Kants Theory of Ethics

Kants Approach to Ethicsand UtilitarianismConsider:Is it ok to jump the queue for lunch because you cant be bothered to wait?

What would happen if everyone did the same?

Chaos.

There would be no queue to jump.

Jumping the queue whenever you feel like it is a contradiction.

Chaos would result and there would be no queue to jump. 2Kants approach argues that in order to see if something is your duty you should see if you can consistently generalise it.

Consider the following statements:

One should keep ones promises .

One should not steal, cheat, kill.

Marriage vows for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health until someone better comes along. Promises commit you to something even if it becomes inconvenient. Going to the not-so-cool party the invitation to which you accepted first and not ditching it for a cooler party to which you were invited later.

3Now construct arguments to show what our duty is with regard to each of the following:Stealing Cheating on testsPolluting the environmentVoting in electionsSuicideWriting honest references for university applications

Then consider how convincing these arguments are. Kant attaches a lot of importance to consistency (think back to where else this has been mentioned).

Why do you think he does this?

Humans have a tendency to special pleading our natural egoism means we think that although rules generally should be respected we are special and they do not apply to us. We might lie to a friend about something that we considered a white lie but would be furious if our friend did the same to us.5Dual conception:Me

One among others

Do as you would be done to

Think of yourself in two ways me and one amongst others. Do as you would be done by is a concept that appears in most world religions. Universal value??6The Veil of IgnoranceThis is a concept which allows/requires you to be objective. Person X does action p to person Y and that you are either person X or person Y but you do not know which one.How do you feel about the action?Do you think it acceptable or not?

Get two children to share a cake fairly. Child one cuts it and child two has first pick of which half to take. 7Values and dignityAgain, looking at the dual conception idea; no one person should be given preferential treatment but also no individual should be discriminated against.

Consider the difference between objects and persons, where the former have value and the latter have dignity.

Your friend borrows your laptop and drops it by accident. He replaces it with all the software and files etc. No real lose. You are in hospital dying of an incurable disease. Your parents come and weep at your bedside every day. Then one day they come to tell you they have some good news. Although you will still die, the doctors say they can clone you so that after your death they can replace you. The clone will not be exactly like you but will look like you and in many ways behave as you do. They will give the clone your bedroom and possessions. Isnt this wonderful news? What would you think? How could they consider replacing you? You are a unique individual and unike a broken computer you cannot simply be replaced by someone genetically identical to you.8Consider this scenarioYou are in hospital dying of an incurable disease. Your parents come and weep at your bedside every day. Then one day they come to tell you they have some good news. Although you will still die, the doctors say they can clone you so that after your death they can replace you. The clone will not be exactly like you but will look like you and in many ways behave as you do. They will give the clone your bedroom and possessions. Isnt this wonderful news? What would you think? How could they consider replacing you? You are a unique individual and unlike a broken computer you cannot simply be replaced by someone genetically identical to you.

Importance of motivesKant says the moral value of an action is determined by the motive behind it rather than the consequences of the action. e.g. you are trying to be helpful but it turns out badly you are less likely to attract censure.You are trying to hurt someone but it doesnt work out you will still be regarded as a bad person.

Reason or feelings?Kant says that to be truly moral our actions should be motivated by reason rather than feelings as feelings are unreliable.

3 different motives for doing good:You expect something in returnSympathyDuty

What happens if you feel like helping someone today but not tomorrow or two people are in the same situation but you only feel like helping person x because you like them more? Would you decision be morally correct? Kant says only has moral value if you act on duty. For example 1 and 2 = hidden benefits. 11Consider the following:If a cat jumps into a pram, who deserves more praise for removing it: someone who likes cats or someone who is frightened of cats?Who deserves more praise: a person who helps another person because they like them, or a person who helps another person even though they dont like them?

Criticisms of KantRule worship moral absolutism. E.g. lying is always wrong. Which of the following would justify breaking a generally accepted rule?

You should respect the highway code but its ok to jump a red light when you are late for work.You should respect the highway code but its ok to jump a red light when you are taking a critically ill person to hospital.You should pay your taxes but it is ok not to pay them if you are short of money this year.You should pay your taxes but it is ok not to pay them if they are being spent on a nuclear arms programme.

Knife wielding maniac bursts into the classroom threatening to kill Mr O, who hides in the cupboard (very sensibly!). Maniac demands to know where Mr O is. On basis of m. absolutism you calmly reply Hes in the cupboard. No-one will congratulate you on your consistency. 13Conflicts of dutyIf a person has been unfaithful, should they confess and risk making their partner unhappy or stay silent and deceive them?

If a terrorist group takes a civilian hostage and threatens to kill them unless the government released five convicted terrorists, should the government give in to their demands? Which two moral principles are in conflict in the above examples? Kants approach leaves us no way to rank our duties and therefore resolve our moral dilemmas.14Moral coldnessKants approach leaves no room for commonsense intuition.

What often motivates us to do the right thing is feeling rather than reason.

Could we argue that feelings are what connect us to each other and reason is what isolates us.

Is it not better that a Husband helps his wife because he loves her and wants to help rather than because it is his duty? Why do people risk smuggling others over borders when there is a real danger to themselves and their families? E.g. Jews in WWII Or ships crew making sure everyone is on the lifeboats before disembarking themselves? A natural human impulse is to help.15UtilitarianismOne supreme moral principle that we should seek the greatest happiness of the greatest number.Maximise happiness!Actions are right in so far as they tend to increase happiness and wrong in so far as they tend to decrease it.

