A Practical Guide to Ethics for Everyday Life E-Book

Dave Robinson

• Herausgeber: Icon Books
• Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
• Serie: Practical Guide Series
• Sprache: Englisch
• Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2012

Seitenzahl: 207

Beschreibung

Ethical philosophy has a long and distinguished history, but how can you apply it to your life? This Practical Guide explores the alternative ethical philosophies and how we can all use these to aid us with everyday dilemmas. Introducing Ethics for Everyday Life provides advice on whether human beings really are selfish and greedy, why you might want to be a good person, and how to pick an ethical philosophy that works for you. Free of jargon but full of straightforward advice, case studies and step-by-step instructions, this is the perfect concise introduction to using ethics to help you make decisions.

Leseprobe

First published in the UK in 2012

by Icon Books Ltd,

Omnibus Business Centre,

39–41 North Road,

London N7 9DP

email: [email protected]

www.iconbooks.co.uk

This electronic edition published

in the UK in 2012 by Icon Books Ltd

Printed edition sold in the UK,

Europe, South Africa and Asia

by Faber & Faber Ltd,

Bloomsbury House,

74–77 Great Russell Street,

London WC1B 3DA or their agents

Printed edition distributed

in the UK, Europe, South Africa

and Asia by TBS Ltd,

TBS Distribution Centre,

Colchester Road, Frating Green,

Colchester CO7 7DW

Printed edition published

in Australia in 2012 by

Allen & Unwin Pty Ltd,

PO Box 8500, 83 Alexander Street,

Crows Nest, NSW 2065

Printed edition distributed in Canada

by Penguin Books Canada,

90 Eglinton Avenue East, Suite 700,

Toronto, Ontario M4P 2Y3

Printed edition published in

the USA in 2012 by Totem Books

Inquiries to: Icon Books Ltd,

Omnibus Business Centre,

39–41 North Road,

London N7 9DP, UK

Printed edition distributed

to the trade in the USA by Consortium

Book Sales and Distribution

The Keg House, 34 Thirteenth

Avenue NE, Suite 101,

Minneapolis, MN 55413-1007

ISBN: 978-184831-371-2 (ePub format)

ISBN: 978-184831-372-9 (Adobe eBook format)

Text copyright © 2012 Dave Robinson

The author has asserted his moral rights.

No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, or by any means, without prior permission in writing from the publisher.

Typeset in Avenir by Marie Doherty

About the author

Dave Robinson taught philosophy for many years. He has also written quite a lot of books about individual philosophers and philosophical subjects, including the graphic guides Introducing Ethics and Introducing Philosophy (both published by Icon). These days he spends most of his time walking, growing vegetables, painting landscapes and arguing with his friends. He is learning to play the ukulele in the privacy of his garden­ shed. He tries to follow some of the advice in this book.

Contents

Title page

Copyright

About the author

Introduction: asking questions

1. Moral philosophy: a very rough history

2. Moral experts

3. Religion and morality

4. Human nature

5. Choice and responsibility

6. Kant’s maxims

7. Consequences

8. Good people

9. Friendship

10. Romantic love

11. Being married

12. Being a parent

13. Growing up

14. Business

15. Citizens or consumers?

16. The good environmentalist

17. Fooling ourselves

18. Change

19. Meaning? What meaning?

Bibliography

Introduction: asking questions

Drifting or thinking?

Most of us drift through life without asking difficult questions. We’re not very interested in what knowledge is, or about what is real, or whether you can ever find the answers to moral problems. But philosophers are restless. They can’t stop asking questions, even though the answers are often hard to find. They examine very odd problems like ‘What is reality?’ or ‘What is a good person?’ They are like children in a way – impossibly curious, sometimes about what seems totally obvious. (‘What is real?’ ‘Are you having a laugh?’)

The first great philosopher was Socrates, and he insisted that everyone had to think for themselves. He said it’s important not to believe everything that other people tell you. Life is usually easier if you go along with everybody else, but it’s lazy. We all need to think for ourselves. It’s one of the things that makes us fully human. Socrates asked awkward questions and was eventually killed for voicing his opinions. Everyone now admires him for sticking to his beliefs. So part of being a good person means not ‘obeying the rules’ but ‘thinking for yourself’.

