What Is Morality? 1.

Being clear about the difference between

Basic Concepts conventional and critical morality
•Moral Issue 2. Distinguishing morality with other normative
•Moral Judgment – right/wrong, good/bad systems.
•Moral Decision 3. identifying starting points for moral thinking; and
Moral Issue and Moral Judgment: The Case of 4. contrasting morality with other normative
Jodie and Mary systems, including religious ones.
In August 2000, a young woman from Gozo, an
island south of Italy, discovered that she was (CANVAS)
carrying conjoined twins. Conventional Morality
• Knowing that the health-care facilities on Gozo Suppose you take sociology or an anthropology
were inadequate to deal with such a birth, she and course, and you get to a unit on the morality of the
her husband went to St. Mary’s Hospital in cultures you’ve been studying. You’ll likely focus
Manchester, England. on the patterns of behavior to be found in the
• The infants, known as Mary and Jodie, were cultures, their accepted ideas about right and wrong,
joined at the lower abdomen. Their spines were and the sorts of character traits that these cultures
fused, and they had one heart and one pair of lungs find admirable. These are the elements of what we
between them. Jodie, the stronger one, was can call conventional morality—the system of
providing blood for her sister. widely accepted rules and principles, created by and
• But the outlook for Mary and Jodie were grim. for human beings, that members of a culture or
• The doctors said that without intervention the girls society use to govern their own lives and to assess
would die within six months. The only hope was an the actions and the motivations of others.
operation to separate them. This would save Jodie,
but Mary would die immediately. Conventional morality can differ from society to
• Would it be right or wrong to separate the twins? society. The conventional morality of Saudi Arabia
forbids women from publicly contradicting their
What Is Morality? husbands or brothers, while Denmark’s
• There is no widely agreed-on definition of conventional morality allows this. People in the
morality. United States would think it immoral to leave a
The absence of a definition does not leave us restaurant without tipping a good waiter or
entirely in the dark, however. (After all, no one has bartender, while such behavior in many other
yet been able to offer informative definitions of societies is perfectly OK.
literature, or life, or art, and yet we know a great
deal about those things.) Critical Morality
• What we can do is to get a good sense of our When we talk about morality in this course, we will
subject matter by doing two things: be referring to moral standards that are not rooted in
widespread endorsement, but rather are independent
of conventional morality and can be used to Critical Morality
critically evaluate its merits. -It refers to the moral standards that are
independent of conventional morality and can be
It’s possible, of course, that conventional morality used to critically evaluate its
is all there is. But this would be a very surprising merits.
discovery. Most of us assume, as I will do, that the -It is untainted by mistaken beliefs, irrationality,
popularity of a moral view is not a guarantee of its or popular prejudices.
truth. We could be wrong on this point, but until we -It can serve as the standard for determining
have a chance to consider the matter in detail, I when conventional morality has got it right and
think it best to assume that conventional morality when it has fallen into error.
can sometimes be mistaken. If so, then there may be • This is the morality whose nature we are going to
some independent, critical morality that explore in this session.

(1) does not have its origin in social agreements; Three core areas of moral philosophy
(2) is untainted by mistaken beliefs, irrationality, or 1. Value theory
popular prejudices; and • What is the good life?
(3) can serve as the true standard for determining • What is worth pursuing for its own sake?
when conventional morality has got it right and • How do we improve our lot in life?
when it has fallen into error. • What is happiness, and is it the very same thing as
well-being?
(PPT)
Conventional and Critical Morality 2. Normative ethics
• Conventional Morality • What are our fundamental moral duties?
-the system of widely accepted rules and • What makes right actions right?
principles, that members of a culture or society use • Which character traits count as virtues, which as
to govern their own lives. vices, and why?
-the patterns of behaviour to be found in the • Who should our role models be?
cultures, • Do the ends always justify the means, or are there
their accepted ideas about right and wrong, and the certain types of action that should never be done
sorts of character traits that these cultures find under any circumstances?
admirable.
-conventional morality can differ from society to 3. Metaethics
society. • What is the status of moral claims and advice?
• Can ethical theories, moral principles, or specific
moral verdicts be true? If so, what makes them true?
