Study Notes

Ethics at Workplace –
Theories of ethics
Theories of Ethics

Introduction

Three major areas of study within ethics recognized today are:

1. Meta-ethics - concerning the theoretical meaning and reference of moral propositions,

and how their truth values can be determined.
2. Normative ethics - is the study of ethical behaviour, and is the branch
of philosophical ethics that investigates the questions that arise regarding how one ought
to act, in a moral sense.
3. Applied ethics - concerning what a person is obligated (or permitted) to do in a specific
situation or a particular domain of action.

Normative

Teleological Virtue Ethics Ethics of Care Deontology

Broadly the theories are classified as Teleological and Deontological.

A deontological approach advocates for doing certain things on principle or because they are
inherently right. Deontological theories thus stress the concepts of obligation, ought, duty, and
right and wrong,

A teleological approach advocates that certain kinds of actions are right because of the
goodness of their consequences. Teleological theories lay stress on the good, the valuable, and
the desirable.

Deontological Teleological
First proposed by Immanuel Kant Introduced by Jeremy Bentham and developed
by John Stuart Mill
also known as Kantian ethics Also known as Utilitarianism
Rule-based view of ethics Consequence-based view of ethics
Goodness or badness is determined by the Goodness or badness is determined by the
action results or outcomes
Ethical behavior is the only one that has Ethical behavior is one that produces greatest
goodwill behind it good for the greatest number

2
Theories of Ethics

Utilitarianism or Teleological ethics

1. Utilitarianism: is a tradition of ethical philosophy that is associated with Jeremy Bentham

and John Stuart Mill, two late 18th- and 19th-century British philosophers, economists,
and political thinkers.
2. Utilitarianism or consequentialism is a general term for the view wherein, actions and
policies should be evaluated on the basis of the benefits and costs they will impose on
society.
3. Utilitarianism is a class of consequentialist ethics.
4. It holds that the consequences of one's conduct are the ultimate basis for any judgment
about the rightness or wrongness of that conduct.
5. Thus, from a consequentialist standpoint, an act is morally correct if it produces a good
outcome even if the cost paid for the same or the act done to receive the desired
outcome is painful, unhappiness or sickness.
6. In any situation, the “right” action or policy is the one that will produce the greatest net
benefits or the lowest net costs.

Example

Ford knew that Pinto (car) would explode when the rear ended at only 20 mph, but they also knew that it
would cost $137 million to fix the problem. Since they would only have to pay $49 million in damages to
the injured victims and families of those who died, they calculated that it was not right to spend the
money to fix the cars when the society set such a low price on the lives and health of the victims.
The kind of analysis that Ford used in their cost benefit analysis is a version of what has been
traditionally called utilitarianism.

Given a particular situation, how does one determine what is the moral thing to do?

There are 3 considerations to follow:

1. You must determine what alternative actions are available.

2. You must estimate the direct and indirect costs and benefits the action would produce
for all involved in foreseeable future.
3. You must choose the alternative that produces the greatest benefit.

Traditional utilitarian deny, that any kind of actions are always right or always wrong.

If, in a certain situation more good consequences would flow from being dishonest than
speaking the truth, then, according to traditional utilitarian theory, dishonesty would be morally
right in that particular situation.

Example

A hunter asks a passerby if he has seen the Baby elephant he is chasing to sell to circus and the
passerby shows the opposite direction as to where the elephant actually is. In this scenario passerby is
morally right as he saved the life of the animal.

3
Theories of Ethics

Shortfalls of this theory

1. It is not always possible to measure the cost and the benefit of a particular situation. For
example; cost of human life.
2. The estimates of the cost and benefits of an action can not necessarily be relied upon.
The predictions may be incorrect.
3. It is unclear what exactly can be counted as benefit or cost. With the change in the
people the perspectives and point of views also change.
4. Utilitarian measurement implies that all goods can be traded for equivalents of each
other. However, non-economic goods like life, freedom, equality, health etc cannot be
valued.

