A Preliminary Challenge to Ethics: Cultural Ethical Relativism

1
A Preliminary Challenge to EthicsCultural
Ethical Relativism

• Cultural relativism Different cultures (or
  societies) have different ethical beliefs and
  practices.
• Cultural ethical relativism Because different
  cultures (or societies) have different ethical
  beliefs and practices, different cultures should
  have different ethical beliefs and practices.
• Ethics are relative to nothing more than a
  particular culture. Whatever a particular
  culture says is right or wrong, really is right
  or wrong, but only for that particular culture.
  There are no cross-cultural or universal moral
  norms that transcend particular cultures.
• If you believe in cultural ethical relativism,
  what can you say about cultures other than your
  own?
• Is cultural ethical relativism a good ethical
  theory?

2
Another Preliminary Challenge to
EthicsIndividual Ethical Relativism

• Individual ethical relativism cultural ethical
  relativism, but individual is substituted for
  cultural.
• Ethics are relative to individual humans.
  Whatever a particular person says is right or
  wrong ,really is right or wrong, but only for
  that particular person.
• There are no moral norms that transcend
  particular people. Whats right for me might be
  wrong for you.
• If you believe in individual ethical relativism,
  what can you say about other people and their
  actions?
• Is individual ethical relativism a good ethical
  theory?

3
Utilitarianism Main Features

• 1. Consequentialist Only the consequences of
  an act are morally
• significant.
• 2. Teleological Actions are good or bad, as
  determined by the ends
• of the actions.
• 3. Egalitarian It applies to everyone equally.
  
• 4. Core feature is a principle of utility An
  action or policy is right if
• it maximizes good consequences over bad
  consequences for all
• beings that stand to be affected by that action
  or policy.
• 5. Value distinctions
• Positive intrinsic value pleasure, happiness,
  or preference satisfaction.
• Instrumental value that which leads to
  intrinsic value.

4
Types of Utilitarianism (U)

• What makes consequences good or bad?
• 1. Hedonistic U Pleasure vs. pain
• 2. Hedonistic U Happiness vs. unhappiness
  (lifetime utilitarianism)
• 3. Preference U Preference satisfaction vs.
  thwarting of preferences
• This is sometimes called welfare
  utilitarianism.
• Happiness is sometimes couched in terms of
  preferences.
• Ways utilitarianism can guide actions
• 1. By applying the principle of utility to each
  act act utilitarianism
• 2. By using the principle of utility to create
  rules rule utilitarianism

5
Utilitarianism (U) and the Environment

• Very influential in shaping public policy through
  risk-cost-benefit analysis.
• Used extensively by governments and other
  bureaucracies.
• Peter Singer and others extend U to include
  sentient animals who can be harmed and benefited
  and/or have preferences.
• Difficult or impossible to extend U beyond
  anthropocentric and zoocentric versions.

6
Deontology Immanuel Kants (1724-1804)Moral
Philosophy

• Deontological standards are derived from reason
  itself.
• Intrinsic moral worth good will.
• Good will autonomous, can recognize duty, and
  can act out of a sense of duty.
• Reason tells you what your duty is.

7
Grounding Kants Moral Philosophy

• According to reason, the central feature of moral
  actions is universalizability actions must be
  universalizable so that everyone in relevantly
  similar circumstances can perform the same
  actions for the same reasons.
• And remember that a good will has intrinsic moral
  worth.
• Kant grounds his moral philosophy in both reason
  and a good will.

8
Imperatives

• Something is imperative if it must be done.
• Hypothetical Imperatives What you want provided
  you have the relevant desires. The desires can
  be renounced. The desires are indexed to what
  you want in terms of consequences.
• Categorical Imperatives What must be done
  (categorically) regardless of what you want as
  determined by consequences.

9
Kants Categorical ImperativeUniversalizability
Form

• Act only on that maxim through which you can at
  the same time will that it should become a
  universal law.
• Maxim principle of action.
• Take a possible course of action, turn it into a
  maxim, and see if it can be universalized without
  contradiction for all people in relevantly
  similar circumstances.
• 1. If it can, the action is morally right.
• 2. If it cannot, the action is morally wrong.
• A categorical imperative admits of no exceptions.
  Therefore moral rules established by it will
  admit of no exceptions.