• Can we gain moral wisdom? If so, how?
• Do we always have a good reason to do our moral 6. Justice is a very important moral good. Any
duty? moral theory that treats justice as irrelevant is
deeply suspect. It is important that we get what we
Moral Starting Points (Part 1) deserve, and that we are treated fairly.)
1. Neither the law nor tradition is immune from
moral criticism. Moral Starting Points (Part 2)
2. Everyone is morally fallible. 7. Deliberately hurting other people requires
3. Friendship is valuable. justification.
4. We are not obligated to do the impossible. 8. Equals ought to be treated equally.
5. Children bear less moral responsibility than 9. Self-interest isn’t the only ethical consideration.
adults. 10.Agony/suffering is bad.
6. Justice is a very important moral good. 11.Might does not make right.
(1. Neither the law nor tradition is immune from 12.Free and informed requests prevent rights
moral criticism. The law does not have the final violations.
word on what is right and wrong. Neither does (7. Deliberately hurting other people requires
tradition. Actions that are legal, or customary, are justification. The default position in ethics is this:
sometimes morally mistaken. do no harm. It is sometimes morally acceptable to
2. Everyone is morally fallible. Everyone has some harm others, but there must be an excellent reason
mistaken ethical views, and no human being is for doing so or else the harmful behavior is
wholly wise when it unjustified.
comes to moral matters.
3. Friendship is valuable. Having friends is a good 8. Equals ought to be treated equally. People who
thing. Friendships add value to your life. You are are alike in all relevant respects should get similar
better off when there are people you care deeply treatment. When this fails to happen—when racist
about, and who care deeply about you. or sexist policies are enacted, for instance—then
4. We are not obligated to do the impossible. something has gone wrong.
Morality can demand only so much of us. Moral
standards that are impossible to meet are 9. Self-interest isn’t the only ethical consideration.
illegitimate. Morality must respect our limitations. How well-off we are is important. But it isn’t the
5. Children bear less moral responsibility than only thing of moral importance. Morality
adults. Moral responsibility assumes an ability on sometimes calls on us to set aside our own interests
our part to understand options, to make decisions for the sake of others.
in an informed way, and to let our decisions guide
our behavior. The fewer of these abilities you have, 10. Agony is bad. Excruciating physical or
the less blameworthy you are for any harm you emotional pain is bad. It may sometimes be
might cause. appropriate to cause such extreme suffering, but
doing so requires a very powerful justification.
 name will place some importance on justice,
11. Might doesn’t make right. People in power can fairness, kindness, and reasonableness.
get away with lots of things that the rest of us can’t.
That doesn’t justify what they do. That a person can (CANVAS)
escape punishment is one thing—whether his Reason and Impartiality
actions are morally acceptable is another. Moral judgments must be backed by good reasons;
and second, morality requires the impartial
12. Free and informed requests prevent rights consideration of each individual’s interests.
violations. If, with eyes wide open and no one
twisting your arm, you ask someone to do Moral Reasoning
something for you, and she does it, then your rights When we feel strongly about an issue, it is tempting
have not been violated— even if you end up hurt as to assume that we just know what the truth is,
a result.) without even having to consider arguments on the
other side. Unfortunately, however, we cannot rely
There are a number of points to make about these on our feelings, no matter how powerful they may
claims. be. Our feelings may be irrational; they may be
nothing but the by-products of prejudice,
-First, this short list isn’t meant to be exhaustive. It selfishness, or cultural conditioning.
could be made much longer.
-Second, we are not claiming that the items on this Thus, if we want to discover the truth, we must let
list are beyond criticism. We are only saying that our feelings be guided as much as possible by
each one is very plausible. Hard thinking might reason. This is the essence of morality. The morally
weaken our confidence in some cases. The point, right thing to do is always the thing best supported
though, is that without such scrutiny, it is perfectly by the arguments. Of course, not every reason that
reasonable to begin our moral thinking with the may be advanced is a good reason. There are bad
items on this list. arguments as well as good ones, and much of the
-Third, many of these claims require interpretation skill of moral thinking consists in discerning the
in order to apply them in a satisfying way. When we difference.
say, for instance, that equals ought to be treated
equally, we leave all of the interesting questions The first thing is to get one’s facts straight. The
open. (What makes people equals? Can we treat facts exist independently of our wishes, and
people equally without treating them in precisely responsible moral thinking begins when we try to
the same way? And so on.) see things as they are.
