Ethical TheoriesJessica PurathLindsey RasmussenDouglas SassAmber Schmidt-BedkerWendy Sloan

Ethical DilemmaSulina just returned from a long day of shopping in another city, an hour’s drive from her home. She purchased several things and as she is unpacking her purchases, she realizes the clerk included a fifty dollar item of clothing in one of the bags that Sulina didn’t pay for. What should Sulina do about the unpaid-for purchase?

Utilitarian TheoryA normative ethical theory where right and wrong is determined solely by the consequences of choosing one behavior or action over another. It moves beyond the scope of self-interest and takes into consideration the interests of other people.

(Cavalier, 2006)

Utilitarian TheoryValues Justice: the fairest choice in the eyes of

the law Fairness: wanting the best possible

choice for the group as a whole Equality: wanting everyone to have a

fair choice or chance Concern for others: wanting the best

possible outcome for society as a whole

Utilitarian TheoryVocabulary Fecundity: will more of the same follow? Purity: pleasure will not be followed by pain Hedonism: pursuit of or devotion to pleasure and self-gratification Utility: concern for maximizing the value of the universe Act utilitarianism

When faced with a choice, the principle of utility is applied to each alternative

The right act is defined as that which brings the best results (or least amount of bad results)

Rule utilitarianism The principle of utility is used to determine the validity of rules of conduct

or moral principles Right and wrong are defined as following or breaking those rules or

principles(Cavalier, 2006)

Utilitarian TheoryContributors Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832)

Developed the principle of utility Pleasure and pain play a fundamental role in

human life Approval or disproval of an action is based on the

amount of pleasure or pain its consequences bring Good equates with pleasure and evil with pain Pleasure and pain can be quantified and are thus

measurable Introduced criteria to measure pleasure and pain

(Cavalier, 2006)

Utilitarian TheoryContributors John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) adjusted the

hedonistic qualities of Bentham’s philosophy by emphasizing the following The quantity of happiness is what is central to

utilitarianism not the quantity of pleasure Quantities cannot be quantified but distinctions can

be made between ‘higher’ and ‘lower’ pleasure Utilitarianism refers to the Greatest Happiness

Principle because it seeks to promote happiness for the most amount of people

(Cavalier, 2006)

Utilitarian TheoryStrengths Utilitarians can compare past situations with

what is currently happening to decide what choice is the most useful for the most people, regardless of personal feelings or the law

Rule utilitarians want the best conceivable result for the most amount of people but they take into consideration people’s feelings (kindness) and they respect the law (justice), all of which is better for society

Utilitarian TheoryCriticisms As humans we are not capable of knowing the

exact outcome of a situation. It is highly unlikely that all people will devote their

lives to helping other people for the common good of all

Not all Utilitarians are concerned with justice as long as an action benefits most people

There exists the potential of conflicting or counteracting laws, especially in rule utilitarianism, thus making an ethically correct answer difficult to determine (if one exists at all).

Utilitarian TheorySulina’s DilemmaAccording to Utilitarianism, Sulina should return the unpaid-for item of clothing because this would be the best possible outcome for society. As a result of this choice, Sulina would be acting in accordance with the law (justice) and could help the employee not get in trouble for his/her mistake (kindness).

Rights Theory A right is a justified claim that individuals or

groups can make upon others wherein the right of one implies the duties of another. Typically moral rights have four features; natural, universal, equal, and inalienable.

(Fieser, 2009) In rights theory, rights are determined to be

ethically correct and valid because the majority of people accept them as so. As a result, society protects these rights and gives them high priority.