10
Kants Categorical ImperativeRespect for
Persons (or Human Dignity) Formulation

• A good will comes attached to a rational,
  autonomous person.
• Such a person is an end in herself or himself.
• To treat such a person as merely a means is an
  affront to that persons autonomy and prevents
  that person from acting autonomously.
• Act in such a way that you always treat
  humanity, whether in your person or in the person
  of another, never simply as a means but always at
  the same time as an end.

11
Kantianism and the Environment

• Kants moral theory is anthropocentric. You can
  only have indirect duties to the nonhuman
  environment.
• Alternative autonomistic interpretation ?
  preference autonomy to have a preference and
  the ability to initiate action with a view to
  satisfying the preference.
• Zoocentric Kantianism Tom Regan and others use
  this alternative to attribute preferences and
  inherent worth or intrinsic value to nonhuman
  animals.

12
Human Rights

• Human rights can ground ethics and justice. One
  is acting ethically right or justly when one is
  following human rights norms, or at least not
  violating such rights.
• Human rights are norms and, as such, are situated
  within deontological approaches to morality.

13
Human Rights

• Relationship between legal and moral rights
• 1. Legalism Legal rights are conventions
  created by
• political entities and are not related to moral
  rights.
• 2. Morality Legal rights follow from moral
  rights.
• But why do people have rights?

14
RightsSome Central Characteristics

1. Rights inform us of our obligations to other
   people.
2. Rights establish and are established by claims,
   powers, liberties, and immunities.
3. Rights establish duties that we owe to other
   people and that other people owe to us.
4. Rights are relationships between people.
5. Rights typically override other non-moral
   considerations, and sometimes even other moral
   considerations.

15
Negative versus Positive Rights

• Negative rights omissions that tell you what
  you cant do.
• Positive rights commissions that tell you what
  you have to do.
• Some people such as classic libertarians do not
  recognize positive rights.

16
Some Possible Environmental Human Rights

• The right to a safe, livable environment
• The right to natural resources
• The right to live a life free from pollution
• The right to make a living (subsistence) that
  requires natural resources
• The right to live in a natural world
• Many traditional rights such as rights to life,
  liberty, and property might require some forms of
  environmental protection

17
Virtue Ethics

• The morally relevant features of actions are the
  character traits of the person performing the
  actions.
• Good people naturally perform good actions for
  the right reasons, and this naturally leads to
  good consequences.
• We can give accounts of good virtues we should
  have and how we can go about acquiring such
  virtues.
• Good people avoid vices.
• When deliberating about what to do, virtue
  ethicists tell us to be good people. Virtue
  ethics are thus teleological because we aim at
  being good people.

18
Virtue Ethics

• Virtues are at the center of morality. A virtue
  is a good character trait.
• Having a virtue involves
• 1. the disposition to act in a particular way,
• 2. the ability to identify cases to which the
  virtue is applicable,
• 3. having appropriate emotions and attitudes,
• 4. acting for the right reasons,
• 5. having role models to demonstrate the
  virtue,
• 6. and inculcating the virtue in a holistic way
  such that it is part of your
• basic character.
• Virtue ethicists put a premium on moral
  development.

19
Virtues

• Plato (424/423-348/347 BCE) claimed that there
  were four central virtues
• Fortitude strength of mind and body to
  persevere in the face of adversity. Fortitude is
  sometimes called courage knowing how to
  regulate fear.
• Temperance control of all unruly appetites,
  especially appetites associated with drink, food,
  and sex.
• Prudence practical wisdom and the ability to
  make the right choice in specific situations.
• Justice fairness, honesty, lawfulness, and the
  ability to keep ones promises.
• Aristotle (384-322 BCE) added many other virtues
  such as friendliness, generosity, modesty, pride,
  and truthfulness.
• Christianity added theological virtues such as
  charity, faith, and hope.

