University of Kansas, Spring 2004
Philosophy 160: Introduction to Ethics
Ben Egglestoneggleston@ku.edu

Lecture notes: introduction

The following notes correspond roughly to what we cover, including at least a portion of what I put on the board or the screen, in class. In places they may be more or less comprehensive than what we actually cover in class, and should not be taken as a substitute for your own observations and records of what goes on in class.

The following outline is designed to be, and is in some Web browsers, collapsible: by clicking on the heading for a section, you can collapse that section or, if it’s already collapsed, make it expanded again. If you want to print some but not all of this outline, collapse the parts you don’t want to print (so that just their top-level headings remain), and then click here to print this frame.

  1. introduction to the subject matter of the course
    1. the three areas of ethics, or moral philosophy
      1. an example
        1. To understand the three areas of ethics, it helps to have a specific example in mind. So think, for a moment, about the act of intentionally spreading a computer virus. We can probably all agree that this is a bad thing for someone to do.
        2. We can use this example to talk about the three areas of ethics.
        3. table row: “areas of ethics, subject matter, sample statements”
      2. applied ethics
        1. table: “applied ethics”
        2. This is the branch of ethics devoted to the study of specific ethical issues.
        3. table: “specific ethical issues”
        4. Regarding our example of spreading a computer virus, an applied ethicist might focus on the ethical dimensions of computer viruses and other kinds of computer-related behavior, such as hacking and spamming.
        5. An applied ethicist with a different specialty might ask whether cloning is all right or whether we ought to treat animals better than we do.
        6. table
          1. “Intentionally spreading a computer virus is wrong.”
          2. “Animals’ interests ought to be considered equally with humans’ interests.”
        7. Sometimes applied ethics is associated with the idea of “case studies.”
      3. normative ethics
        1. table: “normative ethics”
        2. This is the branch of ethics devoted (mostly) to the development of moral theories: theories that specify, in brief and general terms, what actions, policies, institutions, etc., are morally acceptable. In regard to our example of spreading a computer virus, a normative ethicist would try to come up with a moral theory that deals with this as just one of many different moral problems.
        3. table: “what is right and wrong in general”
        4. For example, one normative ethicist might defend a theory whose central principle is that the way to act rightly is to do whatever will cause the most happiness. Such a theory would say that what’s wrong with intentionally spreading a computer virus is that is decreases overall happiness in the world by creating frustration for many people and enjoyment for just a few. And this theory would tell us to judge other, wholly unrelated, issues, such as cloning and animal rights, in the same way: by looking at the consequences, in terms of future happiness, of various policies and courses of action.
        5. Another normative ethicist might defend a theory whose central principle is the golden rule. Such a theory would say that intentionally spreading a computer virus is wrong because it involves treating other people in a way that one would not like to be treated oneself: as someone to be inconvenienced just for fun. And his theory would tell us to judge other issues in the same way: in terms of the golden rule.
        6. table
          1. “The right act is the one that creates the most happiness.”
          2. “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”
      4. meta-ethics
        1. table: “meta-ethics”
        2. This is the branch of ethics devoted to explaining what we are doing when we make moral judgments or engage in moral debates. Meta-ethicists try to give accounts of such things as the meaning of moral terms and the grounds of moral judgments.
        3. table: “what is going on when people make moral judgments”
        4. Consider, then, the moral judgment, “Intentionally spreading a computer virus is wrong.” In some respects, this judgment has the same structure as an ordinary descriptive statement such as “This book is blue”: it specifies a subject, and then uses the verb ‘is’ to ascribe a property to that subject. This kind of consideration, along with other kinds of considerations, leads some people to think that moral judgments are basically like ordinary descriptive judgments. In other respects, the moral judgment that intentionally spreading a computer virus is wrong is like the imperative “Don’t spread computer viruses.” At least, it functions sort of like that in conversation. This is the sort of thing that belongs to meta-ethics: whether moral judgments are like descriptive statements, such as “This book is blue,” or are like imperatives, such as “Don’t spread computer viruses.”
        5. table
          1. “Moral judgments are based on facts just as much as scientific judgments are.”
          2. “Moral judgments are simply reflections of people’s feelings.”
        6. Whatever a meta-ethicist ends up saying about the statement “Intentionally spreading a computer virus is wrong,” she would probably also say about moral statements on other topics, such as “Cloning is not immoral” or “We ought to treat animals better than we do.”
      5. classifying moral judgments
        1. slide: areas of ethics
          1. Iraq: A
          2. rights: O
          3. culture: M
          4. subliminal: A
          5. genes: M
          6. school: A
          7. everyone: O
          8. prohibited by God: O
          9. will of God: M
        2. worksheet: areas of ethics
          1. abortion: A
          2. economic: M
          3. interests: O
          4. invest: A
          5. Nixon: A
          6. politicians: M
          7. contract: O
          8. dishonesty: O
          9. rationalize: M
    2. areas of philosophy (skip)
      1. moral philosophy, or ethics: the study of right and wrong, or of how we ought to live, or of what people’s duties and obligations are
      2. metaphysics: the study of things such as what exists, what it is for one event to cause another, etc.
      3. epistemology: the study of knowledge, when a belief may be regarded as knowledge and not just conjecture or opinion, etc.
      4. philosophy of language: the study of what makes words have meanings, how words refer to things in the world (if they do), etc.
      5. philosophy of mind: the study of what mental states are, how they differ, how they represent the world (if they do), etc.
      6. philosophy of science: the study of what makes something a science, how scientific theories are confirmed, what makes something alive, etc.
      7. philosophy of religion: the study of God, whether God exists, faith versus reason, etc.
      8. logic: the study of correct reasoning
      9. others (aesthetics, political philosophy, etc.)
  2. introduction to the mechanics of the course
    1. review of syllabus
      1. teaching assistant information
      2. assignments / grade determination
      3. book to buy
      4. course web site vs. Blackboard site
      5. e-mail distribution list
      6. schedule
    2. things students said by previous students
      1. a lot of reading
      2. a lot of writing
      3. no right or wrong answers
    3. the teaching assistants and me
      1. introduction of teaching assistants
      2. division of responsibilities
        1. me: books, lectures, assignments, course web site and Blackboard site
        2. TAs: discussion sections, grading, recording grades
      3. slide: whom to contact
      4. contacting me
        1. office hours
        2. in office most of week
        3. available by appointment—send e-mail to request
        4. slide: contacting me
    4. quizzes
      1. show information sheet on course web site
      2. show first quiz on Blackboard
      3. first quiz
        1. to be taken after reading preface and chapter 1
        2. must be taken by 6 a.m. on Wednesday
  3. preview of chapter 1