Ethical

Theories

MAJOR ETHICAL THEORIES

The following is a brief explanation
of the major ethical theories that
have influenced modern thinking.
The four major theories covered are:
Utilitarianism: The Greatest Good
Kantian Ethics: Duties and Rights
Rawlsian Ethics: Justice or Fairness
Aristotelian Ethics: The Virtuous Life

UTILITARIANISM
Utilitarianism

holds that those actions

are good that serve to maximize
human well-being.
The emphasis in utilitarianism is not on
maximizing
the
well-being
of
the
individual, but rather on maximizing the
well-being of society as a whole, and as
such it is somewhat of a collectivist
approach.
Utilitarianism tries to balance the needs
of society with the needs of the individual,
with an emphasis on what will provide
the most benefit to most people.

Utilitarianism: The
Greatest Good
Utilitarianism argues that the
consequences of an action make that
action either moral or immoral.
An action that leads to beneficial
consequences is right or moral; one
that leads to harmful consequences
is wrong or immoral.
Utilitarianism is known as a
consequentialist theory.

Utilitarianism: The
Greatest Good
What consequences count?

Utilitarianism holds that an action is morally

justified to the extent that it maximizes
benefits and minimizes harms or costs.
Thus, the one moral thing to do in any
situation is that action that can be reasonably
seen to provide the greatest net benefit,
when the expected costs are subtracted from
the expected benefits. To do something else
is to behave unethically.
The more an action maximizes net costs or
net harm, the more immoral it becomes.
Thus, utilitarianism calls for the greatest
good for the greatest number of people.

Utilitarianism: The
Greatest Good

But what is the "good" that we are trying

to maximize?
Utilitarians usually state that the greatest
good means the greatest happiness.
Your moral duty is to maximize human
happiness and to minimize
unhappiness.
They back up this claim by pointing out
that everybody wants to be happyit is
the one universal thing that everybody
desires and agrees as good

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS
This

type

of

analysis

is

application of utilitarianism.

just

an

In cost-

benefit analysis, the costs of project

are assessed, as are the benefits. Only
those projects with the highest ratio of
benefits to costs will be implemented.

Kantian Ethics: Duties

and
Rights
Immanuel
Kant, an 18th Century

German philosopher, argued that the

consequences of an action are
irrelevant to a moral evaluation
of that action .
Instead, it is the motivation behind
an action that matters.
Actions that are moral are those that
are undertaken out of a sense of
duty, which means you do it because
you know that it is "the right thing to
do."

Kantian Ethics: Duties

and Rights

How do we know what is our duty?

Kant argues that this can be derived from our unique
nature as human beings. As human beings we are
uniquely rational in a way that all other living creatures
on earth are not.
We alone can reason, and our ability to reason requires
us to be logical and consistent. Logic and consistency
demands that we make the basic rules by which we
operate into universal rules that everyone could and
should follow.
If you cannot do that, you are being illogical and
inconsistent, and you are being immoral, because you
are not granting to other human beings the same
freedom and the same status as a rational human being

that you are claiming for yourself.

Rawlsian Ethics: Justice

or Fairness
Justice

is another important ethical

standard.
Justice involves protecting
individual rights, or preventing an
injustice to an individual.
Justice also requires us to compare
cases to avoid discriminating or
treating people differently who are
alike in relevant respects.
It means treating people fairly.

Rawlsian Ethics: Justice

or Fairness
The

20th Century American philosopher John

Rawls argued that the only way to determine
what is just, or fair, is to see what would be
accepted as fair by rational people
considering all points of view.
We must remedy our tendency to
see things only from our own point of view

all persons would be forced to take the

viewpoint of everyone, thus arriving at a just
or fair decision.

Rawlsian Ethics: Justice

or Fairness

The

principle of fair equality of opportunity obviously

means that all forms of racial, sexual, nationality,
and other forms of discrimination are unjust.
But, it also means that everyone must be provided
the same opportunities to qualify for the best jobs
and positions.
Everybody must be given access to the training and
education necessary for success in any competition
for favored employment. Any differences in outcome
should stem only from differences in ability or effort.
This is particularly important for those who are
poorest, because they frequently face numerous
conditions in life that effectively deny them equal
opportunities to rise to the top.

Aristotelian Ethics: The

Virtuous Life

Previous

ethical theories dealt with

principles or rules to govern our actions.
In contrast, virtue ethics claims that
the main task of ethics is to give us
knowledge of what is the right type of
person, or what is a good person, not
to supply us with rules for what is the
right type of action, or what is a good
action.
Virtue ethics asks: what kind of
character must a person have to be a
moral human being?

Aristotelian Ethics: The

Virtuous Life
The

most famous proponent of virtue

ethics was Aristotle, the ancient Greek
philosopher.
Aristotle stated that a morally virtuous
person is one who constantly and
habitually acts the way a human being
should.
He or she displays the virtues and
avoids the many vices by which we are
so frequently tempted.
A lifetime of virtuous living and
avoidance of vice forms a morally
virtuous character.

