Olabisi Onabanjo University, Ago-Iwoye

Faculty of Arts
Department of Philosophy

Course Code: PHL 203

Course Title: Theories of Ethics

Course Unit: 3
Course Status: Compulsory
Semester: Harmattan
Required Study Hour: 1 hour per week
Year of Course: 2024/2025
Course Instructor: Prof. E. O. Oduwole & Mr. Oluwabori Oyelana
Email: ebunoduwole@[Link],
[Link]@[Link]
Phone: 08034065214, 08144690875

Course Objectives

At the end of the course, students would:

1. Be exposed to basic ethical issues currently experienced in day-to-day living – including

issues that arise from sexual ethics, capital punishment, abortion, euthanasia, suicide etc.

2. Have acquired the capacity to contribute meaningfully and from a more informed perspective
on the issues of morality; and
3. Identify, appreciate, and critically evaluate your own and others’ assumptions, reasoning, and
insights into selected moral issues.

4. Write essays expressing and defending carefully considered opinion(s) on selected moral
issues.

5. Have been positively influenced in his/her moral attitude and conduct.

Course Description

This course deals with topics in current moral debates, with special reference to Africa and the
Nigerian experience. Major ethical issues for discussion include abortion, capital punishment,
euthanasia, suicide, homosexuality, pornography, war etc. The aforementioned topics will be
discussed in relation to standard ethical theories/new guiding principles, and with reference to
the Nigerian experience in particular, and Africa in general.

General Course Overview

This course is an introduction to contemporary debates and research in applied ethics.

Through the semester, students will have a chance to familiarize ourselves with a number of
specific moral issues such as abortion, euthanasia, suicide, capital punishment, sexual ethics,
technology ethics and war. Contemporary life comes with its fair share of moral challenges and
students will have ample chance to critically reflect on some of these ethical concerns.

Course Topics

Topic 1 Nature of Ethics and Ethical problems

Topic 2 Abortion

Topic 3 Euthanasia

Topic 4 Suicide

Topic 5 Capital Punishment

Topic 6 Homosexuality
Topic 7 Pornography and Censorship

Topic 8 Morality and War

Assessment

CA Test 10%

Attendance 10%

Examination 70%

Total 100

Recommended Texts
Abelson, R. & Marie-Louise, F. ( 1975)., Ethics for Modern Life. New York: Paragon Publishers.
Beauchamp, T. L. (2001). Philosophical Ethics: An Introduction to Moral Philosophy. New York:
McGraw-Hill.

Emmett, B. (1990). Moral Philosophy: Theory and Issues. California: Wadsworth Publishing
Company.

Harris, C. E. (1986). Applying Moral Theories. California: Wadsworth.

MacIntyre, A. (1966). A Short History of Ethics. London: Macmillan Publishers.

Olen, J., Van Camp, J. C. & Barry, V. (1992). Applying Ethics: A Text with Readings (11th ed.).
California: Wadsworth Publishing Company.

O. Mabol and E. Oduwole (Eds.), Fundamental theories and issues in ethics (pp. 44-51). Ben-El
Books.

Rachels, J. (1975). Moral Problems. New York: Harper & Row.

Runkle, G. (2001). Ethics: An examination of contemporary moral problems.

Wasserstrom, R. A. (1985). Today's Moral Problems (3rd ed.). New York: Macmillan.

Topic 1: Nature of Ethics and Ethical Issues

Ethics is the study of what are good and bad ends to pursue in life and what is right and wrong to do in
the conduct of life. It‘s therefore, above all, a practical discipline. Its primary aim is to determine how
one ought to live and what actions one ought to do in the conduct of one‘s life. Ethics can also be
described as the philosophical study of moral judgments –value judgments about what is virtuous or
vicious, just or unjust, morally right or wrong, morally good or bad or evil. Ethics can also be conceived
as an attempt to achieve a systematic understanding of the nature of morality and how we ought to live.

Nature of Ethical Issues

Every ethical question involves a decision about what one should do in a specific instance, not with what
one would do. The choices that are implicated by our decisions imply the existence of a moral judgment.
Every choice, in effect, involves an assessment of worth. Thus, nobody can get through life without
ethics, even if he doesn‘t know the meaning of the word. Consciously or unconsciously all of us are
every day making moral decisions.

In addition, it is pertinent to note that ethical issues revolves around decisions that affects others. This is
remotely based on the social nature of humanity, hence there is no private morality. Ethical issues such
as suicide, pornography, euthanasia have implications for family members, friends, relatives etc such
that decisions have far-reaching consequences. It follows from this that moral decisions matter: they
affect the lives, the self-esteem, the happiness of others.

