Different Ethical Philosophies

A few weeks ago I read a book, “The Science of Good and Evil” by Michael Shermer, which takes a rational approach to the subject of morality and ethics. His basic premise is that one need not be religious to be moral.

The author describes morality as right and wrong thoughts and behaviors in the context of the rules of a social group and ethics as being the scientific study and theories about morality.

In one chapter, the author covers several different philosophies of morality, which I’ll list and describe here for you to consider.


Absolute Morality

This is an inflexible set of rules for moral thought and behavior as derived from a particular group’s canon of ethics. This can be a particular religion’s sacred scriptures, the state, an ideology, and so on.

The problem with absolutism is that it requires black and white, dualistic thinking, which is maladaptive as the world is infinitely more complex to be fairly addressed by simplistic yes/no choices.

Relative Morality

A flexible set of rules for moral thought and behavior derived from how the situation is defined by a social group.

This better addresses the complexity of human nature, but can be abused and is subject to the slippery slope syndrome where nearly any human action can be justified, implying that all moral actions are equal.

Existentialism

This philosophy believes that one’s essential self is constantly being created by the experiences we “choose”. Existentialism believes that everything bad that happens to a person is ultimately a person’s own fault, totally caused by the choices one makes in life.

While there is some truth in this in many situations, it, too, is entirely too simplistic and does not allow for randomness (“dumb luck”) and unpredictable circumstances beyond our control.

Utilitarianism

This is a rather mathematical approach to moral choices. When contemplating an action, utilitarianism has seven criteria by which the potential for pleasure or pain can be evaluated.

Purity: The chance it has of not being followed by sensations of the opposite kind
Intensity: The strength, force, or power of the pleasure.
Propinquity: The proximity in time or place of the pleasure.
Certainty: The sureness of the pleasure
Fecundity: The chance it has of being followed by sensations of the same kind.
Extent: The number of persons to whom it extends, or are affected by it.
Duration: The length of time the pleasure will last.

After one has considered all seven aspects, they are expected to tally up the pros on one side, and the cons on the other in order to reach a decision on whether or not to proceed. It essentially reduces moral choices to a bottom line mentality.

Consequentialism

This philosophy maintains that the consequences of an action determine whether it is right or wrong.

Contractarianism

This belief states that contractual agreements between people determine what is right or wrong and that violating the terms of a contract determine immorality.

Deontology

This states that one’s duty determines which actions should be seen as moral or immoral.

Emotivism

This approach claims that morality and immorality is determined by whether a particular action evokes positive or negative feelings.

Ethical Egoism

This philosophy asserts that people always act in their own self-interest, so even good deeds are motivated by selfish desires.

Moral Isolationism

This view believes that we ought to be morally concerned only with those in our immediate group.

Natural Law Theory

This theory believes there is a natural, benevolent order to human affairs and morality is determined by how an action conforms to these natural laws.

Nihilism

Nihilism believes there are no truths to be discovered, particularly pertaining to morality.

Particularity

This view believes that we limit our moral preferences only to those morally relevant to us.

Pluralism

The view states that multiple perspectives should be considered when evaluating a moral question, and that no one approach has all the answers.

Subjectivism

This philosophy asserts that moral choices are an individual thing that can’t be properly evaluated in the larger social and cultural context.

Provisional Ethics

According to this view, moral or immoral means confirmed to such an extent it would be reasonable to offer provisional assent. It is provisional because the evidence and justification may change. Provisional moral principles are applicable to most people in most circumstances most of the time, yet are flexible enough to account for the wide diversity of human behavior, culture, and circumstances.

Thoughts?