Do philosophers have the answers?

Nobody is quite sure what philosophy is these days, especially philosophers. Some say it tries to answer the questions that science has given up on. What are these questions that baffle science?

A scientist can tell you what ‘stem cell research’ means and how it might help sick people, but he can’t tell you, for sure, whether it’s right or wrong. A philosopher can examine a moral problem like this in detail and make suggestions. But, at the end of the day, she can’t tell you the ‘moral truth’ either.

You have to decide for yourself whether stem cell research is right or wrong, in your opinion. Notice those last three words. No one can prove that stem cell research is good or bad. You can only ever have opinions.

That doesn’t mean we can’t make very confident guesses or have strong moral views. It’s just that philosophers will always want to know how you know. Some of us will say that we rely on something we call our ‘conscience’ – but what’s that? Some rely on others – parents, ‘experts’, or the man next door. Some of us may have firm moral views already, because we’ve been taught them in church or at the mosque. But philosophers aren’t happy with ‘Someone told me’ or ‘I read it in the Great Book’. They want reasons, evidence, a logical argument.

Changing morality

Morality gets passed down from generation to generation without being questioned much. But it can change. At one time most people thought that there was nothing wrong in watching a bear being ripped to pieces by a pack of dogs. It made a splendid day out for all the family. Nowadays we’re more alarmed and distressed by needless cruelty to animals and we think that bear-baiting was wrong. A lot of us now think that fox hunting is probably cruel as well. And most people no longer think that homosexuality is wicked. It looks as if society has progressed. But we shouldn’t be too smug. Human beings aren’t necessarily getting nicer, year on year. We still do bad things. And new moral problems keep surfacing that we don’t know how to deal with. Should we allow the government to lock people up without trial, in case they are terrorists? Should we allow them to torture suspects to find out more information?

Sometimes wrong and always wrong

So why do moral beliefs change like this? Where do they come from in the first place? The easy answer to that one is ‘society’. Societies can be very different. They can change. The moral beliefs of medieval Japan are very different from those of modern America. Slavery was quite acceptable 200 years ago. So was slavery right then and wrong now, or has it always been wrong? Is there always one obviously right thing to do, regardless of when or where you live?

Some philosophers called absolutists would say yes, slavery has always been wrong, regardless of what people once believed. Relativists say no, moral beliefs are always relative – slavery was ‘right’ at one time but now it’s ‘wrong’.

And people still disagree about some moral issues. Everyone agrees that attacking a poor old woman and stealing her pension is wrong. No one would argue about that. But people still debate other more complex problems like abortion and animal experiments, and it’s sometimes hard for us to know who to agree with. A lot of moral problems can be very difficult to puzzle out.

The uses of philosophy

This is where moral philosophy can be very useful. It won’t tell you what to think. It won’t give you a set of rules to be obeyed at all times, without question. But it will help you to puzzle things out. Philosophy examines what lies behind our moral judgements. It attempts to explain what a ‘good person’ is like.

Using the ideas of moral philosophy and practical, real-life situations, this book will help you to make up your mind about the moral problems you’re likely to face in everyday life. Philosophy can’t guarantee that you will always make the correct ethical decision, but it will give you a better understanding of how and why you decided as you did.

Here are a few moral questions (Q) to get you started, along with some responses (R). (N.B. These are ‘responses’ and not ‘answers’, because moral statements are firm beliefs, reinforced with evidence and convincing arguments. There are no rigid answers.)

At one time, no one thought there was anything wrong with slavery. Now we think it’s wrong. Why do we? Why did slave owners think it was OK?

Slavery is and always was wrong. (IMHO, as they say on Facebook – in my humble opinion.) How can a human being ever be someone else’s ‘property’? Every individual has the right to be free and treated with dignity. Slave owners themselves didn’t like to think too much about the ethics of slavery. They came up with ridiculous excuses to justify what they were doing. Aristotle said that slaves were slaves ‘by nature’, whatever that means.

Are there any moral rules that you think are always non-negotiable and compulsory? What are they?

