Reading Summaries 5,6 and 7

Chapter 6

Nonconsequentialist Theories: Do Your Duty

Kant’s Ethics

• Reason alone, according to Kant, can inform us of the moral law, the source of our moral duties.
• Right actions have moral value only if they are done with a “good will”—a will to do your duty for duty’s sake.
• To do right, therefore, we must do it for duty’s sake, motivated by respect for the moral law.

Imperatives

• A hypothetical imperative tells us what we should do if we have certain desires. For example, “If you need money, work for it.”
• A categorical imperative tells us that we should do something in all situations regardless of our wants and needs. One example is “Do not steal.”

Kant says that the moral law consists entirely of categorical imperatives.

The Categorical Imperative –1

All categorical imperatives, according to Kant, can be derived from the categorical imperative.

Its first formulation states: “Act only on that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should become universal law.”

The Categorical Imperative –2

According to the first formulation of the categorical imperative, an action is permissible if

1. its maxim can be universalized (if everyone can consistently act on the maxim in similar situations) and
2. you would be willing to let that happen.

The Categorical Imperative and Moral Duties

• Perfect duties are those that must be followed without exception. According to Kant, such duties include the duty not to lie, not to break a promise, and not to commit suicide.
• Imperfect duties are those that can have exceptions or that are not always to be followed. These include duties to develop your talents and to help others in need.

The Means-Ends Principle

Kant’s second formulation of the categorical imperative states:“So act as to treat humanity, whether in thine own person or in that of any other, in every case as an end withal, never as a means only.”

Evaluating Kant’s Ethics –1

Minimum requirement of consistency?

yes

Criterion 1: consistency with considered moral judgments

uncertain

Criterion 2: consistency with our moral experiences

seems generally consistent with our moral experience

Criterion 3: usefulness in moral problem solving

uncertain

Evaluating Kant’s Ethics –2

Criterion 1: consistency with our considered moral judgments

• Are there such things as “absolute, exceptionlessmoral duties”?
• Can you imagine scenarios in which Kant’s perfect duties should be violated in order to do the “right thing”?

Evaluating Kant’s Ethics –3

Criterion 1: consistency with our considered moral judgments

• It seems we can imagine situations in which we must choose between two allegedly perfect duties that directly contradict each other.
• Such conflicts provide plausible evidence against the notion that there are exceptionlessmoral duties.

Evaluating Kant’s Ethics –4

Criterion 3: usefulness in moral problem solving

The conflicts between perfect duties raise questions about the usefulness of Kant’s moral theory in solving specific moral dilemmas.

Evaluating Kant’s Ethics –5

The first formulation of the categorical imperative seems to allow a rule to be moral insofar as you personallyare willing to live in a world that conforms to that rule, thus sanctioning some clearly immoral actions.

Evaluating Kant’s Ethics –6

Criterion 3: usefulness in moral problem solving

Some critics also claim that if a maxim is stated in enough detail, we could use the categorical imperative to sanction all sorts of immoral acts.

For example: "Lie only to avoid injury, death, or embarrassment to anyone who has green eyes and red hair."

Evaluating Kant’s Ethics –7

Criterion 3: usefulness in moral problem solving

Another criticism of Kant’s theory is that the means-ends principle is sometimes impossible to implement. It seems that in some situations, in order to treat some persons as ends rather than means, it is necessary to treat other persons as means.

Learning from Kant’s Ethics

Despite its shortcomings, Kant’s theory has been among the most influential of moral theories, mainly because it embodies a good part of what our considered judgments lead us to embrace:

• universality
• impartiality
• respect for persons

Natural Law Theory

As expressed by Thomas Aquinas, at the heart of natural law theoryis the notion that right actions are those that accord with the moral principles that we can “read” clearly in the very structure of nature itself.

Natural Law and Human Nature –1

According to Aquinas, human nature aims to achieve a number of good things:

• preservation of human life
• avoidance of harm
• reproduction and care of kind
• the search for truth
• the nurturing of social ties
• benign and reasonable behavior

Natural Law and Human Nature –2

• Our duty is to achieve the good—to fully realize the goals toward which our nature is already inclined.
• Reason, which allows us to discern the natural laws that can be derived from our nature, is the foundation of morality.
• Judging the rightness or wrongness of an action is a matter of consulting reason.

Natural Laws

• Like Kant’s perfect duties, the laws of natural law theory are both objective and universal.
• Like Kant’s categorical imperative, traditional natural law theory is strongly absolutist.

The Doctrine of Double Effect

The doctrine of double effectpertains to situations in which an action has both good and bad effects. According to the doctrine of double effect, an action is permissible if four conditions are met:

1. The action is inherently (without reference to consequences) either morally good or morally neutral.
2. The bad effect is not used to produce the good effect (though the bad may be a side effect of the good).
3. The intention must always be to bring about the good effect.
4. The good effect must be at least as important as the bad effect.

Evaluating Natural Law Theory –1

Criterion 1: consistency with considered moral judgments

• Natural law theory, like Kant’s moral theory, contains absolute moral laws that admit no exceptions.
• These absolutes can result in specific moral judgments that diverge from common moral sense.

Evaluating Natural Law Theory –2

Criterion 3: usefulness in moral problem solving

• Natural law theory’s usefulness is undermined by the conflict between its assumptions about the teleological character of nature and the scientific sense of nature as nonteleological.
• It is problematic to try to find your way from what is in nature to what should be.

Learning from Natural Law Theory

Natural law theory emphasizes intentionin moral deliberation, such that an action can be right or wrong depending on one’s intention.

Credits

This concludes the PowerPoint slide set for Chapter 6

Doing Ethics: Moral Reasoning and Contemporary Issues

Fifth Edition (2019) by Lewis Vaughn.