Topic 2: Abortion

2.0 Introduction

An abortion is the spontaneous or induced loss of an early pregnancy. The period of pregnancy prior to
fetal viability outside of the uterus is considered early pregnancy. There are two types of abortion
namely elective and spontaneous abortion. Elective abortion is the deliberate termination of a
pregnancy while spontaneous abortion, otherwise known as a miscarriage is not intentional.

2.1 Reasons for Abortion

i. Threat to a woman's life

ii. Rape or inceustous relationship
iii. Interference with career, education
 iv. Unreadiness for parenting
v. Economic factors
vi. Sex or genetic selection
vii. Unwanted medical stress such as birthing children with congenital conditions
viii. Defective foetuses
ix. Maintenance of body shape and/or size etc

2.2 Schools of Thought on Abortion

(1) The Conservative School of Thought

Those who accept this view belong to the anti-abortion or right to life group and would often define
their position in terms of the thesis that abortion is always morally wrong. The argument of the
conservatives is on the premise that human embryos/fetuses have a right to life that is equal to that of a
normal, innocent, adult human being. Consequently, abortion should be illegal for the same reason that
the killing of an innocent adult human is illegal.

According to this position, from the moment of conception, the fertilized egg (called a zygote until the
second week, when it is implanted in the woman's uterus, an embryo from the second week until the
eighth week when brain waves can be detected, and a fetus from the eighth week until birth) is a living
human being with a moral right to life. Noonan maintained that from the moment of its conception,
every organism that is genetically human has a zygote is a very valuable organism because it has the
potential to develop into a functioning human being with all bio-rational capacities.

(2) The Liberal School of Thought

This is the pro-abortion or pro-choice position. According to the liberal view on abortion, abortion is
always morally acceptable, regardless of the stage of development of the fetus and regard-less of the
reason for desiring an abortion because of the claim that women have a moral right to control their
bodies, which entails that they have a right to decide whether to continue or to terminate a
[Link] insist that at no stageof its development does a fetus have a right to life that overrides a
woman's right to control her body. They agree that a fetus is alive at conception and that it is genetically
human, but they claim that only people have moral rights, including a right to life and that a fetus is not
a person.
Proponents such as Mary Anne Warren argues that the definition of persoonhood is subjective to
consciousness, reasoning, self-motivated activity, capacity to communicate and self-awareness, features
which a foetus does not possess. Hence, a foetus is not a person. In addition, the liberal view contends
that a foetus has no legal or moral status, so terminating a foetus does not involve violations of rights,
hence abortion is morally not unjust.

(3) Moderate Views

Moderate positions come in a wide variety of forms, but what they all share is acceptance of the thesis
that abortion is not always wrong. For moderates, abortion can be permissible in certain situations.
More so, certain conditions are deemed as influence on the the permissibility or not of abortion. These
influences are;

(i) The degree of development of the embryo/fetus at the time of the abortion;

(ii) The normality/abnormality of the embryo/fetus, and its prospects for a reasonable quality of life;

(iii) The likely impact of carrying the fetus to term upon the life and/or health of the woman;

(iv) Whether pregnancy resulted from a deliberate, uncoerced, and fully informed choice on the part of
the woman.

2.3. Dilemmas in Abortion Debate

In discussions on the moral proprietary or otherwise of abortion, there are two crucial perspectives that
shape such discussios. These perspectives are the ontological, moral as well as the legal status of a
foetus. Discussions on abortion are further influenced by factors such as the degree of development of
the embryo/fetus at the time of the abortion, the normality/abnormality of the embryo/fetus, and its
prospects for a reasonable quality of life; the likely impact of carrying the fetus to term upon the life
and/or health of the woman; whether pregnancy resulted from a deliberate, uncoerced, and fully
informed choice on the part of the woman.

