Non Consequential Reasoning
•
5 likes•11,763 views
A short slide presentation about non-consequential ethics and reasoning
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Non Consequential Reasoning
Similar to Non Consequential Reasoning (20)
More from Rebecca
More from Rebecca (16)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Non Consequential Reasoning
- 1. NonConsequential Reasoning Applied Ethics
- 2. Nonconsequential Reasoning An umbrella term that generally describes many different ethical reasoning approaches: divine, duty and virtue ethics. Our actions are based on a set of well-defined laws, principles, and concepts that we have learned. We do not consider the consequences of our actions, instead we simply act out of the understanding that what we are doing is right – period. Also called Deontological reasoning. From the Greek: deon meaning duty, and logos meaning science.
- 3. Act- Nonconsequential Reasoning This mode of belief states that there are not rules or absolute correct theories on correct ethics and or morals. There are only individual acts, people and situations and we cannot make any type of general rule or assumption. All decisions are based on intuition regarding the particular situation or action. We do what “feels right” or “sounds right.” We act according to our feels and “hunches.”
- 4. Problems with Act- Nonconsequential Reasoning Lack of critical thinking – hunches, feelings and guesses suggest that we are not critically examining a situation before me make a decision – instead we act on instinct and our instinct might be wrong. Not everyone has the same instincts and in a community, if we are all doing what seems right or feels good, our non-consequential action could easily harm another and also cause chaos!
- 5. Rule-nonconsequential Reasoning Unlike act nonconsequential reasoning, those who follow this philosophy believe there are set, well defined rules of behavior that should be followed in order to live morally. Here, it is the rules and not the consequences that matter. By following clearly set moral rules, we will in turn be moral individuals.
- 6. Rule Nonconsequential: Divine Ethics We base all of our actions on divine law as found in different religions and set down in different divine publications: Bible, Qur’an, Torah, and other spiritual doctrines. These are the thou shall, and thou shall nots of ethics—as such, there can be no debate, no arguments, no bargaining as to results desired or not.
- 7. Simple Example of Divine Ethics Several laws set down in the Ten commandments guide our ethical behavior and actions in different ways. For example: Thou shall not kill. No matter what, if I believe in divine ethics as understood by The Bible (Judaism and Christianity), I will agree not to kill. I do not think about it, I simply accept and abide by the rule.
- 8. Problems with Divine Ethics All rules, including divine ones, tend to ignore contingent circumstances. For example, if my life is threatened, I may defined myself and in doing so, kill another. Even in the Bible, there are examples of where God “smites” his enemies (Sodom and Gomorrah)- Genesis 19:24. Certain Biblical laws allow for killing: stoning people to death (Deut. 22:13-21 and 22:23-24; Exodus 19:13 and 21:28Leviticus 24:16; Numbers 15:32-56; 1 Kings 21:10). At times, divine law conflicts with secular law – if you belong to a spiritual and secular society, which law do you follow? Which law should society follow? How can you make the determination? Example: the concept of Marriage and same-sex unions.
- 9. Rule Nonconsequential duty ethics ((Immanuel Kant 1724-1804) We act out of a sense of duty to the universal, to humanity, and to Autonomy. We make rules to guide us in this duty and we are asked to follow them without question. Example, our military institutions promote duty ethics in order to guide the actions of solders. In the Middle Ages, chivalry guided warriors as to their duty towards the tribe/kingdom, life and love.
- 10. Kant’s Formula The need for good will – will is defined as human’s ability to abide by moral rules. Morality is established by logic reasoning, not feelings or emotions: Moral truth must be logical. Moral truth must be universal (such as all triangles have 3 sides – never is there a time that this is not true). Categorical Imperative – an act becomes immoral if the rule that guides that act cannot be applied to all humans. Example – it’s ok to kill is immoral because it cannot be applied as a universal rule – everyone should kill everyone else – besides being impractical, it is not logical.
- 11. Problems with Duty Ethics What happens when one rule of duty clashes with another rule of duty? Can there really be universals? How? As a society, how can we assign duties and laws that everyone will agree with absolutely? Is this even possible – likely not. My since of duty might clash with someone else's sense of duty – Again, absolute rules tend to ignore contingent circumstances that may call for a different action
- 12. Summing it all up! Act-nonconsequential reasoning – there are no rules, only individuals and acts and we act based on our instinct alone. Rule-nonconsequential reasoning – There are set, well defined rules that lead to moral behavior – we do not concern ourselves with consequences. Rule-nonconsequential Divine Ethics – Rules defined to lead to spiritual or religious morality. Rule-nonconsequential Kant’s Duty Ethics – Good will, logic and universal rules that offer a road map for morality.
- 13. The End