20
Environmental Virtue Ethics (EVE)

• Two main EVE approaches
• Environmental virtues come from a theory of
  virtue.
• Environmental virtues are gleaned from exemplary,
  environmentally virtuous people.
• EVE as an environmental ethic
• 1. Does EVE supply the entire environmental
  ethic?
• or
• 2. Does EVE complement an existing
  environmental ethic?

21
Moral Principles

• Principle of Nonmaleficence
• Principle of Beneficence
• Principle of Utility
• Principle of Respect for Autonomy
• Principle of Justice

22
Informed Consent

• Many cases of environmental injustice involve a
  violation of informed consent and thus violate
  the principle of respect for autonomy.
• Informed Consent
• 1. Competence
• 2. Voluntariness
• a. Free of compulsion and threats
• b. There are alternatives
• 3. Disclosure
• 4. Understanding

23
Justice

• Classic Formulation of Formal Justice Equals
  must be treated equally, and unequals must be
  treated unequally.
• So what counts as relevant conditions for equal
  or unequal treatment?

24
Material Conditions of Justice

• Equal and unequal treatment concerns how
• burdens and benefits are distributed. This could
• be based on some of the following
• 1. Need 6.
• 2. Effort 7. Race and ethnicity
• 3. Contribution 8. Gender
• 4. Merit 9. Economic class
• 5. Full equality 10. Country of origin

25
Distributive Justice

• This concerns what material conditions are used
  to determine how burdens and benefits are
  distributed.
• Distributive Justice Equity.
• Most past and contemporary theories of justice
  focus almost exclusively on distributive justice.

26
Three Preliminary Issues

• 1. Scope Which entities are the legitimate
  recipients of burdens
• and benefits? This could include some people,
  all people, all
• current and future people, all people and some
  nonhuman
• animals, etc.
• 2. Shape What patterns or criteria should be
  used to determine
• who gets benefits? Classic answers are
  efficiency, equality,
• priority, and sufficiency.
• 3. Currency What material conditions should be
  distributed?
• Classic answers are resources, welfare,
  opportunities for
• welfare, basic capabilities, and access to
  advantage.

27
Three Issues continued and Three Preconditions

• The relationship between the scope, shape, and
  currency of distributive justice can be posed as
  
• What pattern (shape) should be used to determine
  who (scope) gets what (currency)?
• Preconditions that supposedly lead to the need
  for distributive justice
• Scarcity of resources
• Technology developments
• Social changes
• Normativity what should be right/wrong or
  good/bad

28
Libertarianism

• Classically based on three rights
• 1. Life
• 2. Liberty
• 3. Property
• There is some debate as to which of these is most
  important.

29
Libertarianism

• Libertarianism as an expression of three
  principles of justice
• 1. Entitlement to what you ownyour life,
  liberty, and property.
• 2. Reparations to protect you against nuisance,
  trespass, fraud, and
• force.
• 3. Property Acquisition (from John Locke) you
  come to own things
• by mixing your labor with them.
• Two provisos
• a. One must leave as much and as good for
  others.
• b. Nothing was made by God for man to spoil
  or
• destroy (e.g., you can only have as
  much land as you
• can till, plant, improve,
  cultivate, and use).

30
Libertarianism

• Government
• 1. Exists only to defend and enforce the three
• basic rights.
• 2. Is retaliatory and has a monopolistic claim
  to
• the use of force against those who have
• violated the rights of others.
• 3. Should be a minimal state with a police and
• military.

31
Libertarianism

• Classification of Laws
• 1. Those that protect people against themselves
• are illegitimate.
• 2. Those that protect people against others are
• legitimate.
• 3. Those that require people to help others
• (positive rights) are illegitimate.

32
Utilitarianism

• Utilitarianism as a theory of distributive
  justice is really equivalent to utilitarianism as
  a consequentialist approach to normative ethics.
• Two main elements
• 1. Principle of Utility An action or policy
  is right if it maximizes
• good consequences over bad consequences for
  all beings that
• stand to be affected by that action or
  policy.
• 2. Egalitarian Principle Each person (or
  sentient being) to
• count for one and none should count for
  more than one.

