Ethics BJF

The ethics course geared to students in the arts and literature is called Humanities 345-BJF.
This page is not a substitute for lectures, notes given in class, and certainly does not replace required readings.
 

Part 1: Ethics is also called morality or moral law.. It is about what is right and what is not, and how we decide what to do. It is about what we would do if we cared about doing the right thing rather than what we want to, or feel we need to, do. Ethics is a subject relevant to everyone at one time or another in life.  Almost every choice or decision about anything has an ethical aspect.  For some people, what we should do and what we want to do may be the same thing, but for many of us, this is not always the case. Almost every time we are faced with a choice, there are ethical factors to consider. It is not about what is the most logical thing to do, or what we would do if things were different, or about discovering what we really want to do. Most societies consider that what we fantasize about, dream about, think about has little to do with ethics.  It is what we actually do that counts. On the other hand, the intention behind the action is usually considered relevant. We use a Case Study in order to be able to talk realistically about a specific act.   Part 2: When people talk about right and wrong, they often use the language of justice, mental health or religion.  But doing the right thing is not the same thing as doing the legal thing, the healthiest, sanest or most intelligent thing.  What is ethical may be different from what is legal or what is healthy, or even what is a sin and what is not.  For example, the animation in the title at the top of this page depicts right and wrong in the symbolic imagery of certain religions.	The English word moral is not the same as  morale which refers to an emotional state of readiness. Introduction: what ethics is and what it is not: The word right has a few different meanings.  4 is the right answer to: what is 2 + 2 ? This is not the sense as meant in Ethics. [Some people would argue that it is, though:  see deontology.] Will I have a peanut butter, egg or chicken sandwich?     Read the art thieves' discussion:  NEW   Are these words synonymous: right = good? wrong=bad?           W5, the tv show on the CBC network summarizes in its name the requirements for a journalistic report: who, what, when, where, and why. This is the information we need to do a case study.       Dualism is the name given to the world view that says there is an on-going struggle between [the forces of] good and evil.  Judeo-Christian [and Islamic] cultures tend to dualism.
Part Two: Ethics is philosophy. Philosophy is an activity,  an ongoing discussion about the nature of living, and ethics is an important part of philosophy.  For example, one of the founders of Western philosophy,  Socrates (2400 BP), said that  "...the most important thing is not life, but the good life,"  Some other branches of philosophy are: Logic which analyses reasoning using principles of mathematics.  One tool of logic is the syllogism, a 3-part way of thinking to determine whether a conclusion makes sense. If you see on televison that people who harm children are men, then you become wary of male strangers who sit on benches in playgrounds.  You may move if you see one. You are rarely suspicious of women, however. Your thinking goes:             Men harm children.             Here is a man.             We must move away. It is important to notice that makes sense does not necessarily mean is true. What does true or fact or knowledge mean?  For example, when we say something is true, is that the same as "It is a fact that ..."?  We examine these ideas in  Epistemology. (The Humanities course called Knowledge, Belief and Prejudice touches on this topic.) Other branches of philosophy include the following:  Aesthetics is about what makes something beautiful, or what is considered to be art.  Metaphysics is about the nature of reality.  For example, if there is a creator where was she before the universe was formed?  Does time exist independent of the universe then?	We do philosophy.  In it, there are no right or wrong ideas, but there a some accepted conclusions that are derived from the work of well-respected thinkers of the past.   BP = before the present time       algebra is logic using symbols rather than words syllogism   example major premise  is often a generalization. minor premise is a part or aspect of the major one. conclusion         besides ethics and logic, some other kinds of philosophy          Aesthetics may also include discussions about the role of the artist in society. See Jessup and Rader, on reserve.   meta- means beyond
Part Three: There are two basic approaches to determining what is right. The two ways of looking at behaviour from the standpoint of ethics or morality: deontology looks at standards, teleology looks at consequences. The deontological approach is exemplified by those who cite a supreme moral authority, eg. God said in the Ten Commandments (The Bible, Old Testament, Genesis) those who say we 'automatically know right from wrong' the idea of philosopher, Immanuel Kant (fl. 1776 ) who spoke of a "categorical imperative" that is, one standard that can be applied as a general rule, a law with no exceptions or a maxim. Example: One maxim is Rabbi Hillel's (c. 60 BCE ) "Do not do unto others as you would not have them do unto you."  (He said that this when asked to teach Judaism in a just a few seconds.) More difficult to apply is Jesus' (c. 30CE) maxim,   "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Kant also thought that a person should be treated as the end or result of an action.	deontology sets standards for behaviour.    deont-  having to do with teeth, as in bite.              maxims = mottoes or sayings:  They may have originated long ago and far away [If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all.], or we may know who the originator is/was. [The unexamined life is not worth living - Socrates] What would my [best friend/grandmother/ father/teacher, etc.] say about this act?         Respect for the individual is more important than the quality of the action.This is a deontological approach.

