ETHICS THEMES REVISION CARDS

4 KEY POINTS – God is omnipotent // choses to act fairly // orders the universe with divine laws // humans are powerless so we must follow the laws

ORIGIN OF MORALITY – commandments // if God says something is good it is good // if god says something is bad it is bad // right/good and wrong/bad are objective

EUTHYPHRO DILEMMA – Plato asks do the Gods decide the goods from the bads or are moral values from an independent source

ARBITRARINESS PROBLEM – what do we do if the God wills something to be good but it is actually evil

MODIFIED THEORY – Adams says that the commands are coming from his characteristics as he is omnibenevolent // goodness is the essential characteristic of God

STRENGTHS – universal // fits with God as the creator // emphasizes obedience // fits with the idea of divine sovereignty

WEAKNESSES – Euthyphro dilemma // modified theory // arbitrariness problem // are Gods inherently good

TEACHINGS – ten commandments, golden rule, love your neighbour as you love yourself

Virtue theory is a teleological argument, looks at the end goal or purpose of life

The end goal or purpose of life is to reach eudaimonia

PRINCIPLES – an action is only right if a virtuous person does it // virtuous person is someone who acts virtuously // act virtuously if you live and follow the virtues // a virtue is a moral characteristic needed to live well

MODERN THEORY – some people are atheist/agnostic // this is not argued on a religious base which may not be trusted // focuses on people

DOCTRINE OF THE MEANS – being virtuous is the right way to live // needs to be a balance between moral values and intellect // don’t want to be in vice of excess or vice of deficiency

TEACHINGS – ten commandments, golden rule, Matthew 5:3-12

STRENGTHS – based on the consequence of an action // flexible theory // it focuses on what it means to be human

WEAKNESSES – no clear rules // somethings are always wrong // need some objective rules

This is a view that is motivated by self interest and that we should always act out of self interest

Acting out of self interest is more than being selfish

it takes a complex thought to act out of self interest

STRENGTHS ­ - basic personal needs are met // a greater sense of personal identity

WEAKNESSES – social injustice // bigotry // destruction of a community ethos

A theory which says that laws exist which are set by nature // nature has come from God // therefore God has authority everywhere

It is deontological (based on rules) and absolute

Primary precepts – absolute and must be followed // they are preserve life, live in an orderly society, worship God, educate children, reproduce

SECONDARY PRECEPTS – nor absolute or universal // help you to follow primary precepts

ARISTOTLE – saw the end goal of life as reaching happiness // only do this by following the precepts

AQUINAS – agreed with Aristotle that rationality is an important element in human existence // Aquinas said that natural law is located within the ability for humans to reason and that if we add reasoning to moral dilemmas we would act within the natural law

Know natural law through revelation in Romans 2:14-15

Natural law is in all of us (religious or not) and it comes from reasoning

The reasoning should tell you why you should desire to do something and it should lead to the goal of perfection

AQUINAS - The virtue help people be more like God

CARDINAL VIRTUES – prudence (sound judgements) // justice // fortitude // temperance (moderation of activities)

REVEALED VIRTUES – love (charity) // hope // faith // help aim for the final goal // drive the pursuit to reach the end and have a supernatural end with God

INTENTION AND ACTION – if the intention of the action is to do something good or to help someone then the action is good

ABORTION – if woman wants abortion may not be okay at first // goes against primary precepts // may be okay with the secondary precepts // if the intention is right then it is acceptable

VOLUNTARY EUTHANASIA – if someone wants to be euthanised may not be okay at first // goes against primary precepts // may be okay with the secondary precepts // if the intention is right then it is acceptable

INVOLUNTARY EUTHANASIA – if someone wants to be euthanised but cannot ask this may not be okay at first // goes against primary precepts // may be okay with the secondary precepts // if the intention is right then it is acceptable // some people in this case may say that it is still not acceptable

LEGALISTICS ETHICS – when you must follow the rules which have been set // becomes textbook morality // not accepted

ANTINOMIAN ETHICS – when there are no rules and it could lead to something against the law // not accepted

SITUATION ETHICS – when the most loving action should be completed meaning that absolute, legalist rules can be changed if there is something more loving // accepted and accepts rule of agape

STRENGTHS – consistent with teachings of Jesus // flexible relativist system // emphasizes love // avoids conflict of duty as you would experience in an absolute argument

WEAKNESSES ­– may not want to follow the example of Jesus // unprincipled // subjective // difficult to predict the future

FOUR WORKING PRINCIPLES

·        PRAGMATISM – moral actions must work of achieve some realist goal

·        RELATIVISM – no fixed laws which must always be followed

·        POSITIVISM – first place is always to be given to love

·        PERSONALISM – people come before rules

SIX FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES

·        Only one thing is intrinsically good: love

·        The rule norm of Christian decision is love

·        love and justice are the some

·        love wills the neighbours good

·        only the end justifies the means

·        loves decisions are mad situationally

ABORTION

·        If the persons life is at risk then the most loving thing to do would be to have an abortion

·        If the child is going to have a poor quality of life it we be acceptable

·        If there are server mental health issues for the pregnant women it would also be acceptable

EUTHANASIA

·        If the person is suffering from a greatly painful illness

·        Then the most loving thing to do then it would be acceptable

Focuses on the end result on the end result to determine whether the consequences/action is right

decisions should be based on whether the action will lead to a good consequence.

HEDONIC CALCULUS – happiness consists if pleasure and pain // includes aiming for pleasure and avoiding pain // 7 different elements to consider in the hedonic calculus // intensity (how much) duration (length) certainty extent purity richness and propinquity // for greatest amount for each factor will cause the greatest happiness

Each situation should be applied this means it is relativistic theory // each situation should be looked at individually // relativistic means there are no universal moral norms or rules and that each situation should be looked at individually as they are different

Bentham wanted to increase and maximise the quantity of happiness rather than type of happiness being prioritised  

saw that people motivated by pleasure and pain - we pursue pleasure but avoid pain 

believe if you follow hedonic calculus you will be able to find the best action for any situation

Uses the principle of utility, that is the greatest happiness for the greatest number, one can draw up general rules based on past experiences which would help to keep this principle.

HARM PRINCIPLE – happiness is desirable since we desire it // happiness is the only thing desirable as an end since things are inly desirable because they bring happiness // therefore everyone ought to aim at the happiness of everyone as increasing the general happiness will increase my happiness

Mill had the idea that not all pleasures are the same

He split this into higher and lower pleasures

If stimulated by the mind it is a high pleasure

If it is physical thing it is a lower pleasure

No longer looks at the quantity of the pleasure looks at the quality of the pleasure as this is more important

ACT –

Apply the situation to the hedonic calculus

If there is another way to solve the moral dilemma apply this to hedonic calculus

Which ever way causes greatest happiness follow this

RULE –

Should look at the quality of the happiness

Use harm principle

Consider if it is weak or strong utilitarianism