THE RIGHTS APPROACH Ethical Theories Presentation Created by Jill Stiemsma

1
THE RIGHTS APPROACHEthical Theories
PresentationCreated by Jill Stiemsma
2
IMMANUEL KANT1724-1804
3
THEORY OF RIGHT ACTION

• Each human has dignity and is worthy of respect.
  Human dignity gives rise to fundamental moral
  rights.

4
TWO 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)

5
TWO 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

6
As 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.
7
BASIC PRINCIPLE OF MORAL ACTION

• CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE

8
CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE ACT ONLY ACCORDING
TO THAT MAXIM WHEREBY YOU CAN AT THE SAME TIME
WILL THAT IT BECOME A UNIVERSAL LAW.
9
WHAT 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.

10
FOR 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.

11
CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE

• WE CANNOT MAKE EXCEPTIONS FOR OURSELVES
• WHATS GOOD FOR THE GOOSE IS GOOD FOR
• THE GANDER,
• SO TO SPEAK

12
PERFORM TWO TESTS

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.
2. Ask Would you choose to live in a world where
   everyone acted this way? If not, do not act on
   the maxim.

13
USING 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.
14
EXAMPLE 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.

15
ONE MORE EXAMPLE

• I dont have time to write my own paper. I will
  copy from a friend who wrote on this topic last
  semester.

16
TEST 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.

17
TEST 2

• ASK
• Would you choose to live in a world where
  everyone acted this way? If not, do not act on
  the maxim.

18
In short, if you wouldnt want to live in a world
where everyone acted that way,the action would be
deemed neither moral nor ethical
19
GOOD WILL

• According to Kant,
• only one thing
• is inherently good, and that is good will.

20
One 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).
21
IN SHORT, ONES ACTION IS ONLY GOOD IF IT IS GOOD
WITHOUT QUALIFICATION.MORAL WORTH DEPENDS ON
OUR MOTIVATION.
22
We 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

23
IN SHORT, ONES ACTION IS ONLY GOOD IF IT IS GOOD
WITHOUT QUALIFICATION.MORAL WORTH DEPENDS ON
OUR MOTIVATION.
24
THE CRITICISMSof KANTIAN THEORY
25
Criticisms

• Kants approach gives little aid for complex
  situations

26
FOR 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.

27
WHAT 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?

28
WHAT TO DO

• Test 2 ASK
• Would you choose to live in a world where
  everyone acted this way?

29
CAN TESTS 1 AND 2TRULY ADDRESS MORE
COMPLICATED DILEMMAS?
30
CRITICISMS

• 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?

31
CRITICISM

• 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?

32
ANOTHER CONTRIBUTOR

• John Rawls Justice as Fairness Focuses on
  the structure of society

33
Is 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?
34
RAWLS

• 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)

35
Once 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.
36
ADVANTAGES

• Protects from exploitation
• Prohibits favoritism
• Justifies right action
• Promotes happiness
• Prevents harm

37
APPLICATION OF RIGHTS THEORY

• GLOBAL WARMING

38
RIGHT TO PROTECTION OF HUMAN FREEDOMS

• Which human rights are threatened by global
  warming? Access to
• Adequate food
• Reasonable weather
• Clean water
• Freedom from disease

39
EXTREME WEATHER
Droughts, floods, other extreme weather
Catastrophic loss of life
40
INTERRUPTION OF FOOD PRODUCTION
41
INCREASING UNSANITARY CONDITIONS
Those with the fewest resources can expect the
greatest crises
42
Remember 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.
43

In fact, we have a DUTY to protect the well-being
of future generations. We have an obligation NOT
to interfere with their rights.
44
QUESTIONS

1. How could you see yourself using the Rights
   Approach in your own life?
2. How useful are Kants tests?
3. Should rights be the primary consideration when
   making ethical decisions? Why/why not?

45

• The End
• Remember
• Kant loves you