A morality that celebrates genocide, torture,
treachery, sadism, hostility, and slavery is, Next, we can bring moral principles into play. In
depending on how you look at it, either no morality our three examples, a number of principles were
at all or a deeply failed one. Any morality worth the involved: that we should not “use” people; that we
should not kill one person to save another; that we only after scrutinizing them to make sure they are
should do what will benefit the people affected by justified; who will “listen to reason” even when it
our actions; that every life is sacred; and that it is means revising prior convictions; and who, finally,
wrong to discriminate against the handicapped. is willing to
Most moral arguments consist of principles being act on these deliberations.
applied to particular cases, and so we must ask
whether the principles are justified and whether As one might expect, not every ethical theory
they are being applied correctly. accepts this “minimum.” This picture of the
conscientious moral agent has been disputed in
The rote application of routine methods is never a various ways. However, theories that reject it
satisfactory substitute for critical thinking, in any encounter serious difficulties. This is why most
area. Morality is no exception. moral theories embrace the minimum conception, in
one form or another.
The Requirement of Impartiality
Almost every important moral theory includes the (PPT)
idea of impartiality. This is the idea that each Baby Theresa
individual’s interests are equally important; no one • Theresa Ann Campo Pearson, an infant known to
should get special treatment. At the same time, the public as “Baby Theresa,” was born in Florida
impartiality requires that we do not treat the in 1992.
members of particular groups as inferior, and thus it • Baby Theresa had anencephaly, one of the worst
condemns forms of discrimination like sexism and genetic disorders.
racism. • Anencephalic infants are sometimes referred to as
“babies without brains,” but that is not quite
The Minimum Conception of Morality accurate.
We may now state the minimum conception: • Important parts of the brain—the cerebrum and
Morality is, at the very least, the effort to guide cerebellum—are missing, as is the top of the skull.
one’s conduct by reason—that is, to do what there • The brain stem, however, is still there, and so the
are the best reasons for doing—while giving equal baby can still breathe and possess a heartbeat.
weight to the interests of each individual affected •Baby Theresa’s parents made an unusual request.
by one’s action. • Knowing that their baby would die soon and could
never be conscious, Theresa’s parents volunteered
This paints a picture of what it means to be a her organs for immediate transplant.
conscientious moral agent. The conscientious moral • Were the parents right or wrong to volunteer their
agent is someone who is concerned impartially with baby’s organs for transplant? What can be said to
the interests of everyone affected by what he or she justify the parents’ request or to justify opposing
does; who carefully sifts facts and examines their their request?
implications; who accepts principles of conduct
Reason and Impartiality weight to the interests of each individual affected
• Moral judgments must be backed by good reasons; by one’s decision.
and second, morality requires the impartial
consideration of each individual’s interests. The conscientious moral agent is someone :
Moral Reasoning • who is concerned impartially with the interests of
• If we want to discover the truth, we must let our everyone affected by what he or she does;
feelings be guided as much as possible by reason. • who carefully sifts facts and examines their
• This is the essence of morality. The morally right implications;
thing to do is always the thing best supported by the • who accepts principles of conduct only after
arguments. scrutinizing them to make sure they are justified;
• The first thing is to get one’s facts straight. The • who is willing to “listen to reason” even when it
facts exist independently of our wishes, and means revising prior convictions; and
responsible moral thinking begins when we try to • who is willing to act on the results of this
see things as they are. deliberation.