(Rainbow, 2002)

Rights TheoryValues Justice: each person gets what s/he deserves Rights: a justified claim that individuals or

groups can make upon others or society Duty: an obligation one person has to

another Equality: rights are the same for all people,

regardless of gender, race, etc. Validity: having a premise from which a

conclusion may logically derived

Rights TheoryVocabulary Right: a justified claim that individuals or groups can

make upon others or society (Edwards, 2003)

Correlativity of rights and duties: the rights of one person imply the duties of another

Features of moral rights Natural: not invented or created by government Universal: are the same across different societies Equal: rights are the same for all people Inalienable: cannot give our rights over to another person

(Cavalier, 2006)

Rights TheoryContributors Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679)

Conceived natural rights as an extension of man’s “state of nature” and argued the essential human right was to use power as a means of self-preservation

Further stipulated that humans won’t follow the laws of nature without first being subjected to a sovereign power

John Locke (1632-1704) argued that our natural rights, laws of nature given to us by God, shouldn’t harm anyone’s life, health, liberty, or possessions

Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) claimed to derive natural rights from reason alone

Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) maintained that we derive more specific rights from our natural ones, including rights of property, movement, speech, and religious expression

(Fieser, 2009)

Rights TheoryStrengths Rights provide protection for life, health, liberty, and

property and thus provide a moral framework for law Moral, legal, and institutional rules are developed to

distinguish valid rights from those which are invalid Rights and duties are correlative which provides

clarity for action This theory is widely accepted and therefore can

provide a common basis for discussing ethical problems

(Edwards, 2003)

Rights TheoryCriticisms This theory is complicated by the fact that

society has to determine what rights to uphold and what rights to give its citizens

Determining rights requires society to first decide what its goals and ethical priorities are

As a result, rights theory must be used in addition to another which establishes and explains the goals and priorities of society

(Rainbow, 2002)

Rights TheorySulina’s DilemmaAccording to Rights Theory, Sulina should bring the unpaid-for item of clothing back to the store. She should do this because society’s goal is to have working order and no theft. Sulina should bring the item back because she did not pay for it. Furthermore, the employee has a right to make an honest mistake and it follows that Sulina has a duty to inform the employee of his/her mistake so s/he can learn from the experience and not make the same mistake again.

Fairness/Justice TheoryThe theory of justice as fairness and a form of social contract theory. Essentially, in the original position, behind the veil of ignorance, the rational choice of fundamental principles for society would be those which provide the highest minimum standards of justice for all people.

(Kay, 1997)

Fairness/Justice TheoryValues Fairness: the ability to make specific judgments

about something particular; the ability to judge without referring to feelings or interests

Justice: giving each person what s/he deserves (i.e. “their due”); used to refer to a standard of what is right

Liberty: the freedom from control and restrictions

Equality: the existence of being equal to others

Fairness/Justice TheoryVocabulary Equal Liberty Principle

When someone has more of something it means someone else has lost an equivalent amount

One principle of justice = equality Veil of ignorance

Not knowing who we are or where our standing in the social hierarchy is Main distinguishing feature of the original position

Original position: a fair and impartial perspective required to reason about the principles of justice

Difference Principle Behind a veil of ignorance we try to make sure that any inequalities

which arise bring those least well-off, up as far as possible A second, more subtle principle of justice

(Weston, 2008, p.143-144)

Fairness/Justice TheoryContributors John Rawls (1921-2002)

Author of the classic work A Theory of Justice where he developed the concept of justice as fairness Key components of his theory include the veil of ignorance and

original position Both integral in determining the construction of a fair society without

any preconceived notions or prejudices(Wenar, 2012)

Envisioned a society of free citizens holding basic equal rights cooperating with one another within an egalitarian system Fairness regardless of social status is emphasized Conservatives have argued that the American political system gives

everyone an equal chance and that most would choose this system from behind a veil of ignorance

(Travis, 2010)

Fairness/Justice TheoryStrengths The two principles of justice (Equal

Liberty Principle and the Difference Principle) mean that everyone benefits from cooperation

These principals also ensure a sense of self-respect (an important good) through the respect for others

(Chilton, 2005)

Fairness/Justice TheoryCriticisms People cannot really forget who they are

and what society is like, thus any conclusions reached from the original position or from behind the veil of ignorance will be influenced by self-interest

Primary concern is social institutions and the equal distribution of goods

Fairness/Justice TheorySulina’s DilemmaAccording to one interpretation of this theory, Sulina would bring the unpaid-for item back to the store. She would put her feelings aside as well as any thoughts of what she has to gain by keeping the item, and look at the situation from behind a veil of ignorance. Essentially she would take a step back and try to consider the situation from the perspective of what would she do if she didn’t know which side of the issue she were on – the person given an extra item or the employee who has made a mistake. After thoughtful consideration she would decide that the just and fair thing to do is bring the item back.

