UNIT III.

Frameworks and Principles Behind Moral Dispositions

INTRODUCTION

Decisions concerning right and wrong actions permeate in our everyday life. Ethics is concerned
on all levels of life: acting properly as individuals, creating responsible groups, organizations,
institutions, and governments, and making our society as a whole more ethical. We are actually
doing it every day and this decision has something to do with our right or wrong actions, so,
ethics is concerned on all levels of life: acting properly as individuals, creating responsible
groups, organizations, institutions, and governments, and making our society as a whole more
ethical.

There are many systems of ethics, and numerous ways to think about right and wrong actions or
good and bad character. The field of ethics is traditionally divided into three areas:

1) meta ethics- which deals with the nature of the right or the good, as well as the nature and
justification of ethical claims

2) normative ethics- which deals with the standards and principles used to determine whether
something is right or good

3) applied ethics -which deals with the actual application of ethical principles to a particular
situation.

Ethical theories are often broadly divided into three types:

1) Agent-centered theories, which, unlike consequentialist and non-consequentialist theories, are

2) Consequentialist theories, which are primarily concerned with the ethical consequences of
particular actions; and

3) Non-consequentialist theories, which tend to of broadly concerned with the intentions of the
person making ethical decisions about particular actions.

Virtue Ethics

Virtue Ethics is an approach in ethics which emphasizes an individual's character as the key
element of ethical thinking, rather than rules about the acts themselves or their consequences.
Aristotle, with whom virtue Ethics is largely identified, categorized the virtues moral virtues
including as prudence, justice, fortitude and temperance and intellectual virtues including
"sophia" or theoretical wisdom, and "phronesis" or practical wisdom. He further argued that each
of the moral virtues was a golden mean, or desirable middle ground, between two undesirable
extremes.

Aristotle

Aristotle's theory of morality centers around his belief that people, as everything else in nature,
have a distinctive end to achieve and a function to fulfil. In his magnum opus, Nicomachaean
Ethics, he argues that every art and every inquiry, and similarly even action and pursuit, is
thought to aim at some good

Telos

Virtue ethics is a philosophy developed by Aristotle and other ancient Greeks. It is the quest to
understand and live a life of moral character.
People and all the creature need to be virtuous, but how?Aristotle said the having a virtue just
means doing the right thing, in a right time, and in a right way, in the right amount toward to
right people.It means that, nothing, all he wanted to say is there’s no need to be specific because
if you are a virtuous you know what to do all the time.

Who is Aristotle? Aristotle of Stagira (l. 384-322 BCE) was a Greek philosopher who pioneered
systematic, scientific examination in literally every area of human knowledge and was known, in
his time, as "the man who knew everything" and later simply as "The Philosopher”.

Telos - Aristotle accepted that all things have purposes, objectives, or ends which must be
accomplished to its benefit.In short telos talks about what is your purpose here in the world. Who
are you, what are you, how are you.

Telos is a term used by philosopher Aristotle to refer to the final cause of a natural organ or
entity, or of a work of human art.

Telos: The Golden Mean - it is the midpoint between too extremes.

Look at the picture, the golden mean is the middle of too extremes, in the middle of too much
and not enough. The balance between the deficiency and excess, for example the lazy in
deficiency, diligent in the mean and workaholic in excess, another example is boring, witty and
vulgar, quarrelsome, friendly and dating.

Virtue ethics St. Thomas Aquinas

Thomas Aquinas was born in Roccasecca, Italy between 1224 and 1226. At the point when he
kicked the bucket, he was consecrated as the benefactor holy person of educators, hence as a rule
being designated "The Universal Teacher." His two notable works of art are Summa Theologiae
and Summa Contra Gentiles. The two works of Aquinas on his comprehension of the Latin
philosophy.

There four types of law that oversee the universe as indicated by Aquinas.

1. Eternal Law
2. Divine Law
3. Human Law
4. Natural Law.

Eternal law is indistinguishable from the brain of God. It is everlasting however confused by the
human brain. Divine law is the law that originated from the disclosure of God to people written
in the Old and New Testaments. Human Law is the law that is formulated by a human
explanation as indicated by geological, social, and historical conditions.

Natural law

In philosophy Natural Law is the system of right or justice held to be common to all humans and
derived from nature rather than from the rules of society, or positive law.

But according to Thomas Aquinas .It is the law that administers everything in nature and the
establishment of pragmatic thinking of human law. Natural Law is one of the four types of law
that Aquinas indicated that oversee the universe. Aquinas wrote most extensively about natural
law. 

He stated, "the light of reason is placed by nature [and thus by God] in every man to guide him in
his acts." As a result, only humans, among God's other creations, live their lives using reason.
Natural law governs this.

