ETHICS
Chapter 13. Relativism Reconsidered : Conclusion
Section 3. Conclusion

REVIEW of the Principles of the GOOD

If a person is tempted to think that several of the theories could be employed in a single life the result would be a person who would choose which theory to employ to support the decision of what that person was to do in a manner that would provide that person with the outcome that the person most preferred.  This approach is a consequentialist approach, which is centered on the outcome for the decision maker.  In other words the actual principle being used would be EGOISM!  Thus someone who claims to be using one principle on one occasion with one situation and then another principle on another occasion would be using that which pleases that person and provides for the outcome desired by the person claiming multiple ethical principles.  The key factor is that such a person wants the outcome desired.

The CHOICE of a theory is based upon individual judgment but need not be arbitrary.

Each person considers the advantages and disadvantages and the strengths and weaknesses and

chooses consistent with that person's values.

The choice is, perhaps unfortunately, for most:

Hopefully, by considering the various theories and examining how they would be applied to the various situations and dilemmas involving medical practices and institutions each person will become more aware of their fundamental values and which of the theories is most in keeping with what they think of as the good. Such a theory would then serve as a source of moral guidance.

People should have some principle by which they make their decisions as to what is the morally correct thing to do.  At times doing the morally correct thing will not make the actor happy except to know that they did what was right.  It is only the Egoist that thinks doing what is correct must always make the actor happy. 

Well you may be correct in thinking that most people in the world are Ethical Egoists (EE) in that they think about what pleases them first. But it may be time for humankind to grow up and mature and use reason and decide what each of us  will live and die for. What will be the principle of the GOOD used to make moral decisions?   Do you want to make decisions with yourself at the center or do you want to THINK and arrive at a principle consistent with your values that you will use to make moral decisions and you will attempt to convince others to use as well so that there can be resolution to moral conflicts. EE lacks logic in that there is no consistency or universalizability. It can not resolve moral conflicts as there is no agreed upon principle of the GOOD amongst EE's in a conflict. RESULT: Power plays and violence. At the United Nations they operate with the principle of UTILITY in an effort to resolve conflicts and avoid violence. There are other principles. The religious fanatics who employ tactics of violence and terror such as the Islamicists use DIVINE COMMAND as their principle. The world community appears clearly unwilling to accept such a principle as the basis for moral conflict resolution.  What will the world use in a effort to avoid the violence?

So, which principle is it that we are to use direct our lives and to give it a meaning and a value through our choice?  Each makes the decision.  In Philosophy the attempt is made to consider the principle that would serve best, the principle, which has the fewest disadvantages, and hopefully to find a principle that is the best to meet the demands of the current world situation and is correct as to setting humans on a path of conduct that serves the core values of the human community.

When people are confronted with their impending deaths they often review their lives.  Few make judgments as to its worth based on how much they own.  Most people regard how they treated others and were treated by them as much more important than possessions of material objects.  Oneís sense of morality is then seen in retrospect as one of the most important parts of a personís life.  Did I do the right thing is seen as more important than did I possess as much as I could have or was I as happy as I could have been? 

It is your decision as to which principles will guide your decisions.  There is advice that others can and do give you but it is your decision.  Choose wisely.  For Plato this was the whole point of Philosophy: to assist someone in choosing wisely, in choosing what truly is the GOOD.

 

The Dialectical Process

In attempting to reach a conclusion as to the morally correct thing to do responsible moral agents should examine the reasons for the beliefs held concerning what is morally correct .   People should reflect on the beliefs held to determine what principles are involved and what values serve as the base for the belief that one ethical principle is to be placed before or over another.  When taking a position on a moral issue or in attempting to reach a conclusion as to what is morally correct the reasoning and responsible person would give reasons for what they hold to be morally correct and and make arguments for the claims they would make .  Humans should examine the moral arguments in a continuing process of review and reflection.  There must be a critical examination of all arguments offered in support of positions taken and urged on others.   In the ongoing process of inquiry into the basic reasoning and the manner in which principles are used the critical examination would look to see that the reasoning was consistent and coherent.   If the arguments do not appear to be well reasoned or not well supported then revisions would be needed or even the discarding of the first argument in favor of another that was either prompted by the inquiry itself or derived from it.  In turn the new argument in support of the new position becomes itself the candidate for subsequent critical examination.  This continuing process is referred to as being dialectical. 

In the critical examination of arguments or positions on moral issues there is a sort of testing of the arguments as the principles used in the argument are applied to cases either actual or hypothetical in order to examine how well they fit the case and resolve conflicts or if they give rise to further difficulties.  Consider a moral argument that sets a high value on freedom of speech and related to freedom of thought and thought as essential to the moral lives of human beings.  In setting the value of freedom of speech nearly as an absolute value or as a high or , perhaps, the highest value what then becomes of that argument when considering whether or not to allow such freedom on the internet and the presentation of child pornography to any and all viewers?

In entering into the process of moral inquiry, even unto the level of examining the most basic principles and values being used, human beings are developing their skill in ethical thinking and along with that they are growing as responsible moral beings.  As humans do this they are developing and defining the moral aspect of their personalities and their moral personhood. 

The answers or positions arrived at through the process of dialectical inquiry and review are going to be subject to the ongoing process for review and criticism wherein humans will consider as many alternatives as they can.  As long as humans have consciousness and a basic sense of morality and they can reason , then they will use their intellectual faculties to examine and re-examine moral theory and ethical principles.

That the dialectical process does not produce single definitive absolute and eternally unchanging answers to moral questions and resolutions of moral dilemmas should not be discouraging in any way.  The answers to moral problems that have been urged on the communities of people in this world have proven to be in need of revisions over time and adaptations have been made.   The absolutism preferred by some has more often proved to be the basis for what in retrospect appears as atrocious behaviors towards those who disagree.   The ongoing process of continual review of moral thinking and refinement of ethical principles appears to offer the human community the hope for advancement as moral beings.   If there is any hope for the people of planet Earth to arrive at some common understanding about how to resolve moral problems and find resolutions to dilemmas it would appear not top be through insistence on moral absolutes to be imposed on all peoples of the world.  Neither would it be to accept any and all ethical principles and moral reasoning to be of equal worth and use.  The dialectical process does reveal weaker arguments distinguishing them from the stronger and the more useful and more adequate to the tasks at hand and more applicable to situations as we actually encounter them. 

The open ended and ongoing process of moral inquiry offers hope for individual and collective advancement in moral maturity.  Through the process of ongoing moral inquiry we learn more about mortality itself and about what we value and how we value and how we can better go about resolving our conflicts and dilemmas.  That process may lead to agreement on the values and principles and the reasoning most acceptable to humans who must find common resolution to moral and physical  conflicts without resort to violence of any sort.

Proceed to the next section of the chapter by clicking here>> section.

© Copyright Stephen O Sullivan and Philip A. Pecorino  2002. All Rights reserved.

Web Surfer's Caveat: These are class notes, intended to comment on readings and amplify class discussion. They should be read as such. They are not intended for publication or general distribution.

Return to:               Table of Contents for the Online Textbook