Care Based TheoryThe moral concern of attending to and meeting the needs of people we take responsibility for. This theory values the emotions and relational capabilities which help the morally concerned person – the caregiver – determine what would be in the best interest of the person(s) s/he is caring for.

(Bagnoli, 2006)

Care Based TheoryValues Concern for others : looking out for the

welfare of others and loving them as we love ourselves

Relationship: being connected to another person

Responsibility: having the duty of dealing with something; being accountable for our behavior

Best interest of others: being responsible for taking action we think is the most advantageous for others in any given situation

Care Based TheoryVocabulary Interdependence: a reciprocal relationship between at

least two individuals who depend on one another to get their needs met

Caring for: face-to-face encounters where one person takes care of another

Caring about: something more general that takes us into the public realm An example: caring about people who are going hungry and

wanting to do something about it, like start a food pantry According to Noddings, this is the foundation upon which our

sense of justice is built on(Smith, 2004)

Care Based TheoryContributors Nel Noddings (1929-present)

In her first major work Caring (1984) she explores a “feminine approach to ethics and moral education” Believes care is basic to all human life and all people want to be cared for Also asserts that women are guided by ‘natural’ caring and this is a

significant aspect of their experiences Concludes ‘natural’ care is essentially a moral attitude – “a longing for

goodness that arises out of the experience or memory of being cared for” More recently has highlighted the differences between the ‘caring for’

and the ‘caring about’ Argues ‘caring about’ needs more attention because it is a significant

force in society Concludes ‘caring about’ is “the foundation for our sense of justice”

(Smith, 2004)

Care Based TheoryContributors

Carol Gilligan (1936-present) Founder of “difference feminism” Believes women have different moral and psychological

tendencies than men Men think in terms of rules and justice Whereas women tend to think in terms of caring and relationships

Outlines three stages of moral development that women go through Moral thinking begins with selfishness The “conventional” middle stage is the opposite: self-sacrifice Final stage is where women find a balance between self and

others and understand how they are intertwined with others (i.e. an ethics of relationships)

(Weston, 2008, p.200)

Care Based TheoryStrengths Highlights the fact that people, especially women,

think about others in a humane and caring way The validity of emotions, feelings, and virtues in

ethics is recognized Particular attention is given to the family and has

brought the home to the forefront of moral discourse

Starts its reasoning from the moral obligation to meet the needs of others instead from some universal principle

(Noda, 2001)

Care Based TheoryCriticisms The concept of care, which is central to the

ethics of care, is vague and may require an external principle to determine whether the care is right or wrong

Care ethics cannot solve the problem of the conflicts of virtues, a problem in all virtue ethics

There isn’t a mechanism to deal with feelings of vengeance

(Noda, 2001)

Care Based TheorySulina’s DilemmaAccording to this theory, Sulina should take the unpaid-for item back to the store. This decision is based on Sulina’s desire to do what is in the best interest of the employee who mistakenly gave her an unpaid-for item. Sulina doesn’t want the employee to get into any trouble for his/her mistake and wants to continue to have a good customer-employee relationship.

Virtue TheoryThis theory is based on traits. It is the belief that virtues are the kinds of character traits we should seek and sustain, perhaps because they originate from something deep within human nature or the world. It is thought that there exists a relationship between virtues and happiness: maybe virtues make us happy simply because they are virtues.

