Who Ya Gonna Call s1

Immanuel Kant’s Ethics: text pp. 277-78 Kant worked out his ethical ideas around the same time that Bentham was developing “Utilitarianism.” Unlike Bentham’s “consequentialist” ethics (i.e. the morality of an action is determined only by its consequences – in Bentham’s case, the act’s “utility,” or balance of pleasure over pain), Kant argued that the moral agent’s intention or “good will” is paramount. One has a “good will” if one is determined to do one’s “duty” – hence, Kant’s ethical theories are referred to as “deontological” (from the Gr. “deon”, meaning obligation or duty) – by acting on moral principles justified by reason.

Ultimately, Kant argued for a single moral principle: the categorical imperative. The best-known statement of this runs: “Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law of nature.” In other words: would you be OK with your behaviour becoming a general norm of moral action? If yes, the act is morally acceptable; if no, then it’s not

Traditional Christian ethics sound a bit similar to this, because of the emphasis on the reasoned application of moral principle, and because the Categorial Imperative is quite similar to Jesus’ “Golden Rule”: Treat others as you would wish them to treat you.

Actually, Catholic-Christian ethics offer a reasonable middle ground between the deontology of Kant and the consequentialism of Bentham. Traditionally, three things must be considered when judging the morality of an action: 1. The act itself; 2. The intention of the person (“moral agent”) performing the act; 3. The circumstances in which the agent performs the act. Of these three, the first is perhaps most important: no amount of “good will,” and no difficulty of circumstance, can make a bad action good; however, these three criteria force the agent to consider both their own intentions AND the consequences of the action they’re about to perform (which are an aspect of the act itself). Possible Moral Issues to Consider:

Addictive Substances Population Control Abortion Immigration Suicide Smokers' rights Animal Rights Gambling Euthanasia Prostitution Climate Change Privacy Rights Governmental Corruption AIDS & STD’s Rehabilitation of Criminals Academic Doping Age Limits Grade Inflation Who Ya Gonna Call?

You’re faced with an ethical dilemma. Which philosopher would be of most help to you in solving it? Who ya gonna call?

In groups of three:  Select a moral issue for your group to examine. (See over)  Each group member is to consider the issue from the viewpoint of a different school of philosophy, so that three different schools are represented in your group. (e.g. existentialism, utilitarianism, pragmatism, etc.) . One group member must take the viewpoint of Immanuel Kant (above).  Make note of the points you think your school of philosophy would bring up when considering your moral issue.  Discuss your notes with your group members.  Create a graphic organizer to post on the classroom walls, showing . how your group thinks each school of philosophy would likely respond to your moral issue; . which school seems to offer the best solution to your issue; and . what (if anything) Church teaching in the Catechism has to say about the subject – use the subject index at the back to find relevant articles.  Be prepared to explain and defend your graphic organizer to your classmates when they view it.  Note: You may use my books for research, but make sure to put them back when you’re finished!

Category Level One Level Two Level Three Level Four Understanding * limited * some * clear * ample evidence identification of identification of identification of of insight into the the main ideas in the main ideas in the main ideas in main ideas in the the various ethical the various ethical the various ethical various ethical approaches approaches approaches approaches Thinking * limited * some evaluation * clear evaluation * outstanding evaluation of the of the schools’ of the schools’ evaluation of the schools’ ethical ethical ideas ethical ideas schools’ ethical ideas ideas Communication * limited clarity of * some clarity of * clear ideas * clarity & insight ideas expressed ideas expressed expressed in ideas expressed * limited use of * some use of * accurate use of * ethical terms ethical terms ethical terms ethical terms used with accuracy & insight Application * limited responses * some responses * clear responses * outstanding to the ethical to the ethical to the ethical responses to the questions raised in questions raised in questions raised in ethical questions the activity the activity the activity raised in the activity

Overall: Level ___