2.4 Arguments for Abortion

i. A woman's has the right to control what happens inside her own body. The situation,
accordingly, is one where there is a conflict of rights, and so one can attempt to argue that
abortion is not wrong all things considered, because the woman's right to control what happens
 insider her own body counterbalances any right to life that the embryo or fetus may have. Judith
J. Thompson is one the supporters of this argument.
ii. Abortion is not morally wrong if carrying the embryo/fetus to term would be a serious threat to
the life - or perhaps to the health - of the woman. Abortion is permissible when there are
threats to the woman's life or health. In some cases, a pregnancy may be a threat to a woman's
life or to her health and in such cases, the health of the mother takes precedence. This is also
referred to as therapeutic grounds for abortion. Thus, abortion is permissible if based on saving
the woman's life or of preserving her health.
iii. Abortion is not morally wrong in the case of a defective embryo/fetus with little chance of
coming to enjoy a life that is worth living. This argument is applicable in cases of anencephalic
embryos and foetuses or severely brain-damaged foetuses/embryos. An anencephalic human
being is one where there is something approximating the complete absence of any brain. Such a
human being, consequently, can never come to have the psychological states and capacities that
distinguish humans from at least most other species. Indeed, such humans will never enjoy any
mental life at all, even the most rudimentary consciousness.
iv. Abortion is not morally wrong when pregnancy resulted from rape, or from a coercive
incestuous relationship, or when it involves a young girl who was not really capable of making a
responsible decision. Many moderates hold that abortion is permissible in the case of rape.
v. Cases of Extreme Hardship and Deprivation. Finally, some moderates hold that abortion may be
justified in the case of extreme economic hardship. Here the thought is that it may be virtually
impossible for the parents to care for another child, and that the attempt to do so may have
serious impact upon the well being of the children that they already have. The crucial question,
of course, is whether one can show that such negative consequences are sufficiently serious to
counterbalance a violation of a right to life.

2.5 Arguments Against Abortion

i. Abortion is murder. A foetus is aunborn baby, a human being, and an abortion is nothing but the
deliberate killing of that human being.
ii. Abortion sets a dangerous precedent: The danger lies in the relegation of the dignity and
sanctity human life has. Abortion encourages disrespect for and a casual attitude toward human
life.
 iii. Abortion sets a slippery slope in motion wherein people can make rash decisions on the basis of
flimsy reasons such as retention of body shape etc.
iv. The unguided choice making decisions on abortion can encourage murder. Our unabridged
choice can empower the irrational destruction of unborn human lives because of deformity and
some genetic disorders etc.
v. Abortion involves psychological risks to the woman: There is an emotional and psychological
connection between a woman and her child which abortion can potentially violate leading to
unintended consequences.
vi. Alternatives to abortion such as contraceptives, preventive sacs to prevent pregnancies are
available. Furthermore, adoption is one alternative to abortion for unwanted babies. Even in
cases of severely deformed infants there are alternatives. If no one wants to adopt them, there
are plenty of agencies and institutions to take care of them.
vii. Women must be responsible for their sexual activity. Every one that makes a choice must be
ready for the consequences of such choices. As moral agents, man is responsible for his actions
and the effects of such actions.
viii. Abortion can lead to death of the woman.

PRACTICAL QUESTIONS

1. J.J. Thompson argues that the mother's right to life outweighs that of the foetus. Do you agree. If yes,
give your reasons and if no, state your reasons.

2. The morality permissibility of abortion is inextricably linked to the moral status of the foetus and
criteria for persoonhood. Critically discuss.

Topic 3: Euthanasia

3.0 Introduction

The word euthanasia was coined by Sir Francis Bacon. It is also called as ‘mercy killing’. Euthanasia is
derived from two Greek words ‘eu’ and ‘thanotos’, which literally mean ‘good death’. Euthanasia is this
the practice of intentionally ending a life in order to relieve pain and suffering.

3.1 Types of Euthanasia

1. Voluntary Euthanasia (with patients’ consent): is a type of euthanasia performed with the patient's
consent. It is legal in some countries like Belgium, Netherlands, etc.

2. Non-voluntary Euthanasia (patient’s consent unavailable): is one where a person is unable to give
their consent for example, the patient is in a state of coma or is severely brain-damaged and another
person takes the decision on their behalf, often because the ill person had expressed a wish previously
to end their life in such circumstances.

3. Involuntary Euthanasia: Euthanasia conducted against the will of the patient is termed involuntary
euthanasia. In other words, involuntary euthanasia is carried out without asking for the patient's
consent. It can be regarded as murder.

All types of euthanasia can be further divided into passive or active types-

a) Active Euthanasia– where a person intentionally intervenes to end someone’s life with the use of
lethal substances or forces. For example, administering a lethal injection to end life.

b) Passive Euthanasia– where a person causes death by withholding or withdrawing treatment that is
essential to maintain life e.g. stoppage of antibiotics treatment in certain cases where it is necessary for
the continuance of life, removal of life support system, etc

3.2 Arguments For Euthanasia

i. Arguments based on rights: According to this argument, people have a right to self-
determination, and thus should be allowed to choose their own destiny. According to
libertarians, death is a private subject and if there is no harm done to others then, the state and
other people have no right to interfere. In a nutshell, every one has an explicit right to die and
therefore choose the mode of death.
ii. Argument from Freewill: This argument rests on the fact that man is morally free and by
extension has the freedom to make choices and decisions deemed fit.
iii. Assisting a subject to die is a better option than continuing to suffer.