(Weston, 2008, p.173)

Virtue TheoryValues Commitment: being dedicated to a

particular behavior or course of action Rational self-regulation

The ability to discern an appropriate response or course of action when faced with extreme emotion or behavior

The ability to follow the middle path, that of moderation

Virtue TheoryVocabulary Virtues

The appropriate, rational middle between extremes of emotion, behavior, or action

Character traits that allow us to act in ways that develop positive and good morals, values, and attitude

Habit that once acquired become characteristic of a person Vice

Excessive emotion , behavior, or action A practice, behavior, or habit considered immoral, depraved, or

degrading in society Examples are insensitivity, discontent, insatiability, willful

ignorance, denial, and bad temper Defect: too little emotion, behavior, or action

(Weston, 2008, p.172-174)

Virtue TheoryContributors Aristotle (834-322 BCE)

Believed everything in the world has a distinct and essential function, a function which in turn determines its admirable traits (i.e. virtues)

Suggested the characteristic which defines human function is rational self-regulation, the function which in turn determines our moral virtues

(Weston, 2008, p.174)

Virtue TheoryContributors Saint Thomas Aquinas (1224-1274)

Borrowed Aristotle’s “logic of virtue” Derived virtue from human activity or function However, understood human activity in very different terms

According to Aquinas, “reason is not an end in itself” Rather, reason is a means to better understand ourselves

and God Believes our ultimate purpose is “communion with God, as

far as we can achieve it in this life” Added the virtues of faith, hope, and charity to the

“natural” virtues like justice and temperance (Weston, 2008, p.176-177)

Virtue TheoryStrengths Virtues are beneficial and not just because

they’re admirable traits; virtues are valuable They’re socially and ethically valuable and

seen as positive characteristics of people They’re valuable because of the good or

positive consequences they tend to bring with them

We should cultivate virtuous dispositions because such dispositions tend to maximize benefits and positive outlooks of people

Virtue TheoryCriticisms There exists a potential difficulty in

establishing the nature of virtues People from different cultures and

societies often have differing opinions on what constitutes a virtue

Virtues are considered ideal character traits and may conflict with one another

Virtue TheorySulina’s DilemmaAccording to Virtue Theory, Sulina should return the item of clothing that she didn’t pay for but was mistakenly placed in her shopping bag. Returning the item would make her a morally good and virtuous individual. By returning the item, she would appear honest and caring, character traits which are deeply valued in our society.

Divine Command“What’s good is good because God says so. God’s commanding something defines it as good” (Weston, 2008, p.49). Divine Command essentially teaches that something (i.e. action, behavior, choice, etc.) is good because God demands it to be done and evil because God forbids it to be done. Thus, to say it is good to love our neighbors is semantically equivalent to saying God Commands us to love our neighbors. Similarly, it is evil to commit murder because God forbids us to murder.

Divine CommandValues Trust: faith; the belief that God and his

commandments are good Faith: reliance that if He commands it, it is

good Courage: resolution to what God deems is

good even if it goes against our values Commitment: obligation to follow God’s will Loyalty: consistent allegiance to God’s will Fortitude: courage to do God’s will

Divine CommandVocabulary Divine: transcendent or transcendental

power Religion: views established with symbols,

beliefs, spirituality, and moral values Morality: the difference between right

and wrong Moral absolution: the ethical view which

states certain actions are absolutely right or wrong

Divine CommandContributors Augustine (354-430)

Believed ethics to be the pursuit of supreme good, which provides the happiness that all humans are looking for

Claimed the way to obtain this happiness is to love the right objects in the right way and this requires we love God

Thus, according to Augustine, our love of God helps us love everything else in a way proportional to their value

(Austin, 2006)

Divine CommandContributors Immanuel Kant(1724-1804)

Claimed the requirements of morality are too much for us to bear alone so we must believe in the existence of God who will help us live moral lives

Also believed that being moral does not guarantee happiness, so we must believe in a God who will reward the morally righteous with happiness

Did not use his concept of faith as an argument for Divine Command Theory, but contemporaries could use his reasoning to do so

(Austin, 2006)

Divine CommandStrengths Provides an objective metaphysical

foundation for morality Good and bad are relevant to God and our

sense of what is good or bad corresponds to God’s sense of good and bad

Those who do evil will be punished and those who live moral lives will be vindicated and even rewarded

(Austin, 2006)

