Lecture Notes in Gethics part 1

We are discussing no small matter, but how we ought to live.

SOCRATES in Plato’s Republic

Moral philosophy is the study of the values and guidelines by which we live, as well as the justification of these values and
guidelines. It is the study of morality.

Morality is a set of norms and principles that govern our actions with respect to each other and which are taken to have a
special kind of weight or authority.

We can also think of morality as consisting of moral reasons, either grounded in some more basic value, or, the other way
around, grounding value.

There are two traditional subdivisions in moral philosophy:

1. Normative ethics is concerned with the study of the values and guidelines by which we live. It also includes the
study of moral issues such as euthanasia, abortion, homosexuality, disparities of wealth between nations,
international trade and immigration policy, warfare, and global warming. The application of normative ethics to
actual cases is called applied ethics.
2. Theoretical ethics, also known as metaethics, is concerned with the justification of these values and guidelines.
These justifications involve skill in moral reasoning and critical thinking.

In simpler terms, morality is the study of principles of morality which can guide us to the right action in any circumstances.
The principles of morality are sometimes referred to as moral theory/theories.

A theory is a conceptual framework for explaining a set of facts or concepts. In moral philosophy, theory explains why a
certain action—such as torturing babies—is wrong and why we ought to act in certain ways and be a certain type of
person.

And we will be studying moral theories.

Also, for our purposes, we shall be using moral philosophy and ethics interchangeably and that we will not be
differentiating them. What is ethical is moral; what is moral is ethical. Both ethics and morality are actually about the
same: What you ought to be doing with your life. If it’s true that an act is immoral, then you ought not to do it. If an act is
unethical, it’s still something you ought not to do. So, don’t worry about the difference between ethics and morality.

Why be ethical? Why should you be ethical?

1. Ethics can be in your self-interest. In other words, ethics pays off. By and large, generally, people who follow
moral rules tend to live in harmony with those around them. Doing so creates a certain amount of happiness.

Ethical people often have less stress in their lives than unethical people. They don’t have to worry about the stress of
hiding lies and pretensions. Ethical people also seem capable of having happier lives.

The English philosopher Thomas Hobbes tells us that when people don’t come together to cooperate in an ethical
manner, they will have “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short” life.

Hobbes offers an additional reason to be ethical: By following ethical rules you contribute to the cohesion/harmony of
society. To live in a cohesive society turns out to be much more beneficial to an individual than living in a culture of
backstabbers and thieves.

There are rewards and consolation too according to Judaism, Christianity, and Islam if you were to live ethically. It is
paradise for good people. It is burning fire for people with the worst deeds.

2. To have integrity. Ethics is required if you want to live a life of integrity.

Integrity means being honest and having strong moral principles. A person with integrity behaves ethically and does the
right thing, even behind closed doors.

It makes you align your words, actions, and values and be consistent with them. You practice what you preach.
There are good reasons then to ethical commitment. We must therefore commit ourselves to an ethical life.

Is there anything we can start with? Where should we start?

Types of Ethical Theories

1. Moral Relativism: there are no universal and objective bases of right and wrong. What we consider as moral greatly
depends one’s culture, opinions, and preferences. There are no absolute or objective moral truths, only truths relative to
particular contexts. Example: In one culture, polygamy might be morally acceptable, while in another, it is not.
2. Moral Realism/Objectivism/Universalism/Absolutism: there are objective, fundamental and universal moral principles at
all times, in all places, for all people.
3. Moral Nihilism: there are no moral standards, moral truths or values. Holds that statements like "murder is wrong" are
neither true nor false because no moral facts exist. Example: "Stealing is wrong" is not an inherently true or false
statement.
4. Moral Skepticism: doubts that humans can have knowledge of moral facts, even if they exist. Asks whether we can ever
truly know what is morally right or wrong. Example: A moral skeptic might question whether we can know for sure that
harming others is wrong.
5. Moral Non-cognitivism: moral statements do not express propositions that can be true or false. Instead, they are
expressions of emotional attitudes or prescriptions. Example: "Murder is wrong" is interpreted as "I disapprove of murder"
or "Don't murder!"
6. Moral Constructionism: moral truths are constructed by human practices, agreements, or conventions. Morality is a
human-made framework, emerging from social processes rather than existing independently. Example: Moral norms
against lying or theft may be viewed as products of social agreement to maintain trust.

Moral Relativism is the ethical theory that says there are no universal and objective bases of right and wrong. What we
consider as moral greatly depends one’s culture, opinions, and preferences.

Two kinds of moral relativism: moral subjectivism and cultural relativism

1. Moral Subjectivism is the doctrine that what makes an action right

for someone is that it is approved by that person—claims that moral judgments
are always relative to the individual. Whenever someone says that an action is right, what she means is that it is right for
her. There are no objective, universal moral truths—only individuals’ opinions or preferences. What is right for you may be
wrong for me, depending on our respective feelings.

This relativism is also known as Subjective relativism. It holds that moral truths are relative to the individual.

Problems with Subjective Relativism

1. it implies that each of us is morally error-free, not capable of being wrong
2. it makes moral disagreement next to impossible.
3. it allows and disregards any action, even wrong ones, as long as the person
performing it approves of it.