• Next, we can bring moral principles into play.
o We should not “use” people. (PPT)
o We should not kill one person to save another. OTHER NORMATIVE SYSTEMS
o We should do what will benefit the people LAW
affected by our actions. ETIQUETTE
o Every life is sacred. SELF-INTEREST
TRADITION
The Requirement of Impartiality
• Almost every important moral theory includes the Morality and Other Normative Systems
idea of impartiality. • We can also better understand morality by
• This is the idea that each individual’s interests are contrasting its principles with those of other
equally important; no one should get special normative systems.
treatment. • Other normative systems also represent a set of
• Impartiality requires that we not treat the members standards for how we ought to behave, ideals to aim
of particular groups as inferior, and thus it for, rules that we should not break but are different
condemns forms of discrimination like sexism and from morality.
racism. • There are many such systems, but let’s restrict our
focus to four of the most important of them: those
The Minimum Conception of Morality that govern the law, etiquette, self-interest, and
– We may now state the minimum conception: tradition.
Morality is, at the very least, the effort to guide
one’s conduct by reason—that is, to do what there
are the best reasons for doing—while giving equal
Law for their efforts, sued to the point of bankruptcy,
• The fact that a law tells us to do something does and targeted for their courageous behavior.
not necessarily mean that it is the moral act to do.
• Some immoral acts (like cheating on an exam) are Tradition
not illegal. • Finally, morality is also distinct from tradition.
And some illegal acts (like voicing criticism against • That a practice has been around a long time does
a dictator) are not immoral. not automatically make it moral.
• Certainly, many laws require what morality • Morality sometimes requires a break with the past,
requires and forbid what morality forbids. But the as it did when people called for the abolition of
fit is hardly perfect, and that shows that morality is slavery or for allowing women to vote.
something different from the law. That a legislature • And some nontraditional, highly innovative
passed a bill is not enough to show that the bill is practices may be morally excellent.
morally acceptable. • The longevity of a practice is not a fool proof test
of its morality.
Etiquette
• We see the same imperfect fit when it comes to (CANVAS)
standards of etiquette. We can also better understand morality by
• Forks are supposed to be set to the left of a plate, contrasting its principles with those of other
but it isn’t immoral to set them on the right. normative systems. Each of these represents a set of
• Good manners are not the same thing as morally standards for how we ought to behave, ideals to aim
good conduct. Morality sometimes requires us not for, rules that we should not break.
to be polite or gracious, as when someone threatens
your children or happily tells you a racist joke. There are many such systems, but let’s restrict our
• So the standards of etiquette can depart from those focus to four of the most important of them: those
of morality. that govern the law, etiquette, self-interest, and
tradition.
Self-interest
• The same is true when it comes to the standards of Law
self-interest. The fact that a law tells us to do something does not
• Think of all of the people who have gotten ahead settle the question of whether morality gives its
in life by betraying others, lying about their past, stamp of approval.
breaking the rules that others are following. Some immoral acts (like cheating on a spouse) are
• Sometimes you can improve your lot in life by not illegal. And some illegal acts (like voicing
acting immorally. And those who behave virtuously criticism of a dictator) are not immoral. Certainly,
are sometimes punished, rather than rewarded, for it. many laws require what morality requires and
• Whistle blowers who reveal a company’s or a forbid what morality forbids. But the fit is hardly
government official’s corruption are often attacked perfect, and that shows that morality is something
different from the law. That a legislature passed a Tradition
bill is not enough to show that the bill is morally Finally, morality is also distinct from tradition. That
acceptable. a practice has been around a long time does not
automatically make it moral. Morality sometimes
Etiquette requires a break with the past, as it did when people
We see the same imperfect fit when it comes to called for the abolition of slavery or for allowing
standards of etiquette. Forks are supposed to be set women to vote. And some nontraditional, highly
to the left of a plate, but it isn’t immoral to set them innovative practices may be morally excellent. The
on the right. Good manners are not the same thing longevity of a practice is not a foolproof test of its
as morally good conduct. Morality sometimes morality.
requires us not to be polite or gracious, as when
someone threatens your children or happily tells (PPT)
you a racist joke. So the standards of etiquette can The Presumed Connection between Morality
depart from those of morality. and Religion
• In popular thinking, morality and religion are
Self-interest inseparable: People commonly believe that morality
The same is true when it comes to the standards of can be understood only in the context of religion.
self-interest. Think of all of the people who have • Is there morality without God?
gotten ahead in life by betraying others, lying about
their past, breaking the rules that others are The Divine Command Theory
following. It’s an unhappy thought, but a very • The basic idea is that God decides what is right
commonsensical one: you sometimes can improve and wrong.