Torture of any kind is always wrong and never justified (IMHO). Being cruel to children is too. You can probably think of a few more.

What would you need to do before you said, ‘Stem cell research is wicked’?

Whatever moral issue you feel strongly about, like stem cell research, make sure that you know all the facts first, and think hard about it. Don’t just say, ‘It’s wrong because it’s wrong’.

Which of these moral issues do you feel most strongly about? (Mark them from 1 to 10.)

Abortion

Animal rights

Bankers’ greed

Global warming

Euthanasia

This ranking of moral issues is your own. It might tell you some interesting things about your personal moral beliefs.

Where do you think your moral beliefs come from? Your parents? Your friends? TV and newspapers? Your conscience? Somewhere else?

Moral beliefs come from all over the place. Everyone is influenced by different things. Your parents tell you the basics – don’t lie, steal or be cruel. Newspapers and TV are usually good sources of information but may be suspect when it comes to moral pronouncements. At the end of the day, you have to think for yourself and then decide.

An ancient tribe in New Guinea practises cannibalism enthusiastically. They believe that when they eat a grandfather, or an enemy slain in battle, they are also ingesting the strength, wisdom and courage of these people. Should we intervene and stop them?

Do we stop other people’s cultural practices? Personally I can’t see anything wrong about eating a grandfather who died of natural causes, although I wouldn’t want to do it myself. I’m less happy about eating defeated enemies. I might try to encourage this tribe to settle boundary disputes in a less aggressive way. As a sophisticated modern European who has read some anthropology and sociology, I would always be reluctant to impose my own morality and etiquette onto others. So in this case I’m a relativist. It’s their morality, not mine. But if they also went in for compulsory widow-burning, then I would try to stop them. Burning people against their will just seems wrong to me – always. So in that instance I’m an absolutist. Who said morality was easy?

I met Matt down at the pub and he was furious. What was the problem? Apparently his employer had suggested that all his employees donate 2 per cent of their wages to a Third World charity. Matt thinks he’s worked hard all week and deserves all of his pay. Why should he give £6 a week to help people he’s never even met? What has any of this got to do with him? Charity begins at home, he says. Whose side are you on? Matt’s? Or his employer’s?

The philosopher Peter Singer (b. 1946) says that if Matt saw a starving child lying on the pavement outside the pub, then he’d feel morally obliged to give him money for a meal and tell the authorities about him. But there are thousands of starving children in Africa and elsewhere. Just because Matt can’t see them doesn’t mean he shouldn’t have to think about helping them. Does geographical distance make them less worthy of help?

And it’s not as if £6 is a huge amount out of £300. What Matt seems to be objecting to more is his loss of autonomy – his own freedom to choose, and he’s right that no one should be forced to donate money to charity. Matt has to make a personal decision.

1. Moral philosophy: a very rough history

At the very beginning

So when did moral philosophy begin? Codes of behaviour have always existed, ever since human beings started living together to hunt, forage, grow crops and keep domestic animals. Tribal chiefs and priests insisted that individuals abstained from anti-social activities like murder and theft. These things are called ‘anti-social’ because no society can get off the ground if they are widespread. It’s impossible to keep tribes, cities or societies intact if there’s a moral free-for-all.

So, on the whole, people carried on believing what their parents believed. Everyone frowned on unorthodox views or unusual behaviour. Nothing much changed. There was no such thing as ‘modern’. You used the same tools, built the same huts and pyramids, went through the usual ‘reaching puberty’ rituals, married, had kids, taught them what you’d been taught, and so it went on for thousands of years. Technology changed – flint tools got replaced by bronze and then iron ones – but most people still distrusted ethical or political innovation. Anyone who challenged orthodox moral or religious beliefs got laughed at or severely punished. Morality, religion and politics were all interwoven into one unavoidable system. No one ever thought to ask where moral rules came from or why they had to be obeyed. They were usually just too tired or frightened.