Problems with Rights & Justice:

The major difficulty with Utilitarianism is that it is unable to deal with two kinds of moral issues:

a) Rights

b) Justice

That is the utilitarian principle implies that certain actions are morally right when in fact they are
unjust or violate people’s rights.

Rights: meaning individuals entitlements to freedom of choice and well – being.

Justice: looks at how benefits and burdens are distributed among people.

Example

Say a hospital has four people whose lives depend upon receiving organ transplants: a heart, lungs,
a kidney, and a liver. If a healthy person wanders into the hospital, his organs could be harvested to
save four lives at the expense of his one life. This would arguably produce the greatest good for the
greatest number. But few would consider it an acceptable course of action, let alone an ethical one.

In response to the above criticism Rule Utilitarianism has been devised.

 When trying to determine whether a particular action is ethical

 one is never supposed to ask whether that particular action will produce the greatest
amount of utility
 The correct question would be whether the action is required by the correct moral rules
that everyone should follow.

4
Theories of Ethics

Duty-based or Deontological ethics

Deontological (duty-based) ethics are concerned with what people do, not with the
consequences of their actions.

Immanuel Kantian proposed this duty-based ethics. Kant thought that it was possible to
develop a consistent moral system by using reason.
Under this form of ethics you can't justify an action by showing that it produced good
consequences, which is why it's sometimes called 'non-Consequentialist'.

The word 'deontological' comes from the Greek word deon, which means 'duty'.

Duty-based ethics teaches that some acts are right or wrong because of the sorts of things they
are, and people have a duty to act accordingly, regardless of the good or bad consequences
that may be produced.

Deontologists live in a universe of moral rules, such as:

 It is wrong to kill innocent people

 It is wrong to steal
 It is wrong to tell lies
 It is right to keep promises
Someone who follows Duty-based ethics should do the right thing, even if that produces more
harm than doing the wrong thing:

Right – based Ethics:

The concept of rights based ethics is that there are some rights, both positive and
negative, humans have.
These rights can be natural or conventional.
That is, natural rights are those that are moral while conventional are those created by
humans and reflect society's values.

Examples The right to life, The right to liberty, The right to pursue happiness, The right to a jury
trial, The right to a lawyer The right to freely practice a religion of choice, The right to express
ideas or opinions with freedom as an individual ,The right to work etc.

ETHICS OF CARE

Ethics of care differs from two dominant normative moral theories of the 18thand 19thcentury.
The first is deontology, best associated with Immanuel Kant. And the second utilitarianism,
attributed to Jeremy Bentham and improved upon by John Stuart Mill.

Promoter of feminist care ethics include 20thcentury theorists Carol Gilligan and Nel Noddings.

5
Theories of Ethics

Ethics of Care uses a relational and context-bound approach toward morality and decision
making. It holds that moral action centers on relationships and care or benevolence as a virtue

In this view, there is no contrast between reason and the emotions – as some emotions may be
reasonable and morally appropriate in guiding good decisions or actions.

Instead of asking the moral decision maker to be unbiased, the caring moral agent will consider
that one’s duty may be greater to those they have particular bonds with, or to others who are
powerless rather than powerful.

Example

As per the ethics of care theorist should a moral agent steal the required medicine he
cannot afford to buy to give to his very sick wife, or stick to the rule ‘do not steal’,
regardless of the circumstances?

A tricky dilemma to be sure as there are competing duties here (namely, a positive duty to
help those in need as well as a negative duty to avoid stealing).Arguably, the caring
person would place the relationship with one’s spouse above any relationship they may or
may not have with the pharmacist, and care or compassion or love would outweigh a rule
(or a law) in this case, leading to the conclusion that the right thing to do is to steal the
medicine.

Note: The Utilitarian may also claim a moral agent should steal the medicine because saving
the wife’s life is a better outcome than whatever negative consequences may result from
stealing.