He also stated that reason reveals particular natural laws that are good for humans such as self-
preservation, marriage and family, and the desire to know God. He taught, also enables humans
to understand things that are evil such as adultery, suicide, and lying.
The master principle of natural law, that is written by Aquinas, was that "good is to be done and
pursued and evil avoided." -Aquinas
For him, there is no specific natural law, divine fortune, but just pieces of it since it makes us
aware of how the universe was truly created and planned by God. Just like what he stated bad
must be avoided and good must be done.

Virtue Ethics: Natural Law

The Aquinas' moral theory rotates in the possibility of the "Natural Law.” According to Aquinas,
natural law is our basic understanding and willingness to act in certain ways, such as protecting
or securing the other's life, teaching students, maintaining opportunities, working for the good of
the entire community, worshiping God, and avoiding foolishness. We should apply these norms
with a constant understanding of our desire to grow as individuals and the fact that we also have
carnal desires that we should control.

But the questions is “how might we become virtuous according to St. Thomas Aquinas?”

The usual meaning of human nature is to be a rational, free, social, and physical being. We need
to continually look for what will benefit us. Aquinas included that it is wrong to look for
something that can hinder our ability to grow as individuals. We should always consider our
basic needs and understand the natural law to determine what is good and bad for us. To
understand more the cornerstones of Aquinas' virtue ethics, we must also be familiar with the
three moral principles that can be  found in natural law. Everyone who has completed primary
education can understand the three general qualities that govern or manage our ethical
knowledge. He claimed that these qualities are relevantly consistent in all circumstances.

Natural Law: Three Universal Values

Here are the three universal moral principles as indicated by Aquinas:

First is, all-inclusive standards are consistent with each individual who has arrived at the time of
reason as a general rule.

This general rule means that the rule of our personality is unreasonable contradiction, But the
model for the main good standard is you should consistently do great and keep away from evil.

Second is, all-inclusive rules that with certain reflections can be reached from the main
standards. Its model is, we ought to reimburse the beneficial things done to us.

According to this model, we should pay back the good things that have been done for us. We
can't really make up for our parents' sacrifices, so we should continually value and cherish them.
In conclusion, common rules are not easily understood by people, and so an educated teacher
must help to explain them. The finest example for this is that we should be helpful to those who
are unfortunate. We should now go on to another argument made by Thomas Aquinas in his
moral theory.

He was asking how we can acquire happiness, and his response was that we can do so after
realizing and achieving our ultimate goal using a different kinds of strategies. He stated that we
normally have numerous life goals, but that there is also an extreme goal, which is happiness
itself.

The third and definitive ultimate objective is a finish all things considered and won't be utilized
as a way to some further closures.

For example , secondary school students put a lot of effort into passing their classes. Obtaining
passing grades is essential to preparing for school. As soon as in school, studies goal is to
accumulate as much knowledge as they can in order to pass exams and graduate on time.

An excellent academic foundation also will help in finding a job in a respectable field. A great
job implies stability and competitive salary. Riches give someone the impression that they have
the means to engage in activities that will satisfy them. In the example, we can see that some of
the goals are mentioned, but none of them served as the end goal for the activity; rather, they
were used to develop another goal until one reached the very last and ultimate goal, which is to
be happy.

Is it possible to have many goals in total? No is the right answer. Given that a clear ultimate goal
is something we want for its own wellbeing and involves completely satisfying all of one's
desires, happiness is the only extreme ultimate goal for Aquinas.

Summa Theologiae, Thomas Aquinas characterized righteousness as a "propensity" that caused

He introduced numerous sorts of ethics in his book that characterize human goodness;
notwithstanding, he recognized four explicit temperance that arranges us to carry on with
ethically great lives. He called this the Cardinal Virtues. These are prudence, temperance,
courage, and justice.

Cardinal Virtues

The cardinal virtues are four virtues of mind and character in both classical philosophy and
Christian theology.

1. Prudence - Reasonability is the righteousness of scholarly fitness or capacity to do certain

For instance, Aria needs to go to the sleep gathering of her cousin yet she has a test the
following day. She begins to figure out how she will have the option to go to the sleeping
party but then breeze through her test the following day. She thought of cheating yet it isn't
right. She likewise thought of reading for not many hours and heading off to the sleeping
party with her books and notes. She picked the subsequent choice and arranged her timetable
in like manner.

2. Temperance- Restraint is the temperance of refining our methods of making the most of
our real wants. It guides us to follow a control like balance, accommodation, quietude,
forbearance, and celibacy.
 For instance, swearing off drinking liquor, eating exorbitantly, engaging in sexual relations,
and living extravagantly is temperate for Aquinas. Being modest, tame, and mercy are
additionally viewed as ethical on the grounds that these show control of one's passionate
responses.