The Greeks: thinking new thoughts

Then the ancient Greeks arrived. To begin with, they were warrior tribes who fought each other and laid siege to cities. They admired courage and military heroes, celebrated in the works of Homer such as the Iliad and the Odyssey. But then one lot of Greeks, the citizens of Athens, became more modern, more like us. Athens was unusual in that it began to be ruled by direct democracy, which meant that all adult males were voters and members of the government. Slaves did the hard work like farming, mining, metal-working, making pots and furniture, writing letters and teaching children, so Athenian citizens had lots of free time on their hands. They went to religious festivals, plays and athletic competitions, and gave dinner parties.

All of this leisure also meant that some individuals had the time and opportunity to think for themselves instead of just going along with tradition. Greek gods and goddesses were venerated and feared but often behaved quite badly, punishing human beings out of sexual jealousy, for instance. So Athenians couldn’t look to their religion for moral instruction. This meant that they started to ask strange questions about morality and other things like mathematics, science, astronomy and politics. And it’s this that makes them more like us. They asked questions about the rest of the world and the universe, as well as about their own lives.

The first really famous Athenian moral philosopher was Socrates (469–399 BC). He was poor but proud. He seems to have made a living as a stonemason and he always refused to charge for philosophical advice. He was a very charismatic character who attracted many young followers. One of them was Plato, who wrote down everything we know about him. Socrates insisted that we must always argue and debate with each other – that way we usually find that we don’t really know what we’ve been talking about! And he was a rather odd sort of ‘guru’ because he always insisted that he knew nothing himself. He thought that you should constantly examine your prejudices, beliefs, worries and anxieties. ‘The unexamined life is not worth living’, he said.

Socrates is right, of course. We are all driven by motives, feelings and prejudices that we rarely question. Modern Westerners like us still tend to believe that the consumption and ownership of ‘things’ will make us happier. It’s probably a wrong belief. We all have ideas that are ‘manufactured’ by others whose interests have more to do with their profit than our well-being. Our modern world is changing fast, and we have to adapt to it, get used to new gadgets, vocabulary, ideas, needs and wants – at speed. Socrates would say that we should take time out to examine our beliefs. What are the things that are really important to us?

The philosophy of ethics was begun by this snub-nosed, hen-pecked old Athenian who always insisted that we’re more ignorant than we realize – especially about behaving well.

Knowing and choosing

Unfortunately Socrates concluded that behaving morally came from knowing what is ‘good’ – which makes wickedness just a kind of ignorance. The difference between the good man and the villain is that the good one is more informed. But what’s wrong with this idea? Look at the example below.

The Kray brothers set up extensive protection rackets, which they ran with ruthless efficiency. They injured people and murdered them. They did this because they were ignorant of the moral rules forbidding extortion and violence. They were wicked because they were stupid.

This isn’t right, is it? Socrates seems to have got something badly wrong here. The Krays knew what they did was wrong, all right. They weren’t ignorant or stupid, just bad. So it looks as if being moral involves choosing to do good things as well as knowing what they are.

Freedom and choice

Being a good person in our modern world isn’t easy. We don’t live in small city states like Athens. Most of us live in a ‘liberal’ democracy.

Liberalism is a way of thinking about governments and individual citizens. It says that governments are limited in what they can do. They can pass laws to protect our freedom and property, but they can’t force us to be ‘good’ people. Citizens are ‘free’ because governments can’t interfere with our private lives.

Liberals assume that human beings are mostly selfish anyway – interested only in their own wealth and happiness. This is partly because we live in a capitalist society or ‘market’ now, where everyone is competing against everyone else. It’s like a race – we all begin equally, the brightest and most energetic do best and the stupid and lazy do worst. That’s what life is all about. So it’s fair. What do you think about that?

Liberalism and capitalism have both been very successful, especially in the developed world. We’re all wealthier now and we’re relatively free. We can choose. But liberalism has no game-plan, except for more of the same – bigger supermarkets and more ‘choice’ for everyone. Nowadays we all live private lives and have little sense of community any more. Many of us don’t even know who our immediate neighbours are. We shut the front door, have our tea and then watch TV and computer screens. We’re ‘atomized’ – individuals with no real sense of ‘belonging’ to anything other than our own immediate families.