2. Cultural relativism, also known as conventionalism, is the doctrine that what makes an action right for the members of a
particular culture is that it is approved by that culture. Morality is relative to the norms of one's culture. That is, whether an
action is right or wrong depends on the moral norms of the society in which it is practiced. There are no universal moral
standards that can be universally applied to all peoples at all times. The only moral standards against which a society's
practices can be judged are its own. To believe in objective standards of right and wrong and to insist that there are
actions that are ‘absolutely’ good and
‘absolutely’ bad is what cultural relativism calls ‘the myth of objectivity.’

The anthropological argument for cultural relativism:

1. People in different societies make different moral judgments regarding the same action.
2. If people in different societies make different moral judgments regarding the same action, they must accept
different moral standards.
3. If people in different societies accept different moral standards, there are no universal moral standards.
4. Therefore, there are no universal moral standards.
Cultural Relativism asserts that there are no objective moral truths. It argues:
1. “Since morality is a product of culture, there cannot be objective moral truths.”
2. “Since cultures disagree widely about morality, there cannot be objective moral truths.”
3. “Since there’s no clear way to resolve moral differences, there cannot be objective moral truths.”

Points against Cultural Relativism

1. Making anything right: it can allow any practice like slavery, discrimination, and genocide to quality as morally
right.
2. Making moral reforms and progress impossible: it would be considered wrong to introduce changes and moral
reform advocates will be treated as ‘enemies.’ Cultural relativism encourages blind conformity to cultural norms.
3. Ignoring the subgroup problem: whose cultural standard should be adopted given the complexity of our world
today; which group or society should we follow as we belong to many groups or societies? Cultural relativism
does not work in pluralistic cultures.
4. Cultural relativism is based on faulty reasoning: it argues from the fact that a culture believes something, such as
slavery, is moral, to the conclusion that that is the way things ought to be. It commits the faulty logic known naturalist
fallacy which draws a conclusion about what ought to be, based on what is.

Summary:

Is morality just about opinions?

Are There Any Moral Absolutes or Is Morality Completely Relative?

Morality is just a matter of opinion. Both Subjectivism and Cultural Relativism affirms this position. To the subjectivist, what
is right and wrong is just a matter of personal, individual opinion. To the cultural relativist, it is about group opinion.

Ethical relativism is the notion that there are no universally valid moral principles, but that all moral principles are valid
relative to cultural or individual choice. There are two forms of ethical relativism: (1) subjectivism, which views morality as
a personal decision (“Morality is in the eye of the beholder”), and (2) cultural relativism, which views moral validity by
social acceptance.

Opposed to ethical relativism are various theories of moral objectivism. All forms of objectivism affirm the universal validity
of some moral principles. The objective view (also called moral realism) claims that some things are objectively right or
wrong, independently of what anyone (as individual or group) may think or feel.

Divine Command Theory/Supernaturalism is the doctrine that what makes an

action right is that God commands it to be done. On this view, nothing is right (or
wrong) prior to or independently of God’s willing it to be done (or refrained from).
God is both the author and the enforcer of the moral law. God makes the rules,
and ensure that those who break them are punished. Ethics is based on religion.
Three (3) reasons to support DCT.
1. DCT has to be true because the Bible teaches it.
2. If you believe in God, then you believe that all basic laws
of every sort depend on God’s will. But then all Psalm 41:1 Blessed are those who have regard for the weak; the Lord delivers them in times
basic moral laws must depend on God’s will. So, God of trouble.
created the moral order, and God’s will differentiate right
Proverbs 3:27 Do not withhold good from those to whom it is due, when it is in your power
from wrong. to act.
3. If you accept that objective moral duties bind you, then
you must admit a source of this obligation. This source Proverbs 14:31 Whoever oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker, but whoever
could only be a God, not a non-person, or you, or other is kind to the needy honors God.

individuals, or society. Proverbs 17:17 A friend loves at all times, and a brother is born for a time of adversity.

Supernaturalism must be true because Proverbs 19:17 Whoever is kind to the poor lends to the LORD, and he will reward them for
what they have done.
1. the Bible teaches it,
2. all basic laws of every sort depend on God’s will, and Proverbs 22:9 The generous will themselves be blessed, for they share their food with the
3. God is the only plausible source of objective moral poor.
duties. Proverbs 31:8-9 Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all
who are destitute. Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the poor and needy.
These three reasons presume, respectively, that we
Isaiah 1:17 Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the
believe in the Bible, or in God, or in an objective morality. fatherless; plead the case of the widow.

We can know God’s will through (1) the Bible, (2) the Luke 6:38 Give, and it will be given to you. A good measure, pressed down, shaken together
church, (3) prayer, or (4) reason. God wants us to have and running over, will be poured into your lap. For with the measure you use, it will be
measured to you.
concern and love for each other, and to treat others as we
want to be treated. Luke 12:33-34 Sell your possessions and give to the poor. Provide purses for yourselves that
will not wear out, a treasure in heaven that will never fail, where no thief comes near and no
moth destroys. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.
Arguments against DCT/Supernaturalism
1. God cannot make an action right by simply willing it to be
done. God must will an action to be done because it is right. In that case, morality does not depend on God.
2. Ethics could exist without religion. Some truths shall remain true, even without believing in a God. Some moral
principles are logically true: “Equals must be treated equally.” Believers and non-believers will mostly come to the same
moral beliefs, for
example that stealing is wrong.
Suppose that God spoke to you and told you to kill your parents?
How would you know it was God? If you were convinced that it was,
would you do it? Why or why not?