1 / 46

The Moral Hand

The Moral Hand. Stijn Bruers Ghent University. Ethics and meta-ethics. Ethics: which acts are good? Formulate ethical principles Ethical system Meta-ethics: which ethical principles and systems are good? Meta-ethical guidelines. Overview.

eswims
Télécharger la présentation

The Moral Hand

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Moral Hand Stijn Bruers Ghent University

  2. Ethics and meta-ethics • Ethics: which acts are good? • Formulate ethical principles • Ethical system • Meta-ethics: which ethical principles and systems are good? • Meta-ethical guidelines

  3. Overview • The meta-ethical hand: which ethical systems are good? • 5 guidelines to construct a coherent ethical system • 5 principles of anti-arbitrariness (uniformity) • The moral (ethical) hand: which acts are good? • 5 basic principles of a coherent ethical system • 5 principles of anti-dicrimination (equality)

  4. The meta-ethical hand: scientifictheories • A good scientific theory has • Universal laws (no arbitrary exceptions) • Best fit most reliable experimental data • Mutual consistency and completeness • Clarity (no ambiguity) • Parsimony, simplicity • Science versus pseudo-science

  5. The meta-ethical hand: metaphor of the crosswordpuzzle Given description (yellow box) = moral intuition or value White box = particular situation Letter = final moral judgment about acts (all things considered) Word = ethical principle 2) Correspondence with basic information 3) Consistency and completeness 4) Clarity (no ambiguity) 5) Parsimony 1) The same word

  6. The meta-ethical hand • The thumb: uniformity • Not: “Whoorwhatgets all rights?” • But: “Whichrightsshould we give to everything and everyone?” • The forefinger: compatibility and agreement with basic information (moral intuitions) • The middle finger: completeness and internalconsistency • We caneatsomeone (e.g. a pig) • We cannoteatsomeoneelse (e.g. a dog ormentallydisabledhuman) • We cannotdiscriminate • The ring finger: clarity • The little finger: parsimony

  7. The meta-ethical hand: moral illusions Moral illusion = obstinate moral intuition that is inconsistent with a coherent system of mutually supporting judgments and ethical principles A B Three intuitions (spontaneous judgments) 1: A<B 2: length of measure stick remains constant -> A=B 3: erase arrowheads -> A=B

  8. The meta-ethical hand: moralillusions

  9. The meta-ethical hand: moral illusions Moral value of black person Moral value of white person (Morally) irrelevant properties (e.g. skin color)

  10. The meta-ethical hand: moralillusions • Intuition 1: racism (white > black) • Intuition 2: translationmethod (empathy) • Intuition 3: deletionmethod (erasing irrelevant properties) 1 versus 2 + 3 ? -> Racism is a moralillusion -> Speciesism?

  11. kingdom (animals) phylum (chordates and vertebrates) class (mammals) infraclass (eutheria) order (primates) suborder (dry-nosed primates) infraorder (simians) superfamily (Hominoidea) family (great apes) genus (Homo) species(Homo sapiens) subspecies (Homo sapiens sapiens) ethnic group (whites)

  12. Common vertebrate ancestor Australopithecus Our common ancestor Your grandfather Your mother You Chicken

  13. Ring species • All species are connected through time like populations of a ring species are spatially connected. • Is the accidental death of intermediates morally relevant?

  14. The five meta-ethical fingers Uniformity Correspondence with basic information Concistency and completeness Anti arbitrariness Clarity Parsimony

  15. We should all construct our own coherent ethical system using the meta-ethical hand • When coherent systems are different: take a “democratic average” • Incoherent systems are not allowed in this democratic procedure

  16. The moral hand

  17. The thumb: rule universalism You must follow the rules that everyone (who is capable, rational and informed) must follow in all morally similar situations. You may follow only the rules that everyone (who is capable, rational and informed) may follow in all morally similar situations. We should give the good example, even if others don’t. What counts as similar situations?

  18. Rule 1: eat nothing Rule 2: eat kid Rule 3: eat pig Rule 4: eat carrot

  19. Lifetime well-being= • The value you would ascribe when you would live and experience the complete life of someone • How much you prefer to live this life • A function of all positive feelings that are the result of the satisfaction of preferences, of everything wanted by the individual (subtracted by negative feelings of dissatisfaction)

  20. Distribution of lifetime well-being? • Situation 1 (choose rule 1): • person A: 100% (maximum well-being) • person B: 10% (barely worth living) • Situation 2 (choose rule 2): • person A: 50% • person B: 50% • Situation 3 (choose rule 3): • person A: 11% • person B: 11% 2 > 1 > 3

  21. Trade-off between equality and efficiency

  22. The forefinger: justice and the value of lifetime well-being Increase the lifetime well-being of everyone (all beings alive in the present and the future), whereby improvements of the worst-off positions (the worst sufferers, the beings who have the worst lives) have a strong (but not absolute) priority.