3.3 Arguments Against Euthanasia

i. According to apologists, euthanasia is against the will and word of God. Virtually all religions in
their scriptures say ‘you must not kill’. Therefore carrying out any of these would be against
God’s command, and would be an attack on the sovereignty of God
 ii. Euthanasia could weaken society’s respect for the sanctity of life. Human life is sacred. Human
lives are special because God created them. Human beings are made in God’s image. Therefore
human life should be protected and preserved, whatever happens.
iii. Accepting euthanasia would mean that some lives (those of the sick or disabled) are worth less
than others.
iv. Euthanasia might not be in a person’s best interests [Link] members might prescribe
euthanasia for selfish financial reasons etc.
v. Euthanasia affects the rights of other people and not just those of the patient
vi. Allowing euthanasia could discourage the search for new modes of treatment for the terminally
ill.
vii. Euthanasia could discourage the motivation to provide good care for the dying.
viii. Euthanasia gives too much authority to doctors.
ix. Euthanasia exposes vulnerable people to pressure to end their lives.
x. Proper palliative care could make euthanasia unnecessary.
xi. Euthanasia cannot be properly regulated
xii. Permitting euthanasia will lead to less good care for the terminally ill. Euthanasia could
undermine the commitment of doctors and nurses to save lives.
xiii. Euthanasia may become in the future a cost-effective way to treat the terminally ill.
xiv. Allowing euthanasia could discourage the search for new modes of treatment for the terminally
ill.
xv. Euthanasia could discourage the motivation to provide good care for the dying.
xvi. Legalizing euthanasia will put society on a slippery slope, which will lead to unacceptable
[Link] euthanasia could start on a slippery slope that may lead to involuntary
euthanasia and the killing of people who are thought undesirable.
xvii. Moral pressure to free up medical resources.
xviii. Patients may feel euthanasia is the only way out when they are abandoned by their families.

Practical Questions

1. A terminally ill patient experiencing unbearable pain requests euthanasia. The patient has no chance
of recovery, and their family supports the decision. Discuss the ethical considerations a healthcare
provider should take into account before proceeding.
2. A patient in a persistent vegetative state has no advance directive. The family wants to withdraw life
support, but the medical team is hesitant. Analyze the ethical challenges in making a decision in this
case.

TOPIC 4: SUICIDE

Suicide is the act of intentionally taking one’s own life.

4.1 Causes of Suicide

Suicide is a complex and multifaceted issue influenced by various factors, including mental health, social
circumstances, and personal beliefs. Some of the reasons people commit suicide are;

i. Mental health disorders like depression, bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia, stress, trauma.
ii. Depression: One of the most significant risk factors, depression can lead to feelings of
hopelessness, worthlessness, and despair, which may make individuals feel that suicide is their
only escape.
iii. Substance Misuse/Abuse: Alcohol and drug abuse are strongly linked to suicide risk. Substance
use can exacerbate mental health issues, impair judgment, and increase impulsivity, which may
lead to suicidal behaviour.
iv. Social Isolation and loneliness: Lack of social support or feeling disconnected from others can
increase vulnerability to suicide. Individuals who feel isolated may have limited coping
mechanisms and fewer reasons to seek help.
v. .Relationship Issues: Breakups, divorce, or other significant relationship conflicts can cause
emotional distress, leading some to contemplate suicide as a means of escaping their pain.
vi. Financial Stress: Economic hardship, such as job loss, debt, or poverty, can create intense
feelings of hopelessness and despair. For some, financial pressures may contribute to a sense of
being trapped with no way out.
vii. Exposure to Trauma and Abuse: Experiencing physical, emotional, or sexual abuse can have
long-lasting psychological effects, making individuals more susceptible to suicidal thoughts.
viii. Bullying: Bullied individuals can experience severe emotional distress, potentially leading to
suicidal thoughts or attempts.
 ix. Chronic Illness and Pain: Individuals suffering from chronic physical health conditions such as
cancer or debilitating pain may feel a sense of hopelessness or lack of control over their lives,
potentially leading to suicidal thoughts.
x. Psychological factors such as hopelessness, failure
xi. Low-self Esteem and Self-Criticism: High levels of self-criticism, feelings of inadequacy, and a
fear of failure can contribute to suicidal thoughts, especially when individuals set unattainable
standards for themselves.
xii. Cultural norms and Expectations: Cultural factors, such as societal pressure to conform, success-
oriented values, or community attitudes toward honor and shame, can play a role in suicide. For
example, in some cultures, failure to meet certain expectations may be viewed as dishonorable,
contributing to suicidal thoughts e.g. Yoruba culture.

