Nonconsequentialism

1
Non-consequentialism

• Weber State University
• Spring 2007
• PHIL 1000

2
Where are we now?

• Moral Objectivism
• Consequentialism the moral evaluation of action
  depends on the consequences of those actions.
• Non-consequentialism the moral evaluation of
  action does not depend on the consequences.

3
Whats value?

• Gold is valuable.
• Learning (a skill, etc.) is valuable.
• Gold and learning are examples of non-moral
  values.

4
Types of Value

• Intrinsic the type value that a thing possesses
  for its own sake. For e.g., a child is
  intrinsically valuable.
• Instrumental the sort of value which things have
  in virtue of being useful to pursue other ends.
  For e.g., money is instrumentally valuable it
  gets me cool stuff.

5
Deontological Ethics

• The theory that we have absolute moral duties
  determined by reason, which are not affected by
  the consequences of action.

6
The Good Will

• There is only one good that is good without
  qualification The Good Will
• Morality resides only in the goodness of
  intention or motive.
• A truly good will, on Kants account, is the
  intention to act coupled with all the powers at
  your disposal.

7
Heres the deal

• If you do not act on your good intention, you
  cannot say that your motive was good.
• But if in attempting to act on your good
  intention you are thwarted and prevented from
  carrying through on your intention, you
  nonetheless could be said to have acted morally.

8
Where does morality come from?

• Moral rules and principles are not imposed upon
  us by God or by society but are to be found
  within us as the voice of reason.
• Reason is an authority that is in us but yet
  transcends us.

9
Acting from Duty

• According to Kant, the truly moral act is an
  action carried out from a sense of duty.
• Duty is acting out of respect for the moral law.

10
What do we mean by moral law?

• The truly moral action is one that is autonomous
  a word which means self-legislated.
• Morality is a matter of reason and rationality,
  and the source and justification of moral
  principles are in ourselves.
• If we act in accordance with a law, but it is not
  a rule that we have accepted freely, then the
  moral significance of our actions seem to
  disappear.

11
How do we know what the moral law is?

• We first must ask what maxim (or principle) is
  the basis for our action, i.e., anytime we are
  thinking of doing something, try to state the
  principle.
• Kants example Suppose Smith promises to repay
  money when she knows that repayment will be
  impossible.
• The maxim is When in distress, I can falsely
  promise with no intention to keep my promises.

12
The problem of relevant descriptions

• Maxims are subjective descriptions of actions.
• Since for any action there can be a multitude of
  different descriptions designating that action,
  one action description could be assessed as
  morally permissible and another could be assessed
  as morally impermissible.

13
Which description is relevant?

• The one that passes the Universal Law formulation
  of the Categorical Imperative is the relevant
  description.
• But does that really solve the problem?

14
Can we universalize this law?

• Once we have discovered what our maxim is, we
  should ask ourselves whether we could make our
  maxim a rule for everybody.
• If we can, then our action is moral.
• If we cannot, then our action is immoral.

15
Imperatives

• Hypothetical imperatives a rule that tells us
  only what means to use to achieve a desired end.
  For e.g., if we want to drive to Provo, then we
  ought to use I-15.
• Categorical imperatives a moral law that tells
  us what we ought to do but does not depend on any
  prior conditions or subjective wants or wishes,
  and contains no qualifications. For e.g., do not
  steal that RedBull

16
Two Principle Formulations of the Categorical
Imperative

• CI1 Act only on that maxim whereby you can at
  the same time will that it should become a
  universal law. Universal Law
• CI2 Always act so as to treat humanity, whether
  in yourself or in others, as an end in itself,
  never merely as a means. Humanity

17
Two Principle Formulations of the Categorical
Imperative

• CI1 Universal Law formulation of the
  Categorical Imperative
• CI2 Humanity as an End in itself formulation of
  the Categorical Imperative

18
Are the CIs distinct?

• According to Kant, no, the two principle
  formulations of the CI are not distinct.
• He considered them two ways of making the same
  point.

19
Objection to Kantian Ethics

• But suppose that were living in France in 1942
  and weve taken in some Jews who are fleeing from
  the German Gestapo.
• What is the moral thing to do, according to Kant?

20
Objection to Kantian Ethics

• When the Gestapo knock on the door and ask you
  whether you are hiding Jews, according to Kant,
  you ought to tell them, Yes, and they are
  underneath the baseboards.
• Kants theory leads to an equivocal conclusion
  either we tell the truth and reveal the Jews to
  the Germans, which will surely lead to their
  death (breaks CI2), or we lie to the Germans
  (breaks CI1).

21
To the Rosscue

• Kant never dealt with this problem, but one of
  his 20th century successors did W.D. Ross.
• Basically, when our duties conflict, we have to
  show that there is a difference between two types
  of duties.

22
W.D. Ross

• Moral Intuitionism

23
Two Types of Duties

• Prima facie duties a duty that is morally
  binding unless it conflicts with a more important
  duty.
• Actual duties a duty we are morally obligated
  to uphold in a particular situation after we have
  taken all the circumstances into account.