approbative ethical theories - phi 2604

APPROBATIVE APPROBATIVE ETHICAL ETHICAL

THEORIESTHEORIESAn act is morally right if that An act is morally right if that act is approved of by some act is approved of by some person, group of people, or person, group of people, or some other entity (e.g. God).some other entity (e.g. God).

APPROBATIVE APPROBATIVE ETHICAL ETHICAL

THEORIESTHEORIESAccording to approbative According to approbative ethical theories, the moral ethical theories, the moral rightness of an act is based on rightness of an act is based on the act’s being the act’s being believed believed right right by some authority.by some authority.

Approbative Ethical Approbative Ethical Theories include:Theories include:

The Divine Command The Divine Command TheoryTheory SubjectivismSubjectivism Ethical Relativism Ethical Relativism (e.g. Cultural Relativism)(e.g. Cultural Relativism)

The Divine Command The Divine Command TheoryTheory

An act is morally right if An act is morally right if GodGod approves of the act.approves of the act.

An act is morally wrong if An act is morally wrong if God God disapproves of the act.disapproves of the act.

(e.g. Telling the truth is morally right (e.g. Telling the truth is morally right because because God God approves of telling the approves of telling the truth.)truth.)

(e.g. Rape is morally wrong because (e.g. Rape is morally wrong because GodGod disapproves of rape.) disapproves of rape.)


But suppose we ask But suppose we ask whywhy God God approves of approves of telling the truth and disapproves of rape?telling the truth and disapproves of rape?

Aren’t we tempted to respond, “Because Aren’t we tempted to respond, “Because telling the truth is morally right and rape telling the truth is morally right and rape is morally wrong?”is morally wrong?”

But according to the theory, telling the But according to the theory, telling the truth is morally right truth is morally right onlyonly because because God God approves of it!approves of it!

And rape is morally wrong And rape is morally wrong onlyonly because because GodGod disapproves of it! disapproves of it!


Thus telling the truth only Thus telling the truth only becomesbecomes morally morally right when right when God God chooses to approve of it.chooses to approve of it.

And rape only And rape only becomesbecomes morally wrong when morally wrong when GodGod chooses to disapprove of it. chooses to disapprove of it.

That means that That means that GodGod arbitrarily chooses to arbitrarily chooses to approve of some acts and disapprove of approve of some acts and disapprove of others.others.

Since acts are neither right nor wrong Since acts are neither right nor wrong independent of independent of God’sGod’s approval or approval or disapproval, disapproval, God God would have no moral would have no moral reasons for his approval or disapproval!reasons for his approval or disapproval!


If we believe that If we believe that GodGod has moral has moral reasons for approving or disapproving of reasons for approving or disapproving of acts, we must reject the Divine acts, we must reject the Divine Command Theory.Command Theory.

As Shaw and Barry maintain (in the As Shaw and Barry maintain (in the textbook), textbook), GodGod approves of an act approves of an act becausebecause the act is morally right; not: an the act is morally right; not: an act is morally right because act is morally right because GodGod approves of it (as the Divine Command approves of it (as the Divine Command Theory maintains).Theory maintains).

SubjectivismSubjectivism An act is morally right if the agent An act is morally right if the agent

believes that it is right.believes that it is right. An act is morally wrong if the agent An act is morally wrong if the agent

believes that it is wrong.believes that it is wrong. (e.g. If a woman believes that abortion is (e.g. If a woman believes that abortion is

morally permissible, then for her, having morally permissible, then for her, having an abortion is an abortion is notnot morally wrong.) morally wrong.)

(e.g. If a woman believes that abortion is (e.g. If a woman believes that abortion is morally impermissible, then for her, morally impermissible, then for her, having an abortion having an abortion isis morally wrong.) morally wrong.)

SubjectivismSubjectivism Notice that the same action (e.g. Notice that the same action (e.g.

abortion) is both morally permissible abortion) is both morally permissible (for some) and morally impermissible (for some) and morally impermissible (for others). (for others).

Actions are, then, neither objectively Actions are, then, neither objectively right nor objectively wrong, but only right nor objectively wrong, but only become right or wrong when the agent become right or wrong when the agent forms a belief about that one way or the forms a belief about that one way or the other.other.

Notice also that no one can ever be Notice also that no one can ever be mistaken about a moral belief!mistaken about a moral belief!

SubjectivismSubjectivism Suppose someone believes (for most Suppose someone believes (for most

of his adult life) that eating meat (for of his adult life) that eating meat (for example) is morally permissible.example) is morally permissible.

Then, the person has a change of Then, the person has a change of heart, perhaps after reading Peter heart, perhaps after reading Peter Singer’s book Singer’s book Animal LiberationAnimal Liberation..

