Reference no: EM13807712

Normative Ethical Theories

Context

Moral reasoning requires us to know what our ethical values are and to be able to provide a logical defense of them. Normative ethical theories are valuable because they provide frameworks for the justification of ethical claims. In this activity, you will apply a normative theory to a contemporary ethical problem.

Task Description

After completing the required reading, write a two- to three-page paper that uses normative ethical theories (or a single theory) to defend your position on one of the following questions: Your paper should provide a brief explanation of the moral problem and draw on ethical theories to defend your position on the issue. Be sure to use APA style and format, and cite your sources.

For writing assistance and resources, see the Syllabus section titled "Optional Materials."

Choose one of the following for your paper:

Is waterboarding morally defensible as method of interrogation?

Topic Overview

Do ethical norms transcend cultural contexts? How do we justify the morality of an action? What are my moral obligations to others? On a daily basis, we are confronted with ethical problems that range from the personal and mundane-"Am I obliged to tell the supermarket clerk that he gave me back too much change?" to the public and extraordinary-"Is it ethical to use waterboarding as a means of interrogating prisoners?" What values do you draw on when developing an answer to these kinds of questions?

In philosophy, the study of values is called axiology, which is derived from the Greek word axia, "meaning value or worth" (Chaffee, 2013, p. 430). Ethics is part of axiology because moral norms reflect our most cherished ethical values. How are these values derived?

As Chaffee (2013) points out, the English word "ethics" comes from the Greek word, ethos, which refers both to a person's character and to cultural mores, and it can also be traced back to the Latin word moralis, "which...means ‘custom' " (p. 429). The etymology of this word calls attention to the way in which morality has both private and public aspects: "We strive to become morally enlightened people, but we do so within the social context of cultural customs" (Chaffee, 2013, p. 429). Put differently, ethical norms are expressed in and shaped by culture.

That ethical norms are intertwined with cultural values raises some provocative questions about the status of moral norms. Are they merely an expression of personal or cultural values? Relativists believe they are. There are two kinds of relativists. The ethical subjectivist maintains that ethics are a matter of personal preference, similar to one's taste in music or wine. Initially, this position appears to be appealing because it provides great latitude in ethical decision-making, but its flaws are quickly revealed: it leads, as Chaffee (2013) notes, to anarchy (p. 437). Similarly, the cultural relativist argues that what counts as ethical depends on the culture. This position allows for cross-cultural understanding, but it cannot provide a means for adjudicating between the moral truth claims of different cultures.

On what grounds, for example, would one be able to say that the genocide in Darfur was wrong or that the practice of female genital mutilation by some North African societies is immoral? Precisely because cultural relativism reduces moral truths to cultural norms, it cannot provide a means for critiquing another culture's actions. Advocates defend their position by arguing that cross-cultural critique is impossible because transcendent, moral truths (truths that are absolute and applicable in all places and times) do not exist; thus, cultures have no basis for critique.

In contrast, moral absolutists counter that moral truths are not reducible to person or culture; rather, moral norms are transcendent to them.

This position has the advantage of being able to argue that actions like genocide, slavery, and torture are immoral, but it fails to account for descriptive relativism (the notion that cultures do have different moral standards) and the fact that no single set of universal ethical norms have been identified and agreed upon. (Descriptive relativism differs from normative relativism. The former simply says relativism is the case; whereas, the latter claims that relativism ought to be the case.) As you read through this material, you will have the opportunity to determine your position on the status of moral claims: are they relative to culture, or are they absolute?

The study of ethics also involves an examination of normative systems of ethics. We will investigate the moral reasoning brought to bear to justify the morality of an action. Divine command theorists argue that an action is justifiable because God commands it. Natural law theorists claim that moral actions are natural to the species and immoral actions unnatural. Ethical egoists insist that an action is justified by rational self-interest: the moral action is the one that is beneficial to self. Utilitarians, like ethical egoists, justify the morality of an action based on its outcome, but they apply a calculation that moves beyond the principle of self-interest.

The moral action is the action that brings about the greatest good for the greatest number. Along similar lines, virtue ethicists maintain that an action is moral if it produces a virtuous character. Existentialist ethicists, though varied in their approaches, argue that individuals have a moral obligation to be authentic (to develop their subjectivity).

Notice that while ethical egoism, utilitarianism, virtue ethics, and existentialist ethics all justify the morality of an action based on its outcome, they nevertheless differ in their moral reasoning with respect to that outcome. In contrast to these consequentialist normative systems, deontology insists one has a duty to do the right thing (follow the formulations of the categorical imperative) for the right reasons. Reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of these normative theories as you work through this week's assigned materials.

It is helpful to understand ethical reasoning because it is used to provide support for or argue against particular ethical actions. If, for example, you read an Internet editorial that claims that waterboarding is ethical because it yields useful information, you will be able to identify that argument as utilitarian and will therefore be in a better position to evaluate it. The study of normative ethical theories is also helpful because it enables you to develop and craft philosophically-sound arguments for your own ethical positions.

Learner Outcomes

After completing this Topic, you should be able to:

1. Determine your position on the moral status of claims (relativism verses absolutism).

2. Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of normative theories of ethics (divine command theory, natural law, ethical egoism, utilitarianism, virtue ethics, existential ethics, and deontology).

3. Apply normative theories of ethics to moral problems.

4. Discuss selected Jesuit value as it relates to the subject matter.

Readings and Resources

The assigned readings will provide you with resources that are necessary for the study of ethics.

Required Readings

1. Chaffee, J. (2013).

o Chapter 8: Are there moral truths?

o Chapter 9: What are right actions?

2. eReserves - https://ereserves.regis.edu/ares/. For information on how to login to eReserves, see eReserves: How to Access.

o Oliver, "Julia Kristeva's Outlaw Ethics"

o Nussbaum, "Judging Other Cultures"