We also expect instant access to those things we desire. We define ourselves by what we own. Advertisements create a nagging sense of inadequacy in us that we attempt, unsuccessfully, to relieve by shopping. We’ve lost any sense of belonging to anything ‘bigger’ than ourselves. Only a few of us have firm religious beliefs. We no longer dream of a better, more progressive society. All this choice and freedom only makes us feel lonelier and more isolated.

We’re uncertain nowadays about what we mean when we talk about a ‘good person’, and this is a problem, because being moral is mostly about how to live with other people­. No one can sit in front of the TV being ‘good’ on their own.

The Greek philosophers thought that living with other people is what ultimately makes us truly human. Aristotle (384–322 BCE) said that anyone who lived without a community was either an ‘angel’ or a ‘beast’ – a saint or an incomplete human being.

So what have these ancient Greeks taught us? Think for yourself. Don’t just accept the ideas and opinions of others. Examine what they say and engage them in friendly argument. Socrates and Plato were both critical of their own society and government, and we should be too. So don’t passively accept what politicians tell you. One obvious thing we can do is to try to help our own small community of individuals communicate with each other. The more people you talk to, the more you can evaluate and develop your own ideas. Being a good local citizen usually also makes you a happier person and, with luck, a wiser one too.

Think for yourself. Try to find out before you judge.

2. Moral experts

The advisers

There are many people who are happy to tell you how to be ‘a good person’. Sometimes they mean morally good, but usually they’re talking about being a ‘successful’ person. Some of them are very helpful. Life coaches, gurus, therapists, counsellors, advisers, priests, philosophers, writers, psychic mediums, psychiatrists and your Uncle Harry will all let you know where you’ve gone wrong and tell you how to get back on track.

These experts on life may be worth listening to. There is a problem, though. We know there are experts on car mechanics who can fix cars. But are there really experts on life and how to live it?

Have you ever sought advice from an ‘expert’ in life’s problems? Were they helpful? How were they helpful? What advice did they give you that was useful? Was it only useful for you, or could it be useful for everybody?

There are experts in psychology, in relationship problems, in law, in employment, in life’s problems. But there can’t really be experts on morality. A priest or a counsellor can advise you, but in the end you are the only one who can make the decision.

Are some people better at making moral decisions than others? Why do you think they are? What do they have that the rest of us don’t? (More experience of the world? More academic qualifications? A religious role in society? Other reasons?)

When you’re young, it’s probably OK to ask for moral advice from adults who have had more experience of life. If you followed their advice, no one would blame you. When you’re an adult, though, you can ask for advice, but only you can decide to ignore or follow it.

One philosopher who thought that some people were more knowledgeable than others was Plato (c. 428–347 BCE). He was the first truly systematic philosopher. He originally wanted to be a politician, but listening to Socrates changed all that. He eventually founded the Academy where he taught philosophy to young Athenians. His most famous work is The Republic, which begins with accounts of Socrates and his debates and ends with Plato’s own description of a perfect society ruled by moral ‘experts’. He also had some very strange ideas about what ‘knowledge’ is.

Like many Greek thinkers, Plato was in love with mathematics: geometric patterns and numbers. Mathematics is always the same and always true. 2+2 will always be 4. For ever and ever. It’s eternally true, permanent, reliable and unchanging. And mathematics is somehow ‘outside’ of our world of continuous change and decay. So Plato thought that real knowledge had to be like this – immune from change and always true. Somewhere, along with mathematics, were all the ideal truths, he thought. The table I’m writing at is fine, but it won’t last for ever, and so it’s a second-rate copy of an ‘ideal table’ that’s as true and permanent as numbers. Yes. I know it sounds odd. That’s because it is.

Perfect rulers

Plato thought that this knowledge of ‘perfect things’ could only ever be accessed by a gifted few. They had a special kind of ‘inner eye’ that could ‘see’ numbers and the perfect templates of the ‘copies’ we see in our inferior material­ world. Holding all this system together was one big glowing idea – ‘The Good’. Once you’d seen that, then you would be morally infallible. You’d always know what was the best thing to do, in all circumstances. This mental and spiritual gift would then promote you to the post of a ruler ‘Guardian’.