Part Four:
a general topic:  Human Rights
The deontological approach:
A standard of behaviour for the world community of nations devised by Canadian John Humphrey was adopted by
the United Nations General Assembly on Dec. 10, 1948, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
It is not law but rather a set of aspirations which sets forth the basic civil, economic, political and social,  rights and freedoms
of every person. It is based on the notion that all people are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
 
 

Teleology examines the outcome of an action.            Besides the very nature of the act under consideration, and the immediate or short-term effects,  there are also long-term consequences to it. How you evaluate an action's consequences depends on your  view of the nature of reality and of time.   Some people think there is an afterlife.  That there is a part of you that lives on after the death of the physical body, usually called the soul.  You may be motivated to do good by the promise of heaven. Similarly, you may believe that if you do something bad you will go to hell.  This notion may prevent your doing some things you would like to do.  You are prevented by your teleology. Some cultures teach that there is an ideal way of living that conforms to the harmony of the universe.  To go against it would be foolish, self-destructive and, in some cases, lend support to chaos. The ancient Egyptians spoke of the du'at. Hindus refer to it as dharma, the law of the universe. The Navajo "Indians" of the southwest United States use the phrase to walk in Beauty. The Chinese call this harmony the Tao, the shifting interplay of yin and yang energies.  In Persia (Iran), there was also the belief in dualism.  One should act in accord with Light (Ahura Mazda, Ormazd) so that it might continue to prevail over Darkness (Ahriman). People taking these notions into consideration do so because of their awareness of the long-term consequences of their actions.  In Hinduism and Buddhism, that which determines outcomes is called karma (action in Sanskrit).  In many cultures, however, there is believed to be a  judgement. Anubis, the jackal-headed god of the ancient Egyptians would oversee the weighing of the ka of the recently deceased in a balance. If  found to be heavier than the feather of Ma'at, goddess of righteousness, then the ka was destined for eternal misery.   We read in what has come to be known as the Book of the Dead, in fact a collection of various texts, that a negative confession was made before Osiris, Lord of the Dead:  I have not committed sins against men.  I have not opposed my family.... I have not acted deceitfully in the seat of truth.... I have not inflicted pain. I have not caused anyone to go hungry.  I have not made any man weep.  I have not committed murder.  I have not given the order for (it). ... I have not committed fornication .... .                               (Smart and Hecht 37) This confession is certainly similar to the Ten Commandments of the Hebrews which appears in the Bible, Exodus 20. Note of clarification: We are still discussing, teleology, remember.  Although many of  these scriptures contain maxims which provide a basis for a deontological approach, it is the reward in the afterlife that provides a motive for choosing the right over the wrong action.  And, of course, the avoidance of punishment in the form of  eternal damnation, as going to hell is sometimes called, in Christianity. This kind of teleology is very close to deontology in that it relies on consequences, but they are not in this lifetime. Some would consider that these are not consequences at all, arguing from the materialistic standpoint, ie. This is it - there is no other life.

Teleology asks about the result of the action.    tele-  :  at a distance, afar as in telescope, telephone or television.                      Heaven and hell are concepts found in Christianity and Islam.  They are only partially derived from the Jewish ideas of rewards for the just or else a condemnation to she'ol,  a dreary underworld.          Among Buddhists, dharma has come to mean   the teachings of the Buddha.  Here, the concept is closer to a deontological one, ie. conforming to a standard.       Dualism is the belief in two universal opposing forces.         Karma may be thought of as something like gravity, the result of two masses in a vicinity.  It is not a force, but a result.  There is no apportioning  agent/judge.. Sanskrit is the classical ancient Indian language.   The Egyptian Ma'at is an embodiment of the right way as in the Hindu dharma.             The Bible is the name given by Christians to a compilation of  two different scriptural texts.  The first is known as the Old and the second, as the New Testament.  Jews (Hebrews) know the "Old Testament", as the Torah, Writings and Prophets [Tanakh is the acronym in Hebrew]. Written mainly in the Hebrew language, the Torah comprises the Five Books of Moses and a section is read every day in the place of worship, the synagogue, directly from a traditional scroll. The New Testament was written in demotic, or the Greek language of everyday, by the supporters of Jesus.  Christians see it as a continuation of the Hebrew scriptures. Muslims, by the way, regard Jesus as another in the series of prophets that culminated with Muhammed, bearer of the message of Islam* which is recorded in the Qur'an (Koran). Hell is a word related to Hel, the name of the Norse goddess of the underworld.  The notion of a place of eternal flames and stink is common to all three "peoples of the Book"seems derived from a dump outside the gates of ancient Jerusalem called Gehenna where the unwanted were abandoned to die amid decomposing corpses and burning garbage.