Ethics of care has been influential in areas such as education, counselling, nursing and
medicine. Yet there have also been feminist criticisms. Some worry that linking women to the
trait of caring maintains a sexist stereotype and encourages women to continue to nurture
others, to their own detriment, and even while society fails to value carers as they ought. While
Noddings claims moral agents also need to care for themselves, this is so they are better able
to continue caring for others.

Integrating utility, rights, justice and caring

So far, the notes have outlined four main kinds of basic moral considerations:

1. Utilitarian standards - When we do not have the resources to attain everyone's objectives,
we are forced to consider the net social benefits and social costs consequent on the actions by
which we can attain these objectives.

6
Theories of Ethics

2. Standards of Rights - Moral reasoning of this type forces consideration of whether the
behavior respects the basic rights of the individuals involved and whether the behavior is
consistent with one's agreements and special duties.

3. Standards of justice - Indicate how benefits and burdens should be distributed among the
members of a group. When evaluating actions whose distributive effects differ this standard of
justice should be considered.

4. Standards of caring - Indicate the kind of care that is owed to those with whom we have
special concrete relationships. Standards of caring are essential when moral questions arise
that involve persons of relationships, especially those of dependency.

One simple strategy for ensuring that all four kinds of considerations are incorporated into one's
moral reasoning is to inquire systematically into the utility, rights, justice, and caring involved in
a given moral judgment. One might, for example, ask a series of questions about an action that
one is considering:

(a) Does the action, as far as possible, maximize social benefits and minimize social injuries?
(b) Is the action consistent with the moral rights of those whom it will affect?

(c) Will the action lead to a just distribution of benefits and burdens?

(d) Does the action exhibit appropriate care for the well-being of those who are closely related to
or dependent on oneself?

Unfortunately, there is not yet any comprehensive moral theory to show when one of these
considerations should take precedence.

Alternative to Moral Principles

Virtue Approach

 The virtue ethical theory judges a person by his/her character rather than by an action
that may deviate from his/her normal behavior.
 It takes the person’s morals, reputation, and motivation into account when rating an
unusual and irregular behavior that is considered unethical.

Example

There is a student who is very brilliant in his studies and has earned scholarships on various
levels, if he is caught stealing medicine or money. Then the cops can go easy on him giving
him a chance to explain the reason for the act of stealing and if the act is justified leave him
with a warning.

Here, the morals, reputation of the character is taken into account instead of plainly looking at
the act only.

7
Theories of Ethics

One weakness of virtue ethical theory is that it does not take into consideration a person’s
change in moral character.

Virtue ethics has been advocated by Plato, Aristotle, Socrates and Gandhiji.

 According to Aristotle virtue is acquired through education and training.

 Gandhiji advocated for virtues of practicing non-violence, being courageous and
speaking honestly. He also talked about seven deadly sins. These seven sins as per
Gandhiji are
1. Wealth without work,
2. Pleasure without conscience,
3. Science without humanity,
4. Knowledge without character,
5. Politics without principle,
6. Commerce without morality,
7. Worship without sacrifice

Teleological Ethical Theories

 The basic standards for our actions being morally right or wrong depends on the good
or evil generated
 It is basically concerned with the consequences of actions
 Utilitarianism is a type of Teleological theory.

Ethical egoism

 It holds that moral agents ought to act in their own self-interest

 Ethical egoism, focuses on what is in the company’s best interest and hence the most
debated topics amongst business ethics.
 Companies focusing solely on profit maximization seem thus to be acting in accordance
with ethical egoism.
 As per the Ethical Egosim theory the Ford Company in Ford and Pinto case acted
ethically.

Ethical relativism is the theory that holds that morality is relative to the norms of one's culture.

 That is, whether an action is right or wrong depends on the moral norms of the society in
which it is practiced.
 The same action may be morally right in one society but be morally wrong in another.
 Some claim that while the moral practices of societies may differ, the fundamental moral
principles underlying these practices do not.
 For example, in some societies, mercy killing is a common practice, ideology being
freeing the person from unbearable pain. However, such a practice would be
condemned in our society.