your lot in life by acting immorally. And those who • Actions that God commands are morally required;
behave virtuously are sometimes punished, rather actions that God forbids are morally wrong; and all
than rewarded, for it. Whistleblowers who reveal a other actions are permissible or merely morally
company’s or a government official’s corruption neutral.
are often attacked for their efforts sued to the point • This theory has a number of attractive features.
of bankruptcy, and targeted for their courageous • It immediately solves the old problem of the
behavior. Though the relation between self-interest objectivity of ethics.
and morality is contested, it is a plausible starting • There are, however, serious problems with the
point to assume that morality can sometimes require theory.
us to sacrifice our well-being, and that we can • Atheists would not accept it, because they do not
sometimes improve believe that God exists.
our lot in life by acting unethically. • But there are difficulties even for believers.
A. An action is right because God commands it.
B. God commands an action because it is right.
Right conduct is right because God commands it. This theory has a number of attractive features.
This idea encounters several difficulties.
1. This conception of morality is mysterious. -It immediately solves the old problem of the
2. This conception of morality makes God’s objectivity of ethics. Ethics is not merely a matter
commands arbitrary. of personal feeling or social custom. Whether
3. This conception of morality provides the wrong something is right or wrong is perfectly objective: It
reasons for moral principles. is right if God commands it and wrong if God
forbids it.
God commands right conduct because it is right. -The Divine Command Theory explains why any of
• In taking this, we abandon the theological us should bother with morality. Why shouldn’t we
conception of right and wrong. just look out for ourselves? If immorality is the
• When we say that God commands us to be truthful violation of God’s commandments, then there is an
because truthfulness is right, we acknowledge a easy answer: On the day of final reckoning, you
standard that is independent of God’s will. will be held accountable.
• The rightness exists prior to God’s command and
is the reason for the command. There are, however, serious problems with the
theory.
(CANVAS)
Morality and Religion -Atheists would not accept it, because they do not
The Presumed Connection between Morality believe that God exists.
and Religion -But there are difficulties even for believers. One
In popular thinking, morality and religion are can be skeptical and ask, is a conduct right because
inseparable: People commonly believe that morality the gods command it, or do the gods command it
can be understood only in the context of religion. because it is right? This is a question of whether
Thus the clergy are assumed to be authorities on God makes the moral truths true or whether he
morality. merely recognizes that they’re true.
When viewed from a non-religious perspective, the
universe seems to be a cold, meaningless place, First, we might say that right conduct is right
devoid of value and purpose. because God commands it. But this idea encounters
several difficulties.
The Divine Command Theory
The basic idea is that God decides what is right and 1. This conception of morality is mysterious.
wrong. Actions that God commands are morally 2. This conception of morality makes God’s
required; actions that God forbids are morally commands arbitrary.
wrong, and all other actions are permissible or 3. This conception of morality provides the wrong
merely morally neutral. reasons for moral principles.
The second option has a different drawback. another’s. There are no
moral truths that hold for all people at all times.
3. The moral code of our own society has no
-In taking it, we abandon the theological conception special status; it is but one among many.
4. It is arrogant for us to judge other cultures.
of right and wrong. When we say that God
We should always be tolerant of them.
commands us to be truthful because truthfulness is 5. The moral code of a society determines
what is right within that society; that is, if the
right, we acknowledge a standard that is
moral code of a society says it is.
independent of God’s will. The rightness exists
prior to God’s command and is the reason for the
The Cultural Differences Argument
command.
1. Different cultures have different moral
codes.
(CANVAS) 2. Therefore, there is no objective truth in
morality.
Cultural Relativism
3. Right and wrong are only matters of opinion,
Different Cultures Have Different Moral Codes and opinions vary from culture to culture.