Divine CommandCriticisms Morality based entirely on God’s whim

makes morality arbitrary We are morally blind and have no direct

knowledge of good and evil, so have to rely solely upon God and His guidance

It is contingent upon the existence of a person’s religion and beliefs

Divine CommandSulina’s DilemmaAccording to this theory, Sulina would need to return the item because keeping something that does not rightfully belong to her is stealing; even though it was mistakenly put in her bag, she did not pay for it. One of God’s commandments states “thou shalt not steal”. In other words, God forbids stealing, making it wrong and as a result, Sulina must return the item

Natural Law Theory Moral perspective: the moral standards

which govern human behavior derive from the nature of human beings and the nature of the world

Legal perspective: the authority of legal standards derives from the consideration their moral merit

Natural Law TheoryValues Justice: conformity to moral rightness in action or

attitude Obedience: compliance with that which is

required and subject to rightful restraint or control Rights: we much respect the rights of others Responsibility: that for which someone is

responsible or answerable Self-discipline: making ourselves do things when

we should, even if we don’t want to Law abiding: abiding by the rules of society

Natural Law TheoryVocabulary Self preservation: behavior that ensures

the survival of an organism Moral judgment: evaluations or opinions

formed as to whether some action or inaction, intention, motive, character trait, or person as a whole is more or less good or bad as measured against some standard of good

Legal norm: a mandatory rule of social behavior established by the state

Natural Law TheoryContributors Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274)

Catholic priest and an important philosopher and theologian

His goal was to make people good by following the order that exists in nature, obeying what nature has taught all animals, and by pursuing inclinations and tendencies of human reason

Believed a person does anything and everything because that ‘thing’ at least appears to be good

(Garrett, n.d.)

Natural Law TheoryContributors Hugo Grotius (1583-1645)

Defined natural law as a perceptive judgment in which things are good or bad by their own nature

Law is what God has shown to be His will Believed God to be an active, creative God,

persistent in the management and application of Divine or natural law

Believed that human nature, including traits of reason, are divine gifts from God

(Miller, 2011)

Natural Law TheoryStrengths Natural law is based on reason and is a “clear-cut”

ethical theory Attempts to connect ethics to the general structure of

the universe It is not based on feelings or emotions but on the mind

working out what is natural, according to a rational process

For both the religious and non-religious, making a moral judgment is a matter of listening to one’s reason

There is no need to look at an individual’s situation to determine what is right and wrong, it’s straightforward

Natural Law TheoryCriticisms What happens when it contradicts Christian teachings?

Jesus taught us to ‘turn the other cheek’ when abused Natural Law suggests we have a right to self-preservation

Shows what a moral life should be like, on the assumption we are rational beings living in a world designed by a rational creator If this is challenged, so is the theory Do really know what our purpose is?

The idea of a single human nature is rejected by many How do we decide what is natural and normal?

Natural Law TheorySulina’s DilemmaSulina knows that the extra item does not belong to her. Natural law states that deep down inside herself, Sulina knows the right thing to do – return the unpaid-for item. However, the moral perspective of natural theory also says we make our own choices, thus giving Sulina the choice to do what natural law says or not.

Ethical RelativismThe belief that nothing is objectively right or wrong because the definition of what is right or what is wrong depends on the view of the individual, cultural, or historical period.

Ethical RelativismValues Loving kindness: treat others the way you

want to be treated Accountability: taking responsibility for your

behavior Care for others: feeling and exhibiting

concern and empathy for others Honesty: fairness and straightforwardness of

conduct Fairness: consistent with rules, logic, or

ethics

Ethical RelativismVocabulary Prevailing view: the view shared by

most people of a group or ‘the most commonly accepted view’

Primitive notion: an undefined concept

Ethical universals: a set of principles which apply to all humans

Ethical RelativismContributors Immanuel Kant (1724-1804)

Formulated a standard that would identify moral laws Believed generations that failed this test would contain a logical

contradiction or would somehow be self-defeating (Ess, n.d.)