33
Social Contract Theories

• These have been among the most popular approaches
  to political philosophy since the European
  Enlightenment.
• The best known social contract philosophers from
  this time period include Thomas Hobbes
  (1588-1679), John Locke (1632-1704), and
  Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778).
• All posit an original state of naturehistorical
  or logical.
• John Rawls A Theory of Justice (1971) was a
  revival of this tradition.

34
John Rawls Liberalism
35
Rawls Getting Started

• Society should be a fair system of cooperation
  between free and equal persons set up as an
  agreement by those who enter the system.
• People who enter into this system are in an
  original position of reasonable pluralism where
  they cannot agree on moral authority, moral
  values, and natural law.
• Consider this original position as a thought
  experiment that models
• Fair conditions under which free and equal
  persons agree to fair terms of cooperation to
  regulate the basic structure of political
  society.
• Acceptable restrictions on the reasons people may
  use to accept and reject principles of political
  justice when people advance their own different
  interpretations of what they believe is good.

36
Rawls People in the Original Position (POPs)

• POPs are self-interested but not necessarily
  selfish.
• POPs are under a veil of ignorance whereby they
  dont know the social positions or doctrines of
  the people they will be or represent POPs dont
  know anything specific such as their race,
  ethnicity, gender, and various mental and
  physical endowments.
• POPs seek to create a social contract that sets
  up principles of justice for a basic structure of
  society.

37
Rawls More About the POPs

• POPs are handed a menu of principles from the
  western tradition of political society and asked
  to choose their principles
• Because the POPs are reasonable, they should
  follow a maximin rule whereby they maximize the
  minimum payoff Identify the worst possible
  outcome of each principle they could adopt and
  choose those principles whose worst outcomes are
  better than the worse outcomes of all other
  alternatives.
• Rawls central insight is Justice as Fairness.
  

38
Rawls Principles of Justice

• In an original position, Rawls believes that the
  POPs will select two (really three) principles of
  justice
• Equal Liberty Principle Each person has the
  same indefeasible claim to a fully adequate
  scheme of equal basic liberties, which scheme is
  compatible with the same scheme of liberties for
  all.
• Equal Opportunity Principle (and Difference
  Principle) Social and economic inequalities are
  to satisfy two conditions first they are to be
  attached to offices and positions open to all
  under conditions of fair equality of opportunity
  and second, they are to be the greatest benefit
  of the least-advantaged members of society
  (difference principle). 

39
Feminism?

• There are many different types of feminists. All
  of them typically believe that some version of
  the following statements is true
• Part of the structure of the world has been and
  still is patriarchya system where groups of men
  have more power than groups of women and more
  access to what societies esteem.
• Under patriarchy, sexist subordination (or
  domination or oppression) occurs.
• Sexist subordination is morally wrong.
• Sexist subordination ought to be ended, and we
  should work toward a post-patriarchal (or
  post-feminist) world.

40
Feminist Theories of Justice

• Feminist theories of justice are related to
  feminist approaches to ethics and/or politics.
  Two main types
• 1. Feminine or care-based approaches
• 2. Power-based approaches
• Feminist theories of justice tend to focus more
  on participatory justice and identity or
  recognition justice, rather than strictly
  distributive justice.

41
Ethics versus Politics

• Traditional distinction between ethics and
  politics Ethics concerns personal relationships
  we have as individuals to other individuals,
  while politics concerns social relationships we
  have as individuals and groups to public
  institutions such as governments and markets.
• But the same types of subordinating (or
  oppressive or dominating) relationships exist in
  both the personal and public spheres.
• We thus must simultaneously address personal
  morality and public politics (the personal is
  the political).

