A Thought of Few, Thoughts of Many

We were talking about ethics, a field Jason is studying for his Philosophy major. Normative ethics is the attempt to tell us how to live moral lives on the basis of knowing "right from wrong". The consequences of our behavior on ourselves and others is then determined by the goods or bads created by our behavior and the intrinsic good of some of our actions. Some philosophers often view aesthetics, etiquette and arbritation as implying rather than explicitly stating theories of value or of conduct. In this view, ethics is derived from observations of actual choices made in practice. The problem with this is that there are a vast number of different ethical doctrines. Most of these doctrines contradict eachother and themselves.

For example applied ethics attempts to apply 'theoretical' ethics, such as utilitarianism, social contract theory, and deontology, to real world dilemmas. Applied ethics seeks to engage formal ethics in attempts to solve actual dilemmas. This increases the chances of disagreement over the way theories and principles should be applied. Strict, principle-based ethical approaches often result in solutions to specific problems that are not universally acceptable.

A strict deontological approach, for example, to an issue of medical ethics would never permit the deception of a patient about their condition while a utilitarian approach would look only at the consequences of the action. A utilitarian might permit lying to a patient if the result of the action was 'good'. A deontologist could thus derive a different solution to a dilemma than a utilitarian.

This all makes me wonder what really is the "right" way. Can we follow our hearts to make our decisions - or do the consequences outweigh the inner feelings of our hearts? Can we not rely on ourselves? Doesn't ethics, in a sense, contradict philosophical logic by "appealing to authority"? Jason at first did not agree with me at all about this because the labels of these ideas are not used the same way for every person that uses them. I believe, on the other hand, that calling oneself utilitarian or Kantian is appealing to authority in that one defines oneself by the name rather than simply following their own beliefs in whatever ethical doctrines they might see credible.

I'll be writing more on this at another time when I have authoritative research to back up my feelings.

Labels: Utilitarianism

posted by Thought, A Brilliant Disaster @ 7:46 AM