4.2 Arguments For Suicide

i. Autonomy and Personal Freedom: Supporters argue that individuals have the right to make
decisions about their own lives, including the choice to end it. Autonomy is a fundamental
principle of personal freedom, suggesting that people should have the right to decide what is
best for them, especially if they are suffering.
ii. Relief from Suffering: For those facing unbearable pain, terminal illness, or severe mental
distress, suicide is sometimes viewed as a way to escape suffering. In this perspective, suicide is
seen as an option for those who see no other viable means of relief.
iii. Existential and Philosophical Beliefs: Some philosophical perspectives, such as existentialism,
argue that life’s meaning is subjective, and individuals should have the choice to live or die
based on their own understanding of purpose and meaning. Thinkers like Albert Camus have
explored the concept of the “absurd” and the notion that if life lacks inherent meaning,
individuals may see suicide as a rational choice.

4.3 Arguments Against Suicide

I. The sanctity of human life. Many argue that life is inherently valuable and that suicide is morally
wrong. This view often stems from religious beliefs that regard life as sacred and emphasize the
sanctity of human life. For example, Christianity, Islam, and Judaism generally condemn suicide
as a sin or violation of divine will.
 II. Impact on loved ones: Suicide has significant emotional and psychological effects on the friends,
family, and communities of the deceased. This ripple effect can cause long-lasting trauma, guilt,
and grief among those left behind. Opponents of suicide often argue that the harm done to
others is a key reason to dissuade individuals from choosing this path.
III. Availability of medical help and intervention: Opponents of suicide argue that suicide is often
the result of mental health disorders, which can distort a person's thinking and decision-making.
Many people who experience suicidal thoughts are suffering from conditions that are treatable
through therapy, medication, or other interventions.
IV. Suicide is an act of cowardice
V. Irreversibility of death: Unlike other decisions, suicide is irreversible. There is a recognition that
many individuals who survive suicide attempts often later report a desire to continue living. This
suggests that, given time and appropriate support, individuals may find reasons to live, even if
they cannot see them in the moment.
VI. Suicide is nothing but a permanent solution to a temporary problem: Challenges of life are
inevitable and also not everlasting suggesting that there is a solution to all problems.

Practical Questions

1. How do cultural beliefs and societal attitudes toward suicide differ globally? Discuss how these
differences might impact approaches to suicide prevention.

Topic 5: Capital Punishment

5.0 Introduction

Capital punishment has long engendered considerable debate about both its morality and its
effect on criminal [Link] punishment, also called death penalty is the execution of
an offender sentenced to death after conviction by a court of law of a criminal offense. In some
countries such as Iran, Singapore, Malaysia, Phillipiness etc, capital punishment is the
prescribed form of punishment for importation and possession of hard drugs while some
countries impose the death penalty for various economic crimes, including bribery and
corruption of public officials, embezzlement of public funds, currency speculation, and the theft
of large sums of money. Sexual offenses of various kinds are also punishable by death in about
two dozen countries, including most Islamic states.

5.1 Aims of Punishment

The aims of punishment can be divided into two categories:(1) in terms of The first category
includes retributive theories of punishment; the second includes preventive, deterrent,and
reformative theories.

Retribution

The term retribution refers to punishment given in return for some wrong done. This view of
punishment holds that we should punish people simply because they deserve [Link],
retributive theorists have considered punishment a principle of justice, whereby offenders are
made to suffer in kind for the harm they have caused others. Arguments in favor of capital
punishment commonly make this point. The retributive aim of punishment is notably traced to
Immanuel Kant who argues that 'punishment is the inalienable right of an offender's.

Prevention

The prevention view of punishment holds that we should punish to ensure that offenders do
not repeat their offense and so further injure society. Thus robbers should be punished,
perhaps imprisoned, so that they will not steal anything else. Prevention is one of the most
common justifications for capital punishment.

