "drive" in every
individual.
• If this is so, the argument continues, we must recognize this
fact in our moral theory and infer or conclude that our basic
ethical principle must be that of self-love.
• It is usual here to object or think that one cannot logically
infer an ethical conclusion from a psychological premise
(principle or idea) in this way.
2.2.3.2 Psychological Altruism Ethics Theory (humanity or
self-sacrifice ethics theory )
• In Psychological altruism ethics theory, an action is right if the
consequences of that action are favorable to all except the actor.
• Butler argued that we have an inherent psychological capacity to show
generosity and kindness to others.
• This view is called psychological altruism ethics theory and maintains
that at least some of our actions are motivated by instinctive
benevolence (kindness).
• psychological altruism ethics theory is self-sacrificing act to other
people’s interest (that is selflessness act).
• Psychological altruism ethics theory holds that all human
action is necessarily other centered than self-centered act.
• A parallel analysis of psychological altruism ethics results in
opposing conclusion to egoism ethics (self-centeredness).
• Suppose, for example, that Degu, is not good at swimming,
but he saves a child from drawing in Lake Tana.
• In this connection, what ultimately motivated him to do this?
• It would be odd to suggest that it is ultimately his own
benefit that Degu is seeking. After all, he is risking his own
life in the process.
• Psychological altruists are people who act so as to increase
other people’s pleasure or happiness and interest.
• They will act for the sake of someone else even if it
decreases their own pleasure or happiness and interest.
Activity:
• Write some our moral obligations that you admire for its
altruistic or its self-sacrificing for other-centered ethics and
motivation.
• We can differentiate egoistic ethics and psychological altruistic
ethics desires in the following way:
 One’s desire is egoistic ethics if and only if it concerns (what one
perceives to be) the benefit of oneself and not anyone else.
 In the contrary, one’s desire is psychological altruistic ethics if
and only if it concerns (what one perceives to be) the benefit of
others than oneself.
• Altruists reject the theory of egoism ethics and rather they
argue that humans are naturally kind and generous.
• And according to psychological altruists view, altruistic ethics is
the feature of our human nature which is the basis of our
moral obligations.
2.2.4 The Divine Command Theory (DCT)
• According to the divine command theory or view, ethical principles are
simply the commands of God.
• The divine command theorists derive their validity from God’s
commanding them and they mean “commanded by God.”
• Without God, there would be no universally valid morality. We can
analyze the DCT into three separate theses:
1. Morality (that is, rightness and wrongness) originates with
God.
2. Moral rightness simply means “willed or commanded by God,” and
moral wrongness means “being against the will of God.”
3. Because morality essentially is based on divine will, not on
independently existing reasons for an action, no further
reasons for action are necessary at all.
2.3.4.1 Problems with the Divine Command Theory

There are three problems with the Divine Command Theory

(DCT) that need to be faced by those who hold it.
1. It would seem to make people to be out of work or job.

2. It would seem to make people to be out of creativity or

innovation, and
3. It would seem to make people to be out of scientific
reasoning thinking and judgment.
2.3.5 Rights Theory
• In this ethics theory, rights and duties are related in such a way
that the rights of one person imply (demand or require) the
duties of another person.
• For example, if I have a right to payment of $10 by Mister
Smith, then Smith has a duty to pay me $10.
• This is called the correlativity of rights and duties.
2.3.6 Virtue-based Ethics theory
• “Virtue-based ethics theory” is acting in accordance with a moral
rule or principle and a virtue ethicist will emphasize the fact that
providing help would be charitable or generous and kindness
being virtues.
• Generally, “Virtue-based ethics theory or view” is a characteristic
of good personality and doing morally acceptable action .
• It is doing what is right and avoiding what is wrong.
• Virtue-based ethics is moral goodness or moral
excellence or dedication to the common good.
Key questions which virtue-based ethical systems
ask include:
 What sort of a person do I want to be?
 What virtues (moral qualities) are characteristic of the
person I want to be?
 What actions will cultivate or promote and develop
the virtues I want to possess?
 What actions will be characteristic of the sort of a
person I want to be?
The Good Character (the good personality)
• People have a natural capacity for good character or good
personality.
• The good personality or capacity is also developed through
practice.
• Practices are developed through acting and a person's good
personality is formed by what we do.
• The good person is the one who has attained living well and
doing well.
Friendship: a person's relationship to his/her friend
is known as friendship.
• The kinds of friendship:
• Utility (helpfulness and supporting to each other)
• Desire and preference (pleasure and happiness).
• Moral psychology: is making a moral judgment (decision
or opinion about something) and being motivated to act
as that judgment.
• Objectivity: is impartiality and working towards finding
out the moral truth.
Activity:
• Summary questions;

a) How do you understand the notion or idea of ‘virtue’?

• Consider someone whom you think is ‘virtuous’ or morally
good.
b) How would you describe ‘virtues’?
c) What kinds of behaviors or manners of a person would you
recommend as moral indicators of virtue (good personality)?
d) Does a ‘good’ doctor or a ‘good’ nurse have certain
characteristic ‘virtues’ (quality personality)?
2.4 Meta-ethics
2.4.1 What is Meta-ethics?
Meta-Ethics is Normative Ethics.

Meta-ethics tries to answer question, such as:

– What does “good,” “right,” or “justice” mean?

– What makes something good or right?

– Is moral realism or moral practicality true?

– Is morality irreducible, cognitive or overriding (vital)?

– Do intrinsic (basic or inherent and natural) values exist?

 Generally, Meta-ethics:
• Examines the meaning of moral terms and concepts and the
relationships between these concepts.
• Explores where moral values, such as ‘personhood’ and
‘autonomy’ come from.
• Considers the difference between moral values and other kinds
of values.
• Examines the way in which (how) moral claims are justified.
 Meta-ethics also poses questions of the following
kind:
• What do we mean by the claim, ‘life is sacred or blessed’?

• Are moral claims a matter of personal view, religious belief

or social standard or are they objective in some sense?
• If they are objective, what make them so?

• Is there a link between human psychology and the moral

claims that humans make?
Chapter Summary
• Ethics is one of the most important disciplines that needs to be thought to
the students to adopt ethical behavior with respect to good life.
• Ethics promotes healthy society and fulfilling experience for an individual
or a group.
• Morality Concerned about habits, customs, ways of life, especially when
these are assessed as good or bad, right or wrong actions.
• Moral values help to regulate the behavior as a standard as a rule.
• Moral values bring about peace and stability. So, individuals have a
moral responsibility to respect and maintain the value of their society
and refrain from committing things that disturb society’s stability and
peace.
• While utilitarianism (Theleological ethics theory) focuses to consequences
or outcomes of an action, while deontology ethics theory focuses to duty
or rule-based of an action.