Introductory concepts in Ethics

Course Overview

This subject deals with ethical theories, their respective

proponents and their application in the analysis of classic and
current moral issues. It seeks to recognize and understand the
reasons in accepting or rejecting a certain moral principles, and
pursues to clarify arguments behind a moral standing on moral
issues. It aims to develop in students the desire and
appreciation for the “Good Life” and forge the skills of
philosophical thinking, ethical reasoning, and moral courage.

Learning Objectives

By the end of this module, students are

able to:
 Provide the definition of ethics and key concepts within its
discipline.
 Enumerate and explain the following: (a) types of ethics; (b)
moral standards; (c) moral dilemmas; and (d) foundation of
morality
 Find the relevance of ethics to a current socio-political
problem within one’s locality/ community

Course Content

1. What is Ethics?
2. Types of Ethics
3. Moral Standards
4. Moral Dilemmas
5. Foundation of Morality

Discussion

What is Ethics?
The definition of ethics constantly evolved as a result of changes
in the social, economic, political and cultural contexts of societies.
 However, we find the definition of Albert, Denise &Petrfreundin 1984
as logical in whatever cultural societies we belong. For Albert, Denise
&Pertfreund the term ethics is derived from the Greek word ethos,
which means custom or character. It is a branch of philosophy that
studies the rightness or wrongness of a human action. Ethics is more
concerned with questions of how human persons ought to act, and the
search for a definition of a right conduct and the good life. Hence, the
attempt to seek the “good” through the aid of reason is the traditional
goal of ethicists.
Ethics is not the same with moralitydespite the fact that many
philosophers believe that the two terms can be used
interchangeably. Ethics denotes the theory of right action and the
greater good, while morality indicates practice, that is, the rightness
or wrongness of a human action. In other words, ethics undertakes the
systematic study (that is, questioning and critical examination) of the
underlying principles of morality. Hence, it is interested primarily in
the illustration of a more general problem and the examination of
underlying assumptions and the critical evaluation of moral principles.
Morality, on the other hand, is more prescriptive in nature. It tells
us what we ought to do and exhorts us to follow the right way.
According to Terrance McConnell (1994), “morality is characterized as
an ‘end-governed rational enterprise’ whose object is to equip people
with a body of norms (rules and values) that make for peaceful and
collectively satisfying coexistence by facilitating their living together
and interacting in a way that is productive for the realization of the
general benefit”. For example, a religious leader may ask her
followers to be good at all times. In this way, a moralist may want to
keep alive the values she considers to be worthwhile and to improve
the moral quality of the community where she belongs . Hence,
morality, at the very least, aims to guide one’s action by reason and
gives equal weight to the interests of each individual affected by one’s
decision. Indeed, this gives us a picture of what it really means to be a
morally upright person.
Ethics is the science of morals, while morality is the practice of
ethics.

Types of Ethics
 Normative Ethics is prescriptive in nature as it seeks to set norms or
standards that regulate right and wrong or good and bad conduct. It
involves articulating the good habits that one should acquire, the
 duties that one should follow, or the consequences of one’sbehavior on
others. Thus, it provides guidelines on how human persons are ought
to behave (Sunmer, 1967).

 Metaethicsis descriptive in nature. It is allegedly constituted, at least

in part, by questions of the meanings of the various ethical terms and
functions of ethical utterances.” Hence, if a normative ethical inquiry
is evaluative and prescriptive, metaethics is analytical and
descriptive. It is a type of ethical inquiry that provides understanding
of the nature and dynamics of ethical principles. It asks questions
about the nature and origin of moral facts, as well as the way in which
we learn and acquire moral beliefs (Sunmer, 1967).

 Applied Ethicsrefers to the actual application of ethical or moral

theories for the purpose of deciding which ethical or moral actions are
appropriate in a given situation. For this reason, casuists (that is, the
adherents of applied ethics) are concerned with individual moral
problems, such as abortion or euthanasia, and attempt to resolve the
conflicting issues that surround these particular moral problems.
Casuists may also act on some occasions in an advisory capacity,
such as guiding individuals in their choice of actions.

Moral Standards and Non-moral standards

Different societies have different moral beliefs. These beliefs are
influenced bypeople’s culture and context. Thus, some values do have
moral implications, while others don’t. Take this for example, the
wearing of hijab. For sure, in traditional Muslim communities, the
wearing of hijab is the most appropriate act that women have to do in
terms of dressing up. In fact, for some Muslims, showing parts of the
woman’s body, such as the face and legs, is despicable. However, in
many parts of the world, especially in Western societies, most people
don’t mind if women barely cover their bodies. As a matter of fact, the
Hollywood canon of beauty glorifies a sexy and slim body and the
wearing of extremely daring dress. The point here is that people in the
West may have pitied the Muslim women who wear hijab, while some
Muslims may find women who dress up daringly despicable.
There is the necessity of understanding the difference between
moral standards (that is, of what is a moral issue) and non-moral ones
(that is, of what is a non-moral issue―thus, a matter of taste) comes
in. This issue may be too obvious and insignificant for some people,
but understanding the difference between the two may have far-
reaching implications. For one, once we have distinguished moral
standards from non-moral ones, of course, through the aid of the
principles and theories in ethics, we will be able to identify
fundamental ethical values that may guide our actions. Indeed, once
we know that particular values and beliefs are non-moral, we will be
able to avoid running the risk of falling into the pit of cultural
reductionism (that is, taking complex cultural issues as simple and
homogenous ones) and the unnecessary imposition of one’s own
cultural standard on others. The point here is that if such standards
are non-moral (that is, a matter of taste), then we don’t have the right
to impose them on others. But if such standards are moral ones, such
as not killing or harming people, then we may have the right to force
others to act accordingly. In this way, we may be able to find a
common moral ground, such as agreeing not to steal, lie, cheat, kill,
harm, and deceive our fellow human beings.
Now, what are moral standards, and how do they differ from non-moral
ones?