The Callatians, who lived in India, ate the bodies of What Follows from Cultural Relativism
their dead fathers. The Greeks, of course, did not do
that—the Greeks practiced cremation and regarded 1. We could no longer say that the customs of
the funeral pyre as the natural and fitting way to other societies are morally inferior to our own.
dispose of the dead. The Eskimos lived in small 2. We could no longer criticize the code of our
settlements, separated by great distances, and their own society.
customs turned out to be very different from ours. 3. The idea of moral progress is called into
The men often had more than one wife, and they doubt.
would share their wives with guests, lending them
out for the night as a sign of hospitality. Moreover, What We Can Learn from Cultural Relativism
within a community, a dominant male might
demand—and get—regular sexual access to other First, Cultural Relativism warns us, quite rightly,
men’s wives. The women, however, were free to about the danger of assuming that all of our
break these arrangements simply by leaving their practices are based on some absolute rational
husbands and taking up with new partners—free, standard. They are not. Some of our customs are
that is, so long as their former husbands chose not merely conventional—merely peculiar to our
to make too much trouble. All in all, the Eskimo society—and it is easy to lose sight of that fact.
custom of marriage was a volatile practice that bore Cultural Relativism begins with the insight that
little resemblance to our custom. many of our practices are like this—they are only
cultural products.
Cultural Relativism The second lesson has to do with keeping an open
mind. As we grow up, we develop strong feelings
Main Idea: “Different cultures have different moral about things: We learn to see some types of
codes. Therefore, there are no universal moral behavior as acceptable, and other types as
truths, the customs outrageous.
of different societies are all that exist.
Cultural Relativism provides an antidote for this
kind of dogmatism. Realizing this can help broaden
The following claims have all been made by our minds. We can see that our feelings are not
cultural relativists: necessarily perceptions of the truth— they may be
due to cultural conditioning and nothing more.
1. Different societies have different moral
codes; that a certain action is right, then that Many of the practices and attitudes we find natural
action is right, at least within that society. are really only cultural products.
2. There is no objective standard that can be
used to judge one society’s code as better than
(PPT) • Psychological Egoism, by contrast, asserts that
Skepticism in Ethics each person does in fact pursue his or her own self-
Ethical Egoism and Cultural Relativism interest exclusively.
• Psychological Egoism makes a claim about
Ethical Egoism human nature, or about the way things are;
Is There a Duty to Help the Starving? • Ethical Egoism makes a claim about morality, or
• Every day, around 22,000 children under the age about the way things should be.
of 5 die, almost always from preventable causes.
• Why do we let people starve when we could save Psychological Egoism
them? • Is Altruism Possible? Acts of Altruism are
remarkable deeds, but should they be taken at face
Is There a Duty to Help the Starving? value?
• We have duties to others simply because they are • According to Psychological Egoism, we may
people who could be helped or harmed by what we believe ourselves to be noble and self-sacrificing,
do. but that is only an illusion. In reality, we care only
• If a certain action would benefit (or harm) other for ourselves.
people, then that is a reason why we should (or
should not) perform that action. Two arguments are often given for Psychological
• The commonsense assumption is that other Egoism.
people’s interests count, from a moral point of view. • We Always Do What We Want to Do.
• “Every act you have ever performed since the day
Is There a Duty to Help the Starving? you were born was performed because you wanted
• Some people believe that we have no duties to something.”
others. • We Always Do What Makes Us Feel Good.
• This view is known as Ethical Egoism. • The second argument for Psychological Egoism
• Each person ought to pursue his or her own self- appeals to the fact that so- called altruistic actions
interest exclusively. produce a sense of self - satisfaction in the person
• This is the morality of selfishness. It holds that who performs them.
our only duty is to do what is best for ourselves.
Other people matter only insofar as they can benefit • Psychological Egoism is not a credible theory.
us. Moral theorizing need not be a naïve endeavor,
based on an unrealistic view of human nature.
Psychological Egoism vs. Ethical Egoism
• Ethical Egoism claims that each person ought to A. Three Arguments for Ethical Egoism
pursue his or her own self-interest exclusively. • Ethical Egoism, again, is the doctrine that each
person ought to pursue his or her own self-interest
exclusively.
• Ethical Egoism is the radical idea that the (4) Thus, Ethical Egoism is the philosophy that we
principle of self- interest accounts for all of one’s ought to accept.
obligations.