Now, he believes that eating meat is Now, he believes that eating meat is morally impermissible. Which view morally impermissible. Which view is correct?is correct?

SubjectivismSubjectivism According to subjectivism, both views According to subjectivism, both views

are correct!are correct! When he believed that eating meat was When he believed that eating meat was

morally permissible, it was okay for him morally permissible, it was okay for him to eat meat.to eat meat.

When he came to believe that eating When he came to believe that eating meat is morally impermissible, it became meat is morally impermissible, it became morally wrong for him to eat meat.morally wrong for him to eat meat.

He may believe that his original view He may believe that his original view was mistaken, but for the subjectivist, was mistaken, but for the subjectivist, moral mistakes are impossible!moral mistakes are impossible!

SubjectivismSubjectivism Since what is morally right is whatever Since what is morally right is whatever

a person believes is right, a person can a person believes is right, a person can nevernever be mistaken about a moral belief! be mistaken about a moral belief!

Consider the news story about a woman Consider the news story about a woman who smothered her three children. As who smothered her three children. As long as she long as she believedbelieved that this was the that this was the morally right thing to do, then it morally right thing to do, then it waswas the the morally right thing to do!morally right thing to do!

SubjectivismSubjectivism It might be nice to be infallible about one’s It might be nice to be infallible about one’s

moral beliefs, but is that a reasonable view?moral beliefs, but is that a reasonable view? Do we believe that whatever you Do we believe that whatever you thinkthink is is

true, true, isis true because you think so? Unlikely. true because you think so? Unlikely. Why should it be any different for which Why should it be any different for which

actions are morally right?actions are morally right? Just as you cannot make a belief true simply Just as you cannot make a belief true simply

by thinking that it is true, you cannot make by thinking that it is true, you cannot make an action right simply by thinking that it is an action right simply by thinking that it is right.right.

SubjectivismSubjectivism Everyone has a right to his or her Everyone has a right to his or her

opinion…opinion… but it does not follow that everyone’s but it does not follow that everyone’s

opinion is always right!opinion is always right! Subjectivism makes ethics too easy.Subjectivism makes ethics too easy. You can make an action morally right You can make an action morally right

by believing that it is right.by believing that it is right. There would be no point in moral There would be no point in moral

debate because everyone’s views are debate because everyone’s views are equally correct!equally correct!

Ethical RelativismEthical Relativism

There are several forms of ethical There are several forms of ethical relativism.relativism.

We will consider the view known as We will consider the view known as Cultural RelativismCultural Relativism, but we will refer to the , but we will refer to the theory by the more general name: theory by the more general name: Ethical Ethical RelativismRelativism..

An act is morally right if one’s culture or An act is morally right if one’s culture or society believes that it is right.society believes that it is right.

An act is morally wrong if one’s culture or An act is morally wrong if one’s culture or society believes that it is wrong.society believes that it is wrong.


Like Subjectivism, Ethical Relativism Like Subjectivism, Ethical Relativism maintains that the same action can be both maintains that the same action can be both morally permissible and morally morally permissible and morally impermissible.impermissible.

(e.g. Abortion is morally permissible in Japan (e.g. Abortion is morally permissible in Japan because Japanese society considers it a because Japanese society considers it a permissible form of birth control.)permissible form of birth control.)

(e.g. Abortion is morally impermissible in (e.g. Abortion is morally impermissible in Catholic Ireland, because Irish Catholics Catholic Ireland, because Irish Catholics consider it to be the killing of an innocent consider it to be the killing of an innocent human being.)human being.)


Notice that unlike Subjectivism, a person Notice that unlike Subjectivism, a person can be wrong about a moral belief (e.g. if can be wrong about a moral belief (e.g. if one’s moral belief is opposed to the one’s moral belief is opposed to the moral beliefs of one’s culture). moral beliefs of one’s culture).

But a culture or society can never be But a culture or society can never be wrong about its moral beliefs!wrong about its moral beliefs!

Every society’s moral beliefs are correct Every society’s moral beliefs are correct simply by being the moral beliefs of that simply by being the moral beliefs of that society.society.


According to Ethical Relativism, According to Ethical Relativism, slavery was not morally wrong when slavery was not morally wrong when it was practiced by a society that it was practiced by a society that believed that it was morally believed that it was morally permissible.permissible.

The treatment of the Native The treatment of the Native Americans by Europeans was morally Americans by Europeans was morally acceptable simply because Europeans acceptable simply because Europeans believed that it was acceptable.believed that it was acceptable.


In fact, any criticism of the moral In fact, any criticism of the moral behavior of people in other cultures is behavior of people in other cultures is wrong as long as they are following the wrong as long as they are following the moral beliefs of their own society.moral beliefs of their own society.