  23. Trolley dilemma 1

  24. Trolley dilemma 2

  25. The middle finger: the mere means principle and the basic right to bodily autonomy. Never use someone’s body as merely a means to someone else’s ends, because that violates the right to bodily autonomy. The two words “mere means” refer to two conditions: • if in order to reach an end you force someone to do or undergo something that the being does not want, and • if the body of that individual is necessary as a means for that end, then you are not allowed to treat that being in that way.

  26. Right to bodily autonomy • Do not use someone’s body against their will • You own your body. No-one else can claim your body against your will • Equally applies to everyone and everything (no arbitrary exceptions) • A strong right, but not absolute (what if a million would die if…?)

  27. Transplantation dilemma DEAD

  28. Predation dilemma DEAD DEAD

  29. Biodiversity = • The value of anecosystem • The diversity of lifeformsthat are the direct result of natural evolution • Cfr. lifetimewell-being as the value of a sentientbeing: the collection of positivefeelingsthat are the result of preferencesatisfaction Naturalness= • Behaviorthat is the direct consequence of natural evolution, and contributes to biodiversity • Cfr. consciousness of a sentientbeing

  30. Natural: a direct consequence of spontaneous evolution • Normal: frequent • Necessary: important for the survival of sentient beings • 3-N conditions • A normal, necessary and natural behavior is related to biodiversity just as an intense, positive and conscious experience is related to well-being. • The valuable biodiversity would drastically decrease if a behavior that is natural, normal and necessary would be universally prohibited

  31. The ring finger: naturalness and the value of biodiversity. If a behavior is natural, normal and necessary, it is permissible (even if it violates rights and well-being), because a lot of biodiversity depends on that behavior Everyone is equally allowed to do natural, normal and necessary behavior • Permissible: Predation Moving (killing insects) Procreation

  32. Burning house dilemma

  33. The little finger: tolerated partiality and the value of personal relationship When helping others, you are allowed to be a bit partial in favor of your loved ones (with whom you have a personal relation), as long as you are prepared to tolerate similar levels of partiality of everyone else.

  34. The five moral fingers Rule universalism Justice and well-being (priority for the worst-off) Mere means principle (right to bodily autonomy) Anti discrimination (equality) Biodiversity (natural, normal and necessary) Tolerated partiality (personal relations)

  35. Principles of equality • The thumb: the formal principle of impartiality. We should treat all equals equally in all equal situations. We should not look at arbitrary characteristics linked to individuals. • This is a formal principle, because it does not say how we should treat someone.

  36. Principles of equality • The forefinger: prioritarian equality of lifetime well-being (the principle of priority for the worst-off). If total lifetime well-being is the same in situations A and B, then the situation which has the most equal distribution of well-being is the best.

  37. Principles of equality • The middle finger: basic right equality. All beings get an equal claim to the basic right not to be used as merely a means to someone else’s ends.

  38. Principles of equality • The ring finger: naturalistic behavioral fairness. All beings have an equal right to a behavior that is both natural, normal and necessary (i.e. a behavior that contributes to biodiversity). • E.g. if the zebra is allowed to eat in order to survive, a lion is allowed to do so as well (even if it means eating the zebra).

  39. Principles of equality • The little finger: tolerated choice equality. If you choose to help individual X instead of individual Y, and if you tolerate that someone else chooses to help Y instead of X, then X and Y have a tolerated choice equality (even if X is emotionally more important for you than Y).

  40. Application to animal rights and veganism The forefinger • Compare loss of lifetime well-being • Livestock animals and captured fish • Humans who are no longer allowed to eat animal products • Livestock animals and captured fish are worse-off than vegan humans.

  41. Application to animal rights and veganism The middle finger: • Animals for consumption: • Their bodies are used for meat, eggs, milk, leather,… • They are forced to do or undergo things against their will. • Violates the mere means principle.

  42. Application to animal rights and veganism The ring finger • Well-planned vegan diets are not unhealthy (according to the Academy of Nutrition & Dietetics) • Vegan farming is possible • Animal products are not necessary for humans • Biodiversity will not decrease when we would stop consuming animal products • The value of biodiversity cannot be invoked to justify the consumption of animal products

  43. Application to animal rights and veganism The little finger: • We would never tolerate the degree of partiality that is required to justify livestock farming and fishing. • Tolerated partiality cannot be invoked to justify the consumption of animal products.

  44. Application to animal rights and veganism The thumb • Veganism is a good moral rule • give the good example, even when other people continue consuming animal products.

  45. Questions? • http://stijnbruers.wordpress.com • Stijn.bruers@gmail.com

More Related