LINK TO THE THEORIES NOTES:
Part Six:  Teleology [as usually understood - in this lifetime]
John Stuart Mill's Utilitarianism
and his nephew, Jeremy Bentham [d.1832, his mummy is at University College, London]
and the Hedonistic Calculus 

Some questions for discussion:

One of the maxims above is expressed as a negative, and one as a positive.  Do you think it is easier to avoid bad behaviour than to try and be good?
Which articles in the Declaration of Human Rights go too far and which not far enough, and why?
When did Canada get a Bill of Rights and how does it differ from the UN Declaration?
What is the difference between lying and perjury?
Why is lying wrong?  Is lying ever justified?
Is sexual activity a moral issue? Why or why not?
Is the way we use the environment an ethical issue?
Among the Navajo, is the distinction made between ethics and aesthetics?
 
 

General Topics [All Ethics Classes] Capital Punishment NEW Confidentiality Euthanasia "Recreational" Use of Drugs Discrimination (bigotry) Civil Disobedience Violence (war, self-defence) Property Rights & Social Justice Abortion Religious Tolerance multi-culturalism Suicide Animal Rights Freedom of Expression Human Rights/Civil Liberties	Topics for Arts & Literature Friendship & Loyalty:      Do boy- and girl-friends have to be "faithful"?  What does that mean? Co-opting the voice of another Justified Discrimination:  Sampling Irony Liability:  Jerry Springer, music  Is there a Moral Role of the Artist?             If so, what is it: to show reality [as we imagine it, as we know it, or to influence and improve society?  lobbies promoting various agendas pressure producers, eg:. don't show cigarettes, do show condoms; GLAD;  Good Taste Appealing to 'Base Appetites':   Violence, Pornography, Fetishism
Should God be mentioned in government documents?	abortion and sadness:  suggestion	Is gambling right? About 'drawing lots'

 

                                                        References         [Comments in italics after some items.]
 

Hinman, Lawrence M. Ethics: A Pluralistic Approach to Moral Theory.  2nd ed. theory

-------------------------       http://ethics.acusd.edu/Ethics Update.  January 11, 1999. Links and search engine.

Nuland, Sherwin B.  How We Die: Reflections on Life's Final Chapter. New York:  Alfred A. Knopf, 1994. No point discussing euthanasia and the death penalty unless you know what these entail.

PBS Television. Religion & Ethics Newsweekly.  Sunday evenings 6:30 pm on Mountainlake, Videotron's channel 24.
              See www.pbs.org

Denise and Peterfreund. Great Traditions in Ethics. Belmont, Cal.:  Wadsworth Publishing, 1992. theory

Smart, Ninian and Richard D. Hecht. Sacred Texts of the World:  A Universal Anthology. NY:  Crossroad, 1982.

Spinoza, Benedict de.  The Ethics [1677] translated from Latin.  See Propositions and Axioms for an idea of Logic.
 

* IBN TAIMIYA. [Translated Salim Morgan.]  ENJOINING RIGHT AND FORBIDDING WRONG.Al-hisba: Ethics in Islam

 Trombley, Stephen. The Execution Protocol: Inside America's Capital Punishment Industry.  New York: Crown, 1992.  The Missouri Protocol est. by Leuchter [who also claims Auschwitz had no gas chambers.]

White, James E.  Contemporary Moral Problems.  Minneapolis, Minn.:  West Publishing, 1997 (5th ed.).

White, Thomas I.  Right and Wrong:  A Brief Guide to Understanding Ethics. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:  Prentice-Hall,
        1988.  theory
 

http://www.ethics.ubc.ca/resources/misc/topics.html  January 11, 1999. University of British Columbia.
     Interesting topics with links, eg. lying, Jewish law, etc.