Deterrence

The deterrence view holds that we should punish in order to discourage others from
committing similar offenses. Like the prevention theory, it aims to minimize the crime rate.
Deterrence is perhaps the most common argument made on behalf of capital punishment,and
thus is the one that those against capital punishment often focus on. For the moment, we will
simply observe that if a punishment is to function effectively as a deterrent, it must be severe
enough to be undesirable and, just as important,it must be known and certain. Thus, potential
offenders must be aware of the kind and severity of the punishment that awaits them, and they
must be con-vinced that they will receive it if they commit the offense.

Reformation

The reformation theory holds that one should punish in order to induce people to conform to
standards of behavior they have tended to ignore or violate. The idea here is that people will
emerge from punishment better than they were before, insofar as they will be less likely to
breach conventional standards of behavior.

5.2 Schools of Thought

The discourse on the moral nature of capital punishment has generated two divergent views,
representing two major schools of thoughts. These schools of thougt are;

Retentionist: this school refers to supporters of capital punishment. They argue that capital
punishment is viable and should be retained in the society due to its deterrent value.

Abolitionist: this school of thought argues for the expungement of capital punishment as a form
of punishment. This opinion is precipitated on the claim that capital punishment does not deter
offenders.

5.3 Arguments For Capital Punishment

i. Capital punishment is a fair and proportionate punishment for murderers. Supporters of

the death penalty believe that those who commit murder, because they have taken the
life of another, have forfeited their own right to life.
ii. Capital punishment pacifies the victim’s relatives and the moral indignation of law-
abiding citizens in general.
iii. Capital punishment deters others from committing similar crimes.
iv. Capital punishment ensures that offenders will not be able to commit such crimes again.

5.4 Arguments Against Capital Punishment

 i. Capital punishment seems to unjust and immoral because it is sometimes administered on
offences lesser than murder. This implies that capital punishment is an unjust punishment for
drug trafficking. This in effect negates the principle of commensurability.
ii. Capital punishment violates the condemned person’s right to life and is fundamentally inhuman
and degrading.
iii. Capital punishment counterbalances the dignity of human life.
iv. Capital punishment may encourage extra-judicial killings.
v. The possibility of unthorough investigations and judicial errors may lead to the conviction of an
innocent life.
vi. Research has generally shown that the death penalty is not a more effective deterrent than the
alternative sanction of life or long-term imprisonment.

Discussions

1. Fred and Chinedu are friends. They have been drinking at a bar and suddenly get into an argument.
Chinedu attempts to hit Fred with a snooker stick but Fred reacts faster and stabs Chinedu with a bottle.
Is Fred guilty of murder? Should he be sentenced to death? Make your case as an ethicist.

2. Retentionists argument is majorly centred on the claim that capital punishment deters others from
committing similar crimes. Is this true? Examine this claim from the perspective of rising crime rate in
Nigeria.

Topic 6: Pornography and Censorship

Introduction

In general, pornography refers to erotic material that is intended primarily to cause sexual arousal in its
audience or in fact causes arousal in its audience. In this topic, we shall examine the morality or
immorality of pornography and consequently examine the place of censorship in Pornography.
Censorship concerns the legality of pornography and deals with the whether access to pornographic
should be restricted or not.

6.1 Arguments For Pornography

 i. Pornography can be beneficial as it can aid normal sexual development, invigorate
flagging sexual relationships, encourage openness about sex between sexual partners,
and provide a release for people who for one reason or another are unable to find
sexual fulfillment in other ways.
ii. Pornography has been successfully used in sex therapy to treat various sexual disorders.
Pornography can potentially prevent sex crimes by providing a catharsis for people who
would otherwise behave harmfully.
iii. Pornography provides pleasure.
iv. Pornography is an expression of sexual autonomy. Every individual is an autonomous
being and has the right to express his sexual autonomy by viewing or engaging in
pornography.
v. Pornography is a way to get past sexual inhibitions and become more accepting of
certain erotic fantasies. In this way porn is seen as liberating and as increasing the
enjoyment of sex.

6.2 Arguments against Pornography

i. Pornography degrades humans. Pornography tends to separate sex from love as it

concentrates on lust at the expense of our more human emotions. Furthermore,
pornographic materials portray many disgusting and dehumanizing sexual acts.
ii. Pornography is anti-woman propaganda. Pornography portrays women as sex objects,
as playthings who exist only for the pleasure of men.
iii. Pornography can present unrealistic or harmful depictions of sex
iv. Pornography leads to harmful behavior. This is because pornography has psychological
and emotional effects. Humans are affected by what we read and see, thus creating
unwanton images in the subconscious mind. This can eventually trigger criminal sexual
behaviour such as rape and harmful sexual practices with one's spouse.
v. Pornography is a direct violation of the ethical social values of humanism.
vi. Some argue that pornography contradicts or undermines cultural or religious values.
vii. Pornography can alter a person's sexual preferences and desires.
Having discussed points for or against the moral permissibility of pornography, we shall examine
the grounds for censorship or otherwise of pornography. Censorship refers to the restriction or
control of contents deemed objectionable, harmful, sensitive. The debate over the censorship of
pornography often centers around societal, moral, and individual well-being concerns.