Aristotelian Ethics: The

Virtuous Life
For

Aristotle, a moral virtue is the disposition

or tendency to do the right thing and avoid
doing wrong.
We develop this disposition over time and
through training.
In other words, a good character is an
achievement, not a natural endowment.
This is not something that is naturally bred
into us; we must strive to achieve a virtuous
character, and we do this by constantly
practicing the virtues and thereby
developing a good character

Aristotelian Ethics: The

Virtuous Life
According

to Aristotle,there are numerous virtues

that could be mentioned.
These moral virtues include: Courage,
temperance/Austerity,Justice,Prudence/Wisdom,
trustworthiness, honesty, generosity, civility,
sincerity, gentleness, reliability, warmth,
dependability, cooperativeness, empathy, tact,
kindness, tolerance, benevolence, etc.
There is rather widespread agreement across many
differing cultures and religions on a number of basic
virtues and vices.
Virtually no one, for instance, finds cruelty,
arrogance, injustice, cowardice, self-centeredness,
dishonesty, insensitivity, etc., to be virtues.

Duty Ethics and Right Ethics

Those

actions are good that respect the

rights of the individual. Ethical actions are
those actions that could be written down as
a list of duties: be honest, do not cause
suffering to other people, be fair to others,
etc.
Once a persons duties are recognized, the
ethically correct moral actions are obvious.
In this formulation, ethical acts are a result
of proper performance of ones duties.
Rights ethics was largely formulated by
John Locke (1632-1704).
It holds that
people have fundamental rights that other
people have a duty to respect.

Duty Ethics and Right Ethics

Duty ethics and rights ethics are just two sides of

the same coin. In duty ethics, people have duties,
an important one of which is to protect the rights
of others. And in rights ethics, people have
fundamental rights that other have duties to
protect.

There are problems with the duty and rights

ethics theories that must be considered. First, the
basic rights of one person (or group) may conflict
with the basic rights of another group. A single
property holders objection would require that
the project be terminated. However, there is a
need for others living in nearby communities to
have a reliable water supply and to be safe from
continual flooding. Rights ethics would come
down clearly on the side of the individuals living
along the route despite the overall advantage to
society.

Which Theory to Use

The

good news is that in solving ethical

problems, we do not have to choose from
among these theories.

We

can use all of them to analyze a

problem from different angles and see
what result each of the theories gives us.

This

allows us to examine a problem

from different perspective to see what
conclusion each one reaches.
(Continue ..)

Which Theory to Use

Chemical plant near a small city that

discharges a hazardous waste into
the groundwater. If the city takes its
water from wells, the water supply
for the city will be compromised and
significant health problems for the
community may result.

Rights ethics indicates that this

pollution is unethical since it causes
harm to many of the residents.

Which Theory to Use

A

utilitarian analysis would probably also

come to the same conclusion since the
economic benefits of the plant would
almost certainly be outweighed by the
negative effects of the pollution and the
costs required to ensure a safe municipal
water supply

Virtue

ethics would say that discharging

wastes into groundwater is irresponsible
and harmful to individuals and so should
not be done. In this case, all the ethical
theories lead to the same conclusion.

Uses of Ethical
Theories
Ethical

theories have three important

uses: in understanding moral
dilemmas, in justifying professional
obligations and ideals, and in relating
ordinary and professional morality.

RESOLVING MORAL
DILEMMAS
Ethical

theories aid in identifying the

moral consideration of reasons that
constitute a dilemma.

Thus virtue ethics construes the moral

dilemma in terms of competing ideals of
character and relationships; loyalty to
employers and colleagues versus loyalty
to the public

Utilitarianism

construes the dilemma in

terms of competing goods and the safety
of the public.
(Continue)

RESOLVING MORAL DILEMMAS

(CONTD)

Duty

ethics indicates the duties to protect

the public affected by the work and to
respect his employers legitimate authority
to make management-level decisions
about expenditures.
Rights ethics emphasizes the rights of the
public to be protected (or at least warned
of dangers) and the rights of management
to have their decisions respected.
Ethical

theories provide more precise sense

of what kinds of information are relevant to
solving moral dilemma. All the theories
agree that facts about the potential harm
to the public are directly and urgently
relevant.

RESOLVING MORAL DILEMMAS

(CONTD)

The theories offer ways to rank the relevant moral

considerations in order of importance, and thereby
provide at least guidance in solving moral problems.

The theories help us identify the full moral

ramifications of alternative courses of action, urging
a wide perspective on the moral implications of the
options, and providing a systematic framework for
comparing the alternatives.

The theorities augment the precision with which we

use moral terms, and provide framework for moral
reasoning when discussing moral issues with
colleagues.

By providing frameworks for development of moral

arguments, the theories strengthen our ability to
reach balanced and insightful judgments.

Justifying moral
obligations
Ethical theories can be used to justify the
general obligations of engineers and others
involved in technological development.
Relating
The

professional and ordinary morality.

special obligations concerning safety

that engineers acquire as a consequence
of their work are intimately connected with
ordinary or everyday morality.

Justifying moral
obligations

Ethical

theories can be used to justify the

general obligations of engineers and others
involved in technological development.

Relating

professional and ordinary morality.

The

special obligations concerning safety

that engineers acquire as a consequence of
their work are intimately connected with
ordinary or everyday morality.

The

engineers acquire moral obligations

concerning safety by being subject to laws
or enforced codes that require them to be
so obligated.

Justifying moral
obligations
The engineers acquire special obligations by

joining a professional society and thereby agree

to live by that society's code of ethics.

The

engineers acquire safety obligations

through contractual agreements by which they
are hired by their companies or employers. An
engineer who is hired as a safety inspector
surely does acquire special work responsibility
related to safety.

The

engineers tacitly promise the public to

protect and safeguard them in the course of
performing their tasks. In return, the public has
largely underwritten engineering education
through financial support for engineering
colleges, and implicitly granted the profession as
a whole certain privileges.