Ethical Egoism
• A different view, which talks of morality as only the pursuit of self interest • Self-interest is a ‘rational concern’ requiring consideration of one’s long-term interests. E.g., taking bribe may appear to serve one’s self interest but it does not serve the long- term interest of self. Hence taking bribe is not acceptable since it would not do any good on a long-term. This was professed by Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) and Ayn Rand (1905-1982). Ayn Rand – with only one life to live, the individual is of utmost importance It is in one’s self-interest to adopt the Moral Point of View (Hobbes’ Social Contract)
SELF-INTEREST AND ETHICAL EGOISM
Psychological Egoism All of our actions can be reduced to self-interest • We always do what we most want to do. e.g., a man who helps others has chosen to do so, so he sees doing it, is in his self-interest • We do what makes us feel good. e.g., a man who helps others must get pleasure From doing it – hence it is in his self-interest The Problem of Counter Examples What about charity and pity? These require the egoist to distinguish selfish and unselfish acts from selfish and unselfish motives • Charity – I enjoy showing my power • Pity – I worry that it might happen to me So again, doing these, we act from self-interest…
EVALUATION OF ETHICAL THEORIES
We are basically not interested in which of the ethical theories is the best. It is believed that there are areas in which each theory complements others by how they differ. Procedure for General Evaluation: 1. The theory must be clear and formulated with concepts that are coherent and applicable. 2. It must be internally consistent in that none of its tenets contradicts any other. 3. Neither the theory nor its defense can rely upon false information. 4. It must be sufficiently comprehensive to provide guidance in specific situations of interest to us. 5. It must be compatible with our most carefully considered moral convictions about concrete situations.
RIGHTS ETHICS (JOHN LOCKE – 1632-1704)
• Everyone has inherent moral rights • Everyone has rights that arise from EXISTING …
Rawls Development on Kant’s Duty Ethics
Rawls argues that all rational people would agree to abide by two basic moral principles: 1. Each person is entitled to the most extensive amount of liberty compatible with an equal amount for others and 2. Differences in social power and economic benefits are justified only when they are likely to benefit everyone, including members of most disadvantaged groups
DUTY ETHICS
Contends that certain acts (or duties) should be performed because they are inherently ethical such as: • be honest, • keep promises, • do not inflict sufferings on other people, • be fair, • make reparation when you have been unfair, • How gratitude for kindness extended by others • seek to improve own intelligence and character, • develop one’s talents, • don’t commit suicide. • Duties, rather than good consequences, is fundamental.…
Three approaches
1. Cost/benefit – quantifiable approach. Maximize positive utilities (benefits) Against negative utilities (costs). 2. Act utilitarian – “Will the course of action produce more good than any alternative course of action that I could take”? 3. Rule utilitarian – “Would utility be maximized if everyone did the same thing in the same circumstances”? Adoption of commonly accepted rules. 1. COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS: • Assess the available options • Assess the costs and benefits of each option for the entire audience affected • Make the decision that is likely to result in the greatest benefit relative to cost. 2. ACT-UTILITARIANISM: • Focuses on individual actions, rather than general rules. • An act is right if it is likely to produce the most good for the most people involved in the particular situation.…
UTILITARIANISM
• That which produces the maximum benefit for the greatest number of people (e.g. Democracy) • Tries to achieve a balance between the good and bad consequences of an action • Tries to maximize the well-being of society and emphasizes what will provide the most benefits to the largest group of people • This method is fundamental to many types of engineering analysis, including risk- benefit analysis and cost-benefit analysis Drawbacks: • Sometimes what is best for the community as a whole is bad for certain individuals in the community • It is often impossible to know in advance which decision will lead to the most good Organizing Principles to Resolving Ethical Issues • Utilitarian thinking – A standard that promotes those individual actions or rules that produce the greatest total amount of utility to those affected.…
CAUSAL AND LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES
Causal Responsibility: consists simply in being a cause of some event. E.g. lightning as being responsible for a house catching fire. Legal Responsibility: consists simply in being a cause for harm that was so unlikely and also unforeseeable that no moral responsibility is involved
VARIOUS SENSES OF RESPONSIBILITY
Responsibility ascribed by i) virtue, ii) obligations, iii) general moral capacities of people, iv) liabilities and accountability for actions and v) blameworthiness or praiseworthiness. 1. By virtue: A person is said to be a responsible person when we ascribe a moral virtue to the person. We expect that the person is regularly concerned to do the right thing, is conscientious and diligent in meeting obligations. In this sense, professional responsibility is the central virtue of engineers. 2. By obligation: Moral responsibilities can be thought of as obligations or duties to perform morally right acts. 3. By general moral capacity: When we view a person as a whole rather than one with respect to a specific area, we are actually thinking about the active capacity of the person for knowing how to act in morally appropriate ways e.g. the capacity of children grow as they mature and learn. 4. By accountability: Responsibility also means being accountable, answerable or liable to meet particular obligations. The virtue of professional responsibility implies a willingness to be accountable for one’s conduct. 5. By being blameworthy: When accountability for a wrongdoing is at issue, responsible becomes a synonym for blameworthy. When right conduct is the issue, the context is praiseworthiness.