Arguments for Censorship

i. The community has the right and obligation to enforce its standards of decency. This
argument claims that the community has the right and obligation to protect itself from
public indecency. It is an enforcement of the general will over the individual will.
ii. Censorship of obscenity may protect us from crime. With rising and horrible nature of
sex crimes, it would be irresponsible of us not to ban obscene material as long as that
chance is there.
iii. We have a duty to protect ourselves and others from harmful exposure. Proponents argue
that pornography can have a negative impact on minors who are exposed to explicit
content at a young age. This exposure may affect their understanding of sexuality and
lead to unhealthy attitudes and behaviors.
iv. Censorship can prevent exploitation of vulnerable individuals.
v. Censorship could be a means of promoting healthier and more respectful sexual attitudes
toward others, prevention of objectification and dehumanization of humans, especially
women.
vi. Censorship could help uphold societal morals and protect traditional views on sexuality
and modesty.
Arguments against Censorship
i. Pornography is considered a form of expression, and censoring it can infringe on the right
to access information and ideas. Individuals should be free to decide for themselves what
content they want to consume.
ii. Pornography consumption is often a private activity, and censoring it could be viewed as
an invasion of personal privacy. Every individual has the right to privacy. As long as
watching pornography is within the confines of my private space , no one is affected and
as such, it is violation of my right to privacy if censored.
 iii. Prohibiting or restricting access to pornography could lead to underground markets,
potentially increasing risks and encouraging more extreme content that evades regulation.
iv. Censorship could limit access to resources that might otherwise provide healthy and
informative perspectives on sex. This is true for those who see pornography as a source
of sex education or a way to explore their own sexuality in a safe environment.
v. Censorship of obscenity threatens non-obscene material.
vi. Censorship is an unjustifiable infringement of liberty. This is because some individuals
who watch pornographic materials are harmless. It is this unfair to punish some persons
for the offence of others.
vii. The pornography industry generates significant revenue and provides employment for a
large number of people. Censorship could lead to job losses and economic downturns in
areas where the industry is prominent.

Questions for Discussion

1. How does exposure to pornography influence an individual’s views on relationships and

intimacy? Discuss ways you think pornography affects self-esteem and body image.

2. A young school student was expelled from his school for reading a pornographic material in
the school's restroom. Examine the infringement of his personal freedom and choice vis-a-vis a
moral obligation of the school to protect its students.

Topic 7: Homosexuality

Introduction

Homosexuality refers to the romantic or sexual attraction between individuals of the same sex.
Individuals who experience this form of attraction often identify as gay or lesbian although other
terms such as transgenderism, bisexualism are used to describe sexual orientations.
Homosexuality is one aspect of the broader LGBTQ+ spectrum, which includes various
identities related to sexual orientation and gender identity.

7.1 Arguments For Homosexuality

 i. Right to Love and Express Oneself. All individuals have the right to love whomever they
choose and express their identity freely. Denying these rights based on sexual
orientation is a violation of fundamental human rights.
ii. Every individual as an autonomous being has the freedom to align with any sexual
orientation deemed appropriate.
iii. Homosexuality is a form of natural variation within human sexuality, found in many
animal species as well. This diversity is part of the broader spectrum of human
experience and is not inherently harmful.
iv. Sexual orientation is sometimes not a choice but a core aspect of a person's identity.
Forcing someone to change their orientation or live in denial can lead to psychological
harm.

7.2 Arguments Against Homosexuality

i. Homosexuality is against the natural order.

ii. Homosexuality is against the will of God.
iii. Homosexuality negates a core purpose of marriage which is procreation.
iv. Homosexuality causes confusion on sexual attitudes and values.
v. Homosexuality undermines traditional gender roles.

Discussions

1. Theologians have argued that homosexuality violates the natural order and is therefore
unnatural and by extension immoral. Examine this position in light of the concept naturalness

2. Imagine you are a school counselor, and a student confides that they are struggling to come
out and reveal her sexual orientation due to fear of rejection. Discuss the potential reasons with
which you will encourage her.