Theory developed by Jeremy Bentham (1748 -1832) and John Stuart Mill (1806-73)

What is happiness?It is the sum of pleasures. A happy life is one that maximises feelings of pleasure and minimises feelings of pain. (Bentham)

Higher GRH means a morally better world and a lower GRH means a morally worse world.

Utilitometer measures pleasure through your central nervous system. Sends sum of pleasure to central computer which calculates the nations Gross National Happiness each day. 17In favour of utilitarianismSimple method of deciding what to do. You have a conflict of duties which will bring the greatest pleasure to the most people?Democratic theory each person is the best judge of their own happiness and each persons happiness is considered in determining GNH.Long-term considerations smoking gives pleasure but in the long run will cause more pain, so is a bad idea.Egalitarian e.g. distributing money from rich to poor.Consider:How might a utilitarian justify or criticise the following:

Eating ice cream every dayWearing seat-belts in carsForcing a reluctant child to learn the pianoVoluntary euthanasia

Should the happiness of all living creatures be taken into consideration?19Practical objections:How do we measure happiness?

2 scoops of ice cream = a day at the seaside = one evening with friends?

Can you measure the happiness of health or love or friendship?

Is a life of only pleasure actually a good thing?Might you be bored if you had everything you wanted? What would you strive for? Would those pleasures have the same value as if you only had a few? Do we always recognise at the time when we are happy or is it often more in retrospect?

20Can we predict the consequences of our actions?Imagine a married woman falls passionately in love with a colleague at work and is wondering whether or not to leave her husband. What should she do?

Look at pros and cons and whatever maximises the happiness of the people involved.

Can you see any problems with this approach?

Might not work out with new partner. Husband might kill himself/find another partner and live happily ever after while wife and new partner are miserable. Cant predict outcome with certainty. Doctor saves life of mother and child in difficult birth (from Roald Dahls Genesis and Catastrophe . Book ends with doctor saying Youll be all right now, Mrs Hitler.21Theoretical objectionsPleasure or happiness is not always a good thing

Actions should be judged by their motives rather than their consequences

Utilitarianism is incompatible with the belief that we have moral obligations and individual rightsBad pleasures:

Malicious pleasures: derived from the suffering of others

Empty pleasures: do not help us develop our potential or flourish

What problems are caused for utilitarianism if some pleasures are better than others?Malicious sadist who beats up a masochist. Mugger who gets a buzz out of what he does. Do they make the world a better place (they have increased GNH) If the mugger really enjoys what he does, then he has increased GNH even more and so the world is an even better place. Empty shopping, eating chocolate, not bad in themselves but should not be our exclusive purpose in life. Brave New World (Huxley) genetically engineered to be happy and soma available to keep them on a permanent high but still controlled. Is this really making the world a better place?23In summary:Utilitarianism consequences more important than motives.Kant motives (based on reason) are more important.

Utilitarianism no room for moral obligations or human rights.Kant too inflexible.You can lie as long as it makes the majority happy, against you can never lie even if it causes suffering.You are a dinner party and the food is awful. Your host asks if you are enjoying the meal. Reply based on Kant/utilitarianism?24Imagine the following scenario:Smith, an orphan with no family or friends is in hospital for a cataract operation. The man in the bed on his left is dying of kidney failure and the man on his right is dying of heart failure. Solution kill Smith and give his organs to the other men.

Jones is malicious and spends much time trying to make people in his village unhappy. One day you wait around a corner and smack him on the head with a heavy object before throwing him in the river. Result! Everyone else is happier!

As a utilitarian what would you say? What difficulties does this create for utilitarianism?Killing Smith obvious correct course of action as can save two others with his body parts and also make their families happy while only upsetting Smith. BUT if you live in a society where it is not safe to go to hospital for minor procedures you will put off going. If you live somewhere where unpopular people are killed you might worry if people seemed not to like you too much. In both cases fear would increase and this would have a negative effect on GNH. There are in fact good utilitiarian reasons to protect peoples rights. 25Rule utilitarianismDoes an action conform to a rule that promotes general happiness?

Not what will the effect be on GNH if I break this promise? but what will the effect be on GNH if we abandon the rule that people should keep their promises?

No hard and fast rule. No replacement for good judgement.26Imagine you are the sole heir to your great-uncles $5 million fortune. He makes you promise to use the money to start a butterfly farm. On his death you give it to an AIDS charity. Is your action right or wrong? What light can these moral theories shed on these questions:Is abortion ever justified?Should drugs be legalised?Are there limits to free speech? From utilitarianist point of view/kantian point of view? Self-interest theory? Moral relativist point of view?A. how many people would be made unhappy by the birth of the unwanted child? How many people made happy by lack of baby? B. only junkies who are affected adversely? What about their families? what about those they rob or mug for drug money (even legal drugs need paying for) what are the motives behind the legalisation? More taxes? Less policing? Lots of happy, high people? C. expressing racist/sexist etc language, if you really believe it/are with others who believe it. Promoting violence/criminal actions, because you think others have more than you etc.27Ethics are inescapableEthics are insoluble

Theories can help us consider the possibilities but in the end we cannot pass the buck and we have to make our own decisions.

Useful language:Altruismrule worshipCultural imperialismself-interest theoryDuty ethicsspecial pleadingEgoismutilitarianismGolden rulevalue-judgementMoral absolutismveil of ignoranceMoral principleMoral relativismRights