42
Feminism Power-Based Approaches

• Feminisms differ in terms of defining what
  subordination (or domination or oppression) is,
  how and why it occurs, and how it should be
  eliminated.
• Power-based approaches to feminism attempt to
  provide answers to at least three different
  questions
• 1. Descriptive How can we accurately describe
  and discuss the
• different experiences and viewpoints of people,
  especially women?
• 2. Critical What explains the subordination
  (or domination or
• oppression) of women and other groups of
  people?
• 3. Prescriptive What should be done to end the
  subordination (or
• domination or oppression) of women and other
  groups of people?

43
Ecological Feminism

• Ecological feminism builds on other forms of
  feminism and adds in the domination of nature.
• In addition to all of the ways women (and men)
  are subordinated, nature itself is dominated, and
  the domination of nature is conceptually and
  historically linked to the subordination of
  people, especially women.

44
Characterizing Ecofeminism

• There is no one generic ecofeminism. Ecofeminism
  is a cluster of different positions minimally
  characterized by some or all of the following
  convictions
• All ecofeminisms are both feminist and
  environmentalist.
• All ecofeminisms examine and critique a variety
  of connections between the domination of women
  (and others) and nature.
• Ecofeminist insights concerning men/women,
  privileged groups/others, and humans/nature
  connections should be part of any theory of
  environmental ethics or environmental justice.
• Beyond critiquing domination in all its forms,
  ecofeminists should work toward dismantling all
  forms and systems of human domination.
• Ecofeminists should be committed to creative
  problem-solving in developing life-affirming,
  environmentally and socially sustainable,
  biologically and culturally diverse practices,
  policies, lifestyles, and communities of choice.

45
Capabilities Approaches

• Central insight Human development concerns not
  just what people have (such as resources and
  money) but, more importantly, what people
  actively can do with their lives.
• Amartya Sens approach is based on the idea that
  expanding peoples freedoms is both the principal
  means of development and the primary end of
  development.
• Martha Nussbaums approach is based on the idea
  that there are core human capabilities that are
  central in human lives and that distinctively
  make us human.
• These approaches support the creation of social,
  political, economic, legal, and moral conditions
  for people to develop and exercise their
  capabilities.

46
Amartya Sen Development as Freedom

• Justice concerns
• 1. Elementary functions doings and
• beings such as having access to
• adequate food and shelter that can be secured
  by
• personal liberty, income, and wealth.
• 2. Complex functions doings and beings such
  as
• having self-respect and being able to take part
  in
• political communities that depend on factors
• independent of possessing resources.

47
Some Aspects of Sens Approach

• Rather than an exclusive focus on economic
  indicators, focuses also on the range and quality
  of valued options of peoples choices.
• To examine a persons capabilities, normatively
  rank
• 1. A set of life paths that person could
  follow.
• 2. How that person actually lives.
• 3. How satisfied that person feels.
• 4. The goods/commodities that person uses.

48
Martha Nussbaum Capabilities Approach

• Develops an open and revisable threshold list of
  central human capabilities that all people ought
  to be able to exercise.
• This list can be used for public planning
  purposes by governments and other political
  entities. The goal would be to develop legal,
  political, and social institutions and procedures
  that create conditions in which people can
  develop and exercise their capabilities.

49
Nussbaums List of Central Human Capabilities

• 1. Life being able to live a normal human life
  span.
• 2. Bodily Health being able to have good
  health.
• 3. Bodily Integrity being able to be
  physically secure, including rights over
• ones own body.
• 4. Senses, Imagination, and Thought being able
  to use these mental
• capacities in a truly human way through adequate
  education,
• informed consent, and freedom from repression.
• 5. Emotions being able to have and freely
  express feelings and sentiments.
• 6. Practical Reason being able to form a
  conception of the good and to
• engage in critical reflection about the planning
  of ones life.
• 7. Affiliation (a) being able to interact well
  with other people, and
• (b) having the social bases for self-respect,
  dignity, and non-humiliation.
• 8. Other Species being able to live with
  concern for the natural world.
• 9. Play being able to play and laugh.
• 10. Control Over Environment being able to
  effectively participate in
• political processes, to have possessions, and to
  seek employment.