3. Courage - is the virtue of limiting feelings of trepidation while figuring out how to bear
preposterous hunger for wild activities. Fearlessness realizes when to battle and when to
fly. In the event that you have fearlessness, you likewise have continuance, certainty,
heavenliness, persistence, and diligence.

For instance, facing a challenge to go after that position you are sitting tight for quite a long
time is a type of mental fortitude yet skydiving without legitimate hardware for the
adrenaline surge is a type of foolishness.

4. Justice- is centered on going people to productive members of society. Equity is the

This righteousness administers our relationship with others not at all like different excellences
referenced. The reason for this prudence is to cause individuals to turn out to be productive
members of society. The two kinds of equity are commutative and distributive. Commutative is
justice between common individual residents. While distributive is equity as the aggregate
activities of the individuals from the state.

Two kinds of Equity

Kant and rights theories

Immanuel Kant is a German Philosopher (1724-1804) whose way of thinking on the goodwill
and categorical imperative is established in utilizing an individual's capacity to reason.

Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) is the central figure in modern philosophy. He synthesized early
modern rationalism and empiricism, set the terms for much of nineteenth and twentieth century
philosophy, and continues to exercise a significant influence today in metaphysics, epistemology,
ethics, political philosophy, aesthetics, and other fields. The fundamental idea of Kant’s “critical
philosophy” – especially in his three Critiques: the Critique of Pure Reason (1781, 1787),
the Critique of Practical Reason (1788), and the Critique of the Power of Judgment (1790) – is
human autonomy. He argues that the human understanding is the source of the general laws of
nature that structure all our experience; and that human reason gives itself the moral law, which
is our basis for belief in God, freedom, and immortality. Therefore, scientific knowledge,
morality, and religious belief are mutually consistent and secure because they all rest on the same
foundation of human autonomy, which is also the final end of nature according to the teleological
worldview of reflecting judgment that Kant introduces to unify the theoretical and practical parts
of his philosophical system.

Kant accepts that the feeling of profound quality of people doesn't really originate from an
incomparable power of God. So as to decide directly from wrong, we need to utilize reason. As
indicated by him, profound quality and religion ought to be isolated on the grounds that people
have various religions, that we will have various answers and reasons for our ethical quality.

Deontologist Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) believed that we should do our duty purely out of
good will, not because of rewards or punishment or other consequences.
A person of good will can be depended on to do what is right, even when other motives are
absent. Good will is related to proper self-esteem.

For Kant, the development of good will and proper self-esteem is the only way to ensure that we
will consistently do our duty. A person of good will can be counted on to do what is right
independently of external pressures or emotions. An action that is done out of conformity to
cultural or peer norms, or even out of sympathy or because one enjoys helping others, may be
praiseworthy but it has no moral value.

For example, a college student decides to volunteer helping homeless people living on the street
because he feels sympathy toward them and because it makes him feel good to know his fellow
students will see him as a kind and charitable person. But when the homeless people show little
gratitude and a few even reject his offer of help, he may become angry or offended and quit. For
Kant the good will is to act from duty rather than act in a way that's consistent with duty.

For instance, Kant gives an example of a merchant who decides not to cheat on his costumers.
The merchant reasons that if he cheats on his customers, they'll eventually find out and decide no
to shop in his store. In this case, the merchant isn't acting from duty not to lie, but rather he's
acting in a way that's consistent with it. If the merchant reasons "Lying is wrong regardless of the
outcome, so I won't lie to my customers" he would act from duty. Acting from duty requires that
you act on the basis of your duty rather than contingent benefits or conveniences associated with
the duty. The notion of good will is at the heart of Kant's ethics.

Categorical Imperatives

The idea of categorical imperatives was first introduced by Immanuel Kant, a philosopher from
the 1700s. Kant argues that the categorical imperative is a moral principle that is absolute
meaning that it should be followed by all rational beings and that following it should be seen as a
goal in itself.

Kant is most famous for his ideas on a person's unconditional moral obligation, known as the
categorical imperative. Kant defines categorical imperatives as commands or moral laws all
persons must follow, regardless of their desires or extenuating circumstances. As morals, these
imperatives are binding on everyone. The categorical imperative is one of the best-known moral
principles to ever be formulated, and can be useful in a variety of contexts, so it’s important to
understand it

The categorical imperative is a moral principle which denotes that you should “act only in
accordance with that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it become a
universal law” meaning that you should act a certain way only if you’re willing to have everyone
else act the same way too.

For example, you should not make a promise that you intend to break later, unless you’re willing
to have everyone else do the same. For Kant there was only one categorical imperative in the
moral realm, which he formulated in two ways, the formula of Universal principle and the
formula of humanity.