A.3. Ethical Egoism as Compatible with
A.1. The Argument That Altruism Is Self- Commonsense Morality
Defeating. • Ordinary morality consists in obeying certain
• We understand the desires and needs of other rules. We must speak the truth, keep our promises,
people only imperfectly, and we are not well avoid harming others, and so on.
situated to pursue them. • Ethical Egoists would say that all these duties are
• The policy of “looking out for others” is an ultimately derived from the one fundamental
offensive intrusion into other people’s privacy. principle of self-interest.
• Making other people the object of one’s “charity” • The Golden Rule: We should “do unto others”
is degrading to them; it robs them of their dignity because if we do, others will be more likely to “do
and self- respect. unto us.”

A.2. Ayn Rand’s Argument B. Three Arguments against Ethical Egoism

• Ayn Rand regarded the “ethics of altruism” as a B.1. The Argument That Ethical Egoism
totally destructive idea - leads to a denial of the Endorses Wickedness.
value of the individual. • Suppose that someone could actually benefit by
• It says to a person: Your life is merely something doing such things. Wouldn’t Ethical Egoism have
to be sacrificed. to approve of such actions?

• Ethical Egoism is the only ethic that takes B.2. The Argument That Ethical Egoism Is
seriously the reality of the individual person. Logically Inconsistent.
(1) Each person has only one life to live. If we • The Theory leads to contradictions. If this is true,
value the individual, then we must agree that this then Ethical Egoism is indeed mistaken, for no
life is of supreme importance. After all, it is all one theory can be true if it contradicts itself.
has, and all one is.
(2) The ethics of altruism regards the life of the B.3. The Argument That Ethical Egoism Is
individual as something that may be sacrificed for Unacceptably Arbitrary.
the good of others. Therefore, the ethics of altruism • Ethical Egoism is a moral theory of the same type
does not take seriously the value of the individual. like racism.
(3) Ethical Egoism, which allows each person to • It advocates dividing the world into two categories
view his or her own life as being of ultimate value, of people— ourselves and everyone else—and it
does take the individual seriously—it is, in fact, the urges us to regard the interests of those in the first
only philosophy that does. group as more important than the interests of those
in the second group.
The Challenge of Cultural Relativism (1) The Eskimos saw nothing wrong with
Different Cultures Have Different Moral Codes infanticide, whereas Filipinos believe infanticide is
• The Callatians ate the bodies of their dead fathers. immoral.
• The Greeks practiced cremation and regarded the (2) Therefore, infanticide is neither objectively right
funeral pyre as the natural and fitting way to nor objectively wrong. It is merely a matter of
dispose of the dead. opinion, which varies from culture to culture.
• The Eskimos often had more than one wife, and (1) The Greeks believed it was wrong to eat the
they would share their wives with guests, lending dead, whereas the Callatians believed it was right to
them out for the night as a sign of hospitality. eat the dead.
(2) Therefore, eating the dead is neither objectively
Cultural Relativism right nor objectively wrong. It is merely a matter of
•Main Idea: “Different cultures have different moral opinion, which varies from culture to culture.
codes. Therefore, there are no universal moral
truths, the customs of different societies are all that What Follows from Cultural Relativism
exist. 1. We could no longer say that the customs of other
Basic principle societies are morally inferior to our own.
1. Different societies have different moral codes. 2. We could no longer criticize the code of our own
2. The moral code of a society determines what is society.
right within that society; that is, if the moral code of 3. The idea of moral progress is called into doubt.
a society says that a certain action is right, then that
action is right, at least within that society. What We Can Learn from Cultural Relativism
3. There is no objective standard that can be used to • First, Cultural Relativism warns us, quite rightly,
judge one society’s code as better than another’s. about the danger of assuming that all of our
There are no moral truths that hold for all people at practices are based on some absolute rational
all times. standard.
4. The moral code of our own society has no special • The second lesson has to do with keeping an open
status; it is but one among many. mind.
5. It is arrogant for us to judge other cultures. We • Many of the practices and attitudes we find
should always be tolerant of them. natural are really only cultural products.

The Cultural Differences Argument

(1) Different cultures have different moral codes.
(2) Therefore, there is no objective truth in
morality.
Right and wrong are only matters of opinion, and
opinions vary from culture to culture.