Title: THE RIGHTS APPROACH Ethical Theories Presentation Created by Jill Stiemsma
1THE RIGHTS APPROACHEthical Theories
PresentationCreated by Jill Stiemsma
2IMMANUEL KANT1724-1804
3THEORY OF RIGHT ACTION
- Each human has dignity and is worthy of respect.
Human dignity gives rise to fundamental moral
rights.
4TWO BASIC RIGHTS
- Right to protection of human freedoms each of
us, therefore, has an obligation not to interfere
with others rights (e.g., the right to free
speech)
5TWO BASIC RIGHTS
- Right to a minimal level of well-being (e.g., the
right to sufficient calories) - Imposes on others the duty to sustain that level
of well-being
6As such, each of us has protections (rights) and
each of us has a commensurate responsibility to
others. Its not just about me. Consider
drinking and driving.
7BASIC PRINCIPLE OF MORAL ACTION
8CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE ACT ONLY ACCORDING
TO THAT MAXIM WHEREBY YOU CAN AT THE SAME TIME
WILL THAT IT BECOME A UNIVERSAL LAW.
9WHAT IN THE WORLD DOES THAT MEAN???
- The rule you propose for yourself when deciding
what to do must be consistent with the rule that
everyone else should follow.
10FOR EXAMPLE
- Should I lie to get myself out of an embarrassing
situation? - Kant No. Because if others therefore could
also lie in the same situation, the general
expectation for truthfulness could never be
maintained.
11CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE
- WE CANNOT MAKE EXCEPTIONS FOR OURSELVES
- WHATS GOOD FOR THE GOOSE IS GOOD FOR
- THE GANDER,
- SO TO SPEAK
12PERFORM TWO TESTS
- Generalize the principle to others If someone
else acted this way in this situation, would it
be all right?Perform Test 2 only if Test 1
makes sense. - Ask Would you choose to live in a world where
everyone acted this way? If not, do not act on
the maxim.
13USING TEST 1Maxim I may make a false
promise Generalized Anyone may make a false
promise This is self-contradictory because
If anyone may make a Result I may not
act on that maxim. The maxim fails Test One.
14EXAMPLE TWOUSING TESTS ONE AND TWO
- Maxim I may refuse to help another
- Generalized Anyone may refuse to help
- Can it be conceived? Yes.
- Could you will it to be universal law?
No - Result You cannot act on the "Bad Samaritan"
maxim.
15ONE MORE EXAMPLE
- I dont have time to write my own paper. I will
copy from a friend who wrote on this topic last
semester.
16TEST 1
- Generalize the principle to others
- If someone else acted this way in this
situation, would it be all right? - Perform Test 2 ONLY if Test 1 makes sense. Lets
assume it does.
17TEST 2
- ASK
- Would you choose to live in a world where
everyone acted this way? If not, do not act on
the maxim.
18In short, if you wouldnt want to live in a world
where everyone acted that way,the action would be
deemed neither moral nor ethical
19GOOD WILL
- According to Kant,
- only one thing
- is inherently good, and that is good will.
20One employs good will ONLY if s/he acts with
RESPECT forMORAL LAW. That is, a good action
is not the same thing as a morally right action.
Even if one does the morally right thing, s/he
does not deserve credit unless s/he acts from
good will (heart).
21IN SHORT, ONES ACTION IS ONLY GOOD IF IT IS GOOD
WITHOUT QUALIFICATION.MORAL WORTH DEPENDS ON
OUR MOTIVATION.
22We Differ from Animals
- Because we can act rationally
- Because we can make moral choices
- Because we can treat people like ends vs. means
- Because we can follow rules, reach conclusions,
generalize and make free choices
23IN SHORT, ONES ACTION IS ONLY GOOD IF IT IS GOOD
WITHOUT QUALIFICATION.MORAL WORTH DEPENDS ON
OUR MOTIVATION.
24THE CRITICISMSof KANTIAN THEORY
25Criticisms
- Kants approach gives little aid for complex
situations
26FOR EXAMPLE
- Lets say your work group consists of two
productive students and two slackers. Your grade
depends upon submitting a well reasoned, well
edited project which will not happen unless you
pick up the slack. - Lets apply Test 1 and Test 2.
27WHAT TO DO
- Test 1 Generalize to others If someone else
acted this way in this situation, would it be all
right? - If others picked up the slack for lazy students,
would that be all right?
28WHAT TO DO
- Test 2 ASK
- Would you choose to live in a world where
everyone acted this way?
29CAN TESTS 1 AND 2TRULY ADDRESS MORE
COMPLICATED DILEMMAS?
30CRITICISMS
- Kant dismisses emotions such as pity and
compassion as irrelevant to morality - How does one separate such emotions from
morality? - Is there anything wrong with compassion and pity?
31CRITICISM
- Kants approach doesnt take the consequences of
actions seriously enough - What if a well-intentioned babysitter dries your
cat in the microwave Would you say, Thats
okay you meant well?
32ANOTHER CONTRIBUTOR
- John Rawls Justice as Fairness Focuses on
the structure of society
33Is there a way to organize society to avoid envy
and resentment, alienation and exploitation?Can
society be set up around fair principles of
cooperation that citizens would accept?
34RAWLS
- Each person should have equal right to the most
extensive system of equal basic liberties - Social and economic inequalities are to be
arranged so that it benefits both parties fairly
and equally (e.g., New Zealand school funding)
35Once society has been set up around a fair set of
rules, then people should have the chance to
freely play the game Get jobs, get
educations, earn income, establish businesses,
etc. -- and succeed or fail on their own
terms.
36ADVANTAGES
- Protects from exploitation
- Prohibits favoritism
- Justifies right action
- Promotes happiness
- Prevents harm
37APPLICATION OF RIGHTS THEORY
38RIGHT TO PROTECTION OF HUMAN FREEDOMS
- Which human rights are threatened by global
warming? Access to - Adequate food
- Reasonable weather
- Clean water
- Freedom from disease
39EXTREME WEATHER
Droughts, floods, other extreme weather
Catastrophic loss of life
40INTERRUPTION OF FOOD PRODUCTION
41INCREASING UNSANITARY CONDITIONS
Those with the fewest resources can expect the
greatest crises
42Remember From a Rights Approach, we should all
expect a minimal level of well-being. Hence,
this approach would suggest we should alter
behavior NOW to preserve future right to survival.
43In fact, we have a DUTY to protect the well-being
of future generations. We have an obligation NOT
to interfere with their rights.
44QUESTIONS
- How could you see yourself using the Rights
Approach in your own life? - How useful are Kants tests?
- Should rights be the primary consideration when
making ethical decisions? Why/why not?
45- The End
- Remember
- Kant loves you