Topic 8: Morality and War

8.0 Introduction

The morality of war is a complex and contentious subject, involving questions about when, if ever, war
can be morally justified. In the debate surrounding the morality of war, several key frameworks and
perspectives have emerged.

1. Just War Theory: this theory claims that wars can he justified. However, the justification of
wars is based on certain factors;

(a) Just Cause: War must address a wrong, such as defense against aggression, protection of
innocent lives, or safeguarding human rights.

(b) Legitimate Authority: Only duly recognized authorities, like governments, have the moral
right to declare war.

(c) Right Intention: The intentions behind going to war must be good, such as restoring peace or
justice, rather than seeking revenge or personal gain.

(d) Probability of Success: War should have a reasonable chance of achieving its goals to avoid
unnecessary loss of life.

(e) Proportionality: The expected benefits of the war should outweigh the expected harms.

(f) Last Resort: All peaceful alternatives must have been tried and exhausted before resorting to
war.

Moreso, the just war theory also prescribes conduct in war (Jus in Bello) as well as justice after
war(Jus post Bellum). This theory asserts that once war has begun, certain moral rules govern
how it should be conducted Moral rules such as distinction between combatants and non-
combatants, avoiding harm to civilians, the use of minimum necessary to achieve legitimate
military objectives. The principle of Jus post Bellum dictates that prisoners of war be treated
fairly and humanely, rebuilding of societies and promotion of reconciliation to prevent future
conflicts.
2. Pacifism: this is in moral opposition to wars. Pacifism is the belief that war and violence are
always morally wrong, regardless of circumstances. Pacifists argue that violence cannot achieve
true peace and that alternatives such as diplomacy, negotiation, and nonviolent resistance
should always be pursued. Pacifists emphasize moral principles like compassion, forgiveness,
and respect for all life. They argue that responding to violence with violence perpetuates a cycle
of harm.

3. Consequentialism and Utilitarianism: From a consequentialist viewpoint, the morality of war

is determined by its outcomes. If the results of war bring about a greater good, such as ending a
dictatorship or preventing genocide, then war may be considered morally justifiable.
Utilitarianism assesses war based on whether it produces the greatest good for the greatest
number. This approach weighs the suffering caused by war against the benefits, like long-term
peace or stability.

8.1 Arguments For War

i. War is morally justifiable as a necessary means to protect a nation or group from an

immediate threat. If a country or group faces an attack, engaging in war might be
considered the only way to defend its people, sovereignty, and way of life.
ii. War can serve as a means of deterrence. By engaging in war, a nation might deter future
attacks by demonstrating its willingness and capacity to defend itself forcefully
iii. Eliminating dangerous regimes that are considered a significant threat to regional or
global stability can sometimes be seen as a justification for war. This argument is often
cited when dealing with oppressive dictatorships or regimes with expansionist
ambitions.
iv. War can serve as platforms for establishing long-term peace. Proponents of the view
that war can justified argue that war can sometimes be necessary to create conditions
for long-term peace by defeating aggressive or destabilizing forces.
v. It can be a means of enforcing international norms: When a nation violates international
agreements, engages in unlawful invasions, or disregards norms, other countries may go
to war to enforce international rules and maintain order.
Arguments Against War

i. The cost of war, in terms of human lives, resources, and lasting regional instability is
always too high.
ii. Survivors of war frequently suffer from physical injuries and psychological trauma,
including PTSD. The impact on mental health can last for generations, affecting not only
individuals but also entire communities.
iii. Taking lives is inherently wrong, and that the harm caused by war cannot be morally
justified.
iv. War often leads to violations of fundamental ethical principles, including respect for
human life and dignity.
v. War often leads to violations of human rights and international laws, including torture,
rape, and genocide. These atrocities leave lasting scars on humanity’s collective
conscience.
vi. War perpetuates a cycle of violence, leading to retaliation, revenge, and future conflicts.
This cycle makes it difficult to achieve lasting peace and reconciliation.
vii. War often forces people to flee their homes, leading to large-scale displacement and
creating refugee crises. This disrupts lives and places immense strain on neighboring
countries and global resources.
viii. War is expensive, costing resources which could be better spent on healthcare,
education, infrastructure, and other social needs.
ix. Destruction of Infrastructure: War damages or destroys critical infrastructure like
hospitals, schools, roads, and power grids, which can take decades and massive financial
resources to rebuild.
x. War often disrupts economies, leading to long-term poverty and economic instability.