Are we to accept any behavior, no matter Are we to accept any behavior, no matter how abhorrent, simply because the how abhorrent, simply because the people engaged in the behavior have no people engaged in the behavior have no qualms about it?qualms about it?

Do we feel that way about the events of Do we feel that way about the events of 9/11?9/11?

Ethical RelativismEthical Relativism The same point can be made about the The same point can be made about the

moral behavior of people in past societies.moral behavior of people in past societies. According to Ethical Relativism, there can According to Ethical Relativism, there can

be no ethical progress because the moral be no ethical progress because the moral beliefs of past cultures are just as beliefs of past cultures are just as acceptable as those of contemporary acceptable as those of contemporary society.society.

Slavery, segregation, the subjugation of Slavery, segregation, the subjugation of women, the Holocaust…can all of these women, the Holocaust…can all of these actions be considered permissible simply actions be considered permissible simply because people thought they were because people thought they were permissible?permissible?


The question of whether human beings The question of whether human beings have made moral progress through have made moral progress through history is an interesting and history is an interesting and controversial one.controversial one.

But according to Ethical Relativism, not But according to Ethical Relativism, not only has there been no moral progress, only has there been no moral progress, the very concept of moral progress is the very concept of moral progress is unintelligible!unintelligible!

Can you understand what moral Can you understand what moral progress would be like?progress would be like?


Any criticism of the moral behavior Any criticism of the moral behavior of people in one’s own society would of people in one’s own society would be equally misguided.be equally misguided.

As long as the majority of people As long as the majority of people think that a behavior is morally think that a behavior is morally permissible, then it is permissible.permissible, then it is permissible.

Consider the civil rights movement Consider the civil rights movement in the United States of America.in the United States of America.


According to Ethical Relativism, According to Ethical Relativism, people like Martin Luther King, who people like Martin Luther King, who opposed the practice of segregation, opposed the practice of segregation, were acting were acting immorallyimmorally at the time at the time that segregation was accepted by the that segregation was accepted by the majority of Americans.majority of Americans.

Segregation only Segregation only becamebecame morally morally wrong when the majority of American wrong when the majority of American began to think that it was wrong!began to think that it was wrong!


According to Ethical Relativism, ethics is According to Ethical Relativism, ethics is much like the game show, “Family much like the game show, “Family Feud.” Whatever the majority of a Feud.” Whatever the majority of a society says about an action’s being society says about an action’s being morally right or wrong determines morally right or wrong determines whether the action whether the action isis right or wrong. right or wrong.

Majority rule is a good thing in some Majority rule is a good thing in some circumstances, but is that how we should circumstances, but is that how we should determine right and wrong…by taking a determine right and wrong…by taking a vote?vote?

Ethical RelativismEthical Relativism It does It does seemseem true that different cultures true that different cultures

have different moral values. But, even if have different moral values. But, even if that were true, it does not follow that that were true, it does not follow that every culture’s moral values are equally every culture’s moral values are equally correct.correct.

Perhaps moral values do not differ from Perhaps moral values do not differ from one culture to another after all. Perhaps one culture to another after all. Perhaps the different moral behavior of people in the different moral behavior of people in other cultures is due to different other cultures is due to different circumstances and different factual circumstances and different factual beliefs, not different moral values.beliefs, not different moral values.

Ethical RelativismEthical Relativism Consider the Inuit Tribes of the remote Consider the Inuit Tribes of the remote

North American Continent (sometimes North American Continent (sometimes referred to as Eskimos).referred to as Eskimos).

Before contact with Western Civilization, Before contact with Western Civilization, it was a common practice to take an it was a common practice to take an elderly person on a “final hunt.”elderly person on a “final hunt.”

The final hunt left the elderly person on The final hunt left the elderly person on an ice floe to drift out to sea (to die of an ice floe to drift out to sea (to die of exposure). exposure).

Does this show that the Inuit had Does this show that the Inuit had different moral values? different moral values?

Ethical RelativismEthical Relativism Is it that the Inuit did not value their elderly?Is it that the Inuit did not value their elderly? Or, is the behavior the result of living in the Or, is the behavior the result of living in the

Tundra, where food is scarce.Tundra, where food is scarce. The Inuit were nomads, following the herds of The Inuit were nomads, following the herds of

animals on which survival depended.animals on which survival depended. To keep “grandpa” alive as long as possible To keep “grandpa” alive as long as possible

might mean depriving “junior” of needed food.might mean depriving “junior” of needed food. Since the elderly could no longer contribute to Since the elderly could no longer contribute to

the tribe’s survival, keeping them alive might the tribe’s survival, keeping them alive might doom the entire tribe.doom the entire tribe.