Moral Standards and their Characteristics

Moral standards are norms that individuals or groups have about
the kinds of actions believed to be morally right or wrong, as well as
the values placed on what we believed to be morally good or morally
bad. Moral standards normally promote “the good”, that is, the welfare
and well-being of humans as well as animals and the environment.
Moral standards, therefore, prescribe what humans ought to do in
terms of rights and obligations.According to some scholars, moral
standards are the sum of combined norms and values. In other words,
norms plus values equal moral standards. On the one hand, norms are
understood as general rules about our actions or behaviors. For
example, we may say “We are always under the obligation to fulfill our
promises” or “It is always believed that killing innocent people is
absolutely wrong”. On the other hand, values are understood as
enduring beliefs or statements about what is good and desirable or
 not. For example, we may say “Helping the poor is good” or “Cheating
during exams is bad”.

Characteristics of moral standard:

 Moral standards deal with matters we think can seriously injure or
benefit humans, animals, and the environment, such as child abuse,
rape, and murder
 Moral standards are not established or changed by the decisions of
authoritative individuals or bodies. Indeed, moral standards rest on the
adequacy of the reasons that are taken to support and justify them
 Moral standards are overriding, that is, they take precedence over
other standards and considerations, especially of self-interest
 Moral standards are based on impartial considerations. Hence, moral
standards are fair and just
 Moral standards are associated with special emotions (such as guilt
and shame) and vocabulary (such as right, wrong, good, and bad).

Non-moral Standards
Non-moral standards refer to standards by which we judge what
is good or bad and right or wrong in a non-moral way. Examples of non-
moral standards are standards of etiquette by which we judge
manners as good or bad, standards we call the law by which we judge
something as legal or illegal, and standards of aesthetics by which we
judge art as good or rubbish. Hence, we should not confuse morality
with etiquette, law, aesthetics or even with religion. Hence, a
scrupulous observance of these types of standards does not make one
a moral person. Violation of said standards also does not pose any
threat to human well-being. If a moral standard says “Do not kill” or
“Don’t steal”, a non-moral standard says “Don’t text and drive”
or “Don’t talk to strangers”.

Moral Dilemmas
Dilemmas are referred to situations where a person is
forced to choose between two or more conflicting options, neither of
 which is acceptable. Hence, the most logical thing to do for that
person is to look for alternatives or solutions to address the
problem.When dilemmas involve human actions which have moral
implications, they are called ethical or moral dilemmas.
Moral dilemmasare situations where persons, who are called
“moral agents” in ethics, are forced to choose between two or more
conflicting options, neither of which resolves the situation in a morally
acceptable manner. These involve three conditions:

 The person or the agent of a moral action is obliged to make a

decision about which course of action is best

 There must be different courses of action to choose from

 No matter what course of action is taken, some moral principles are

always compromised.

Foundations of Morality

 According to David Hume, morality is founded on the emotional

responses of the human person. For Hume, “it appears evident that
the ultimate ends of human actions can never, in any case, be
accounted for by reason, but recommend themselves entirely to the
sentiments and affections of mankind without any dependence on the
intellectual faculties.”

 For Immanuel Kant, morality is founded on the rational nature of

human person, his autonomy of the rational will. Kant’s notion of
autonomy is one of the more central, distinctive, and influential
aspects of his ethics. He defines autonomy as “the property of the will
by which it is a law to itself (independently of any property of the
objects of volition)”. According to Kant, the will of a moral agent is
autonomous in that it both gives itself the moral law (is self-
legislating) and can constrain or motivate itself to follow the law (is
self-constraining or self-motivating). In contrast to Hume, Kant argued
that the main source of moral law is not in the agent’s feelings, natural
impulses or inclinations, but in her “pure” rational will, which Kant
identifies as the “proper self”
References

Albert, E., Denise, T., and Peterfreund, S. (1984). Great Traditions in

Ethics. 5th ed. California: Wadsworth Publishing Company.

http://philonotes.com/index.php/2018/05/13/ethics/(accessed 04
September 2020, 10:00 PM)

https://www.scu.edu/ethics/ethics-resources/ethical-decision-making/
what-is-ethics/ (accessed 04 September 2020, 09:23 AM)

McConnell, T. (1994). Review: On the Nature and Scope of

Morality. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 54(2), pp. 421-
425.

Sumner, L. W. (1967). Normative and Metaethics, 77(2), pp. 95-106.

https://www.niehs.nih.gov/research/resources/bioethics/whatis/
index.cfm(accessed 04 September 2020, 1:30 PM)

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-hume-morality/(accessed 04
September 2020, 11:22 AM)