Section A Revision:
Week 1 – Fundamentals – Lewis Vaughn & Pryor
Terms
Morality - a system of norms and standards that prescribe right and wrong, good,
and bad conduct. It informs us of what we should and shouldn't do, serving as a
code of conduct that people can rationally agree upon. It is expressed through
moral judgments, values, theories, and rules that guide human behavior.
Ethics - the philosophical examination of morality. It aims to organize, elucidate, and
critically evaluate theories concerning the moral correctness and incorrectness of
actions and behavior.
Ethical theory - Aim to establish a coherent and defensible framework for
understanding our moral obligations and the moral status of actions. They provide
guidance on determining the moral rightness or wrongness of our actions based on
certain principles or criteria. For example, an action may be considered morally right
if it aligns with a specific moral principle (X).
• Metaethics – Concerns the nature and meaning of moral properties in
themselves such as right, wrong, good, bad.
• Normative Ethics – The philosophical study, construction and analysis of the
moral rules, principles and theories that guide human action and behaviour.
• Applied Ethics - The practical application of moral norms and theories to
evaluate real-world moral issues or cases.
o Legally right/wrong – Whether or not something is permitted by the law.
o Prudentially right/wrong – Whether or not something is
helpful/beneficial/harmful to your long-term well-being.
o Morally right/wrong - That which is right or wrong according to an ethical
theory or moral principle.
o Morally Right - Something is morally good if it is worth doing and enhances
the life of those doing that thing and/or others.
o Morally Good - Something is morally right if it is an action that must be
done according to moral principles, most likely because it is morally good.
o Morally Forbidden/Impermissible Actions - Actions we should not do
because they contradict a morally justifiable system. These actions are
considered wrong based on moral reasons and can be judged as
inappropriate and against the moral system or relevant moral judgments
(Morally blameworthy).
o Morally required/obligatory actions – actions you should do because they
align with a morally justifiable system. These actions are considered right
based on moral reasons and can be seen as appropriate and in
accordance with the moral system or relevant moral judgments (morally
praiseworthy).
o Supererogatory actions - morally good actions that are not required by
our moral systems and go beyond what is expected, but we still consider
them morally praiseworthy.
, o Suburgatory actions - actions that are not forbidden by our moral systems
but are still morally blameworthy. For instance, getting excessively drunk at
an engagement party.
o Morally permissible/neutral actions - actions we are allowed to do under
our moral systems. They are neither morally praiseworthy nor blameworthy.
Descriptive Theories – make claims about how the world is.
Ethical Theories (Moral Theories) – theories of how we ought to act and behave, aim
to tell/prescribe how humans ought to act and behave.
• Teleological – moral kindness with whether actions/behaviour maximize some
goal/aim. Something is good if its in pursuit of some good X.
• Deontological – prescribe a set of moral rules we must follow without
exception. Moral rightness of an action is determined by the following
prescribed rules.
• Character-based theories – what constitutes good and bad character, how
one should behave to be considered a morally good person. Moral goodness
in person determined by whether they embody the set of moral character
traits in the way prescribed by the theory.
Criteria for assessing moral theories
1. Internal Consistency (coherence of claims)
Consistency of claims, is there contradictions?
2. Consistency with considered moral judgements
Alignment with strong and informed intuitions about morality, no reason to doubt
truth upon initial inspection.
3. Consistency with background assumptions about morality
Consistency with what we think morality is like and is for.
,Good moral theory: moral stability, allows complexity, not demanding, should
always be able to guide us.
4. Usefulness in moral problem solving
Successfully guide our moral actions, tell correct moral action to take in each
scenario,
Bad arguments & Fallacies
Week 2 – Moral Relativism – Gilbert Harman, Jonathan Wolff & David B. Wong
• Descriptive Cultural Relativism (DCR) – different cultures have different moral norms
& ethical systems.
Theory of morality: It’s a fact of our world that different societies and cultures
function with different moral norms. This is a sociological or anthropological claim
that there are observable moral disagreement between cultures.
Implication:
- DCR doesn’t say moral claims of all cultures are true.
- That is, it can be true that our cultures have different moral commitments
without saying that all those commitments are true or right in themselves. DCR
is NOT a metaethical claim.
- DCR does not tell us that we should follow these moral codes. DCR is not a
normative claim.
• Metaethical Cultural Relativism (MCR) - moral rightness & wrongness is determined
by culture, no objective morality & morality depends on culture.
, Argument:
P1: Moral judgments differ between cultures. (DCR)
P2: If people’s moral judgments differ between cultures, then right and wrong also
differ according to culture.
C: If right and wrong differ according to culture, then there can be no objective
morality and the truth and falsity of
moral claims is relatively determined culturally.
• Normative Cultural Relativism (NCR) – we ought to do what our culture’s claim is
morally right. (builds from MCR)
Claims:
1. There is widespread disagreement about morality amongst cultures (DCR).
2. Right and wrong differ according to culture. (Meta-R)
3. There is no objective morality, in that are no moral truths that
always/universally hold for all people [because moral truths are culturally
determined] (Meta-R).
So
4. We ought to do what our cultures demand as morally right. (NCR)
5. We should not treat the moral principles and norms of a particular culture as
having special status over the moral norms of other cultures. (No moral
chauvinism).(NCR)
6. We ought to be tolerant of people acting under the moral norms of different
cultures. (NCR)
Summary
DCR – claim 1 – there’s widespread moral disagreement
+ Argument for MCR – claim 1-3 – the argument from cultural differences →
widespread disagreement amongst cultures, right/wrong differ with culture, no
subjective morality.
+ NCR inferred – claim 4-6 – we must act to what culture dictates, avoid moral
Chauvinism, must be tolerant.
= The full argument for NCR – claim 1-6 (4-6 = conclusions)
Claims 5 & 6
Requires us to respect moral cultural diversity (NCR).
• Avoids forcing our own cultures’ moral commitments on others (NCR).
• Encourages harmonious relations between people from different cultures (NCR).