Ethical RelativismEthical Relativism Also, the Inuit believed that the Also, the Inuit believed that the

condition you are in at the time of your condition you are in at the time of your death is the condition you will remain in death is the condition you will remain in for eternity in the “happy hunting for eternity in the “happy hunting ground.”ground.”

Grandpa was ready to get on that ice floe Grandpa was ready to get on that ice floe in order to arrive at the happy hunting in order to arrive at the happy hunting ground as an able bodied hunter.ground as an able bodied hunter.

If you had a similar belief about the If you had a similar belief about the afterlife, wouldn’t you behave in a afterlife, wouldn’t you behave in a similar fashion?similar fashion?

Ethical RelativismEthical Relativism So, the behavior of the Inuit (before So, the behavior of the Inuit (before

contact with the West) can be contact with the West) can be explained without supposing that explained without supposing that they had different moral values at they had different moral values at all.all.

They simply lived in different They simply lived in different circumstances and had different circumstances and had different factual beliefs about the afterlife. factual beliefs about the afterlife.

Thus, different moral behavior might Thus, different moral behavior might not indicate different moral values.not indicate different moral values.

Ethical RelativismEthical Relativism Many people are lead to embrace Ethical Many people are lead to embrace Ethical

Relativism because they believe that it Relativism because they believe that it justifies their view that one ought to be justifies their view that one ought to be tolerant of the different behavior of tolerant of the different behavior of people in other cultures.people in other cultures.

But Ethical Relativism says that one But Ethical Relativism says that one ought to do whatever the culture thinks ought to do whatever the culture thinks one ought to do.one ought to do.

Ethical Relativism does Ethical Relativism does notnot really justify really justify tolerance at all.tolerance at all.

Ethical RelativismEthical Relativism If you believe that tolerance is morally If you believe that tolerance is morally

right, then you believe that it is right, then you believe that it is objectivelyobjectively right to be tolerant. right to be tolerant.

But if Ethical Relativism is true, then But if Ethical Relativism is true, then there is no such thing as there is no such thing as objectiveobjective moral moral rightness!rightness!

In fact, if you live in a society that In fact, if you live in a society that believes intolerance is morally right, then believes intolerance is morally right, then as an Ethical Relativist, you would have as an Ethical Relativist, you would have to recognize intolerance is morally right!to recognize intolerance is morally right!

Ethical RelativismEthical Relativism The Ethical Relativist is right to point The Ethical Relativist is right to point

out that one should be open-minded out that one should be open-minded when dealing with people of other when dealing with people of other cultures.cultures.

But the theory cannot justify open-But the theory cannot justify open-mindedness (or anything else) as being mindedness (or anything else) as being objectively right.objectively right.

Given all of the unpleasant implications Given all of the unpleasant implications of Ethical Relativism, it is a theory that of Ethical Relativism, it is a theory that must be rejected.must be rejected.

Approbative Ethical Approbative Ethical TheoriesTheories

What all Approbative Ethical Theories have What all Approbative Ethical Theories have in common is that they try to base what in common is that they try to base what isis morally right on what someone morally right on what someone believesbelieves is is morally right.morally right.

Isn’t that backwards?Isn’t that backwards? We should attempt to base what we We should attempt to base what we believebelieve

is morally right on what is morally right on what isis morally right. morally right. But, how can we determine what But, how can we determine what

really really isis morally right? morally right?

What Is Objectively Morally What Is Objectively Morally Right?Right?

Chapter One of the text offers several Chapter One of the text offers several possibilities for justifying one’s moral possibilities for justifying one’s moral judgments, but most don’t withstand critical judgments, but most don’t withstand critical scrutiny. Do we:scrutiny. Do we: Appeal to the law? No the laws might be immoral.Appeal to the law? No the laws might be immoral. Appeal to religious belief? Which one?Appeal to religious belief? Which one? Appeal to God? No. (Divine Command Theory)Appeal to God? No. (Divine Command Theory) Appeal to societies moral standards? No. (EthicalAppeal to societies moral standards? No. (Ethical

Relativism)Relativism) Appeal to one’s conscience. No, it is not infallible.Appeal to one’s conscience. No, it is not infallible.

What Is Objectively Morally What Is Objectively Morally Right?Right?

Shaw and Barry (the Textbook authors) Shaw and Barry (the Textbook authors) suggest that the best way to defend suggest that the best way to defend your moral judgment is to construct a your moral judgment is to construct a soundsound argument in which your moral argument in which your moral judgment is the conclusion of the judgment is the conclusion of the argument.argument.

Constructing sound arguments is the Constructing sound arguments is the focus of the next PowerPoint focus of the next PowerPoint Presentation! (See Shaw and Barry’s Presentation! (See Shaw and Barry’s Preferred Form of Argument.)Preferred Form of Argument.)

approbative ethical theories - phi 2604

Documents