The first formulation, known as The Formula of Universal Law (FUL)- “Act only in accordance
with that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it become a universal law”.

Maxim is a personal rule or a general principle that underlies a particular action. As rational
beings, we don’t just act randomly; we devise certain rules that tell us what to do in different
circumstances. A complete maxim will include three pieces: the action, the circumstances under
which we do that action, and the purpose behind that action.

For example, the maxim explaining why you’re reading this book, if it’s an assigned text, it
might be, “I will read all books assigned for class because I want to succeed in class.”

But in different principles could underlie the same action. For example, you might be reading
this book simply to help you understand the topic, in which case your principle might be, “When
I am confused about a topic, I will read an accessible text to improve my understanding.” The
important point is that we are guided by general principles that we give to ourselves, that tell us
what we’ll do in certain circumstances.

According to Kant, a man must act just as indicated by the adage which you can simultaneously
will that it should turn into an all-inclusive law without logical inconsistency.

For example, imagine you need money to pay off some debts. You go to a friend to borrow the
money and tell this friend that you will pay him back. You know you won’t be able to pay your
friend back, but you promise him nonetheless. You are making a false promise. Is this
permissible? To test, we first look at the maxim underlying the action, something like, “If I need
something, I’ll make a false promise in order to get what I need.” What would happen if
everyone were to make false promises every time they needed something? False promises would
be rampant, so rampant that promises would become meaningless; they would just be empty
words.

First formulation is expressed, its core meaning is that ethical rules should be universal and that
if any rule can’t be universalized, it shouldn’t be followed. These appeals to our sense that all
people deserve equal moral consideration and we shouldn’t make special exceptions for
ourselves or others.

The second formulation, known as The Formula of Humanity as End in Itself (FH)- “Act so that
you use humanity, as much in your own person as in the person of every other, always at the
same time as end and never merely as means”.

That is, we shouldn’t treat people merely as means to ends; we should treat them as ends,
including ourselves. To treat someone merely as a means is to not give the person the proper
respect—to fail to treat the person with dignity, to treat the person as a thing.

For example, you see someone who is poor and hungry, his end at that point might be to get
food. If you give him food or money to buy food, you are making it your end to feed him. Since
you should treat people as ends, then that means you should sometimes provide people with help.

Second formulation speaks to the idea that we are beings with intrinsic value and with dignity,
and to use people as if they are objects or tools is deeply immoral.

Nature of Theory Distributions

Distribution theory, in economics, the systematic attempt to account for the sharing of the
national income among the owners of the factors of production land, labor, and capital.
Traditionally, economists have studied how the costs of these factors and the size of their return.
rent, wages, and profits are fixed.

Egalitarian Theory - is a philosophy based on equality, namely that all people are equal and
deserve equal treatment in all things. As an idea, it can be looked at in terms of its implications
for individuals in both an economic and legal capacity.

Alienation - refers to the estrangement, division, or distancing of people from each other, from
what is important and meaningful to them, or from their own sense of self.
  Alienation has been primarily described in two ways: economic alienation, as articulated
by Karl Max, or social alienation, as described by Émile Durkheim with his concept of
anomie.
 Both economic and social alienation come to bear in urban environments as cities
exacerbate the economic pressures associated with capitalism and create environments in
which it is more difficult to attach oneself to a social structure.
 Social alienation was famously described by French sociologist Émile Durkheim in the
late nineteenth century with his concept of anomie.
 Anomie describes a lack of social norms, or the breakdown of social bonds between an
individual and his community ties, resulting in the fragmentation of social identity.

Taxation- is a term for when a taxing authority, usually a government, levies or imposes a
financial obligation on its citizens or residents. 

Taxation is a term for when a taxing authority, usually a government, levies or imposes a
financial obligation on its citizens or residents. Paying taxes to governments or officials has been
a mainstay of civilization since ancient times.

The term "taxation" applies to all types of involuntary levies, from income to capital gains to
estate taxes. Though taxation can be a noun or verb, it is usually referred to as an act; the
resulting revenue is usually called "taxes."

ETHICS OF TAX COLLECTION

In the Western world the proportion of the economy controlled by the state has grown
enormously over the last century, and pressures on the state are set to rise as people live longer,
meaning that tax will continue to rise for the great majority of the population. What are the rights
and wrongs of asking so many people to pay so much?

To answer this we can ask several questions, including how much tax should be collected in
total, which objectives of taxation are legitimate, and how individuals should conduct themselves
as taxpayers. We will address these questions by using arguments from political philosophy, and
the following three approaches to ethics:

•Utilitarianism- which tells us to aim for the greatest total happiness across the population.

•Deontology- which bases ethics on the idea of duty.

• Virtue ethics- which focus on the virtues we should have, and on what constitutes a virtuous
life.