Home | Back to Program Schedule

How Broad Our Ethics? - Sat. 1:30pm
Can we ever justify cheating, stealing, subordinating other social justice goals?

Presenters: Matejka

George Matejka, Ph.D.   
Associate Professor of Philosophy, Ursuline College

Click here for a printable version of George's outline.

HOW BROAD OUR ETHICS?

Can we ever justify cheating, stealing, subordinating other social justice goals?

Some basic points from the discipline of Ethics that serve to frame our discussion:

1. Our understanding of Ethics began with the ancient Greeks, especially Plato and Aristotle. For them, ethics consisted of guidelines to ensure the positive relationship between two individual human persons. Unethical behavior (like lying to a friend) did harm to the health of the relationship. Telling the truth contributed to the strengthening of that relationship.

2. With the rise of the nation-states in the 18th and 19th centuries, the notion of ethics expanded to include what we today call “social ethics.” Issues like capital punishment as well as the criteria for the distribution of society’s goods and services (e.g., education, health care) come to the fore at this time.

3. Over the past few decades, more and more ethicists are beginning to suggest that ethics needs to expand its horizon and include human relationships with all of created reality, including animals and the environment.

4. Also today, there is increased awareness of our relationships to future generations of humans, as well as to the environment in which they and the other species of the earth will live. Here, we see the argument for conservation of resources for the future, as opposed to simply being about the here-and-now.

Some Important Ethical Principles for our Consideration:

The Principle of Double Effect: Many human actions will have more than one effect. A person with a gangrene infection in her/his foot may face the dilemma of having the foot amputated in order to save her/his life. In this case, the harm of amputating the foot is tolerated as a necessary harm in order to achieve the intended goal of saving the person’s life. This is not the same as simply saying that it is always ok to do harm/evil in order to achieve a good.

Kant’s Categorical Imperative: Act in such a way that your decision could become a universal law. [What if everyone did this?]

Mill’s Utility Principle: Act so as to achieve the greatest good for the greatest number.[traditionally this has been interpreted as the greatest number of humans]

Aldo Leopold’s Land Ethic: “A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise.”