G. E. Moore (1873-1958) Believed the term ‘good’ was a primitive notion and could not be

analyzed into parts Concluded that ‘good’ referred to a “non-natural” property of things

Melville Herskovits (1895-1963) Believed evaluations are relative to the culture they come from Believed there might be ethical universals that were the same across

cultures(DeLapp, 2011)

Ethical RelativismStrengths Encourages tolerance of other cultures Promotes respect for other individuals

and societies Helps keep societies from falling apart Allows individuals to choose their own

values

Ethical RelativismCriticisms Confuses what should be done with

what is currently being done No universals or absolutes There can be no moral progress Upholds morality of things like slavery,

sexism, and racism as long as the culture accepts them

Ethical RelativismSelena’s DilemmaAccording to this theory, Sulina’s decision to keep or return the unpaid for item is not objectively right or wrong, but instead depends on what she values and society supports. In this case, Sulina values honesty, a trait that is also valued in society. As a result, the right thing for her to do is return the unpaid-for item.

Social Contract TheorySulina’s DilemmaAccording to Social Contract Theory, Sulina has willfully agreed to follow the laws of society and to hold herself accountable for her behaviors. As a result, she will return the unpaid-for item; keeping it would essentially be stealing, which is in violation of the law. Furthermore, she would not want the employee who mistakenly put the item in her bag, to get in any trouble, as another key tenet of Social Contract Theory is preserving our rights and freedoms by cooperating with other individuals.

Ethical EgoismSulina’s DilemmaAccording to Ethical Egoism, Sulina has the personal freedom decide whether or not she will return the unpaid-for item. On one hand she could keep it, which at first glance appears to be in her best interest – she has a shirt she didn’t have to pay for; however, with the freedom to choose comes the obligation to allow others this same right. And furthermore, ethical egoism also states it is in Sulina’s best interest to look long-term at how her actions affect other people. If Sulina keeps the shirt, other people in the same situation may do the same, and over time this could lead to a price increase which is not in the best interest of anyone. As a result, Sulina returns the unpaid-for item.

ReferencesAustin, M. (2006). Divine command theory. In Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from http://www.iep.utm.edu/divine-c/.Bagnoli, C. (2006, June 4). The ethics of care: Personal, political, global [Review of the book The ethics of care: Personal, political,

global]. Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews. Retrieved from http://ndpr.nd.edu/recent-reviews/.

Cavalier, R. (2002). Utilitarian Theories. In Online Guide to Ethics and Moral Philosophy. Retrieved from http://caae.phil.cmu.edu/

cavalier/80130/part2/sect9.html.Chilton, S. (2005). Notes on John Rawls a theory of justice. Retrieved

from http://www.d.umn.edu/~schilton/3652/Readings.3652.Rawls.ATheoryOfJustice.full.html.DeLapp (2011). Metaethics. In Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Retrieved from http://www.iep.utm.edu/metaethi/.

ReferencesEdwards, C. (2003). An assessment of rights theory in a specific health care context. Retrieved fromhttp://www.pantaneto.co.uk/issue11/edwards.htm.Ess (n.d.). Three approaches to Kant. Retrieved from http://www.drury.edu/ess/values/kant1.html.Fieser, J. (2009). Ethics. In Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from http://www.iep.utm.edu/ethics/.Garrett, J. (n.d.). Aquinas on law. Retrieved from http://www.wku.edu/~jan.garrett/302/aquinlaw.htm.Kay, C. (1997). Justice as fairness. Retrieved from http://webs.wofford.edu/kaycd/ethics/justice.htmlMiller, J. (2011). Hugo Grotius. In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/grotius/.Noda, K. (2011). An ethics of care from a unificationist perspective. Journal of Unification Studies, 12. Retrieved from http://www.journals.uts.edu/volume-xxi-2011.

ReferencesRainbow, C. (2002). Descriptions of ethical theories and principles. Retrieved from http://www.bio.davidson.edu/people/kabernd/Indep/carainbow/Theories.

htm.Smith, M. (2004). Nel Noddings, the ethics of care, and education. Retrieved from http://www.infed.org/thinkers/noddings.htm.Travis, C. (2010, March 12). Explanation of John Rawls theory of justice. Retrieved from http://www.voices.yahoo.com.Wenar, L. (2012). John Rawls. In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu entries/rawls/.Weston, A. (2008). A 21st century ethical toolbox (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.