Moral Theoretical Terms: A Basic Overview
Common terminology in moral theory.
This guide to moral theoretical terms was prepared for a course called "Philosophy of Peace" which I taught at Queen's University in 2001. This document can be used for introduction to ethics purposes by activists, or by instructors in courses, especially where only a basic treatment of ethics is called for. Goes with "Overview of Moral Theories".
Note: If a term appears in italics, it is explained in a separate entry in this overview.
Consequentialism
This term refers to the set of theories that only consequences
of actions matter in deciding right and wrong, not the
intrinsic nature of actions. So theft, for example, is morally
wrong on this view due to what results from it, not its
intrinsic nature. Note, however, that
nonconsequentialist may also consider the value of
consequences, only for the latter thinkers, outcomes cannot be
the sole guiding consideration. Kant, however is a
rigorist, or held to certain duties no matter the
consequences. See Kantianism.
Utilitarianism
The view that we ought to realize the greatest good for the
greatest number. It considers only good consequences to be of
value (different kinds of values are considered, such as
welfare, desire-satisfaction, etc.), and essentially tries to
maximize what is of value, and minimize what is of disvalue
(i.e., what is bad).
Ethical Egoism
In general, the view that we always ought to act in, and
possibly maximize, our self-interest. "Enlightened egoism"
claims that it is in our self-interest to serve others, as well
as ourselves (see Contractarianism, and Ethical
Particularism).
Ethical Particularism
The theory that one may act in favour of one's own particular
group, such as one's country, school, church, relgion,
political party, etc., without equally respecting groups
different than one's own. It is, in a sense, a corporate
version of Ethical Egoism.
Deontology
This word literally means "the science of duty," and refers to
that cluster of theories which emphasizes rights and duties,
especially ones that hold in spite of some or all consequences
of observing them. Contrast with Consequentialism.
Kantianism
The tradition stemming from Immanuel Kant's writings. Kant
believed that all rational beings have a special dignity
because they are rational, and that we always ought to treat
such beings as ends in themselves, and not as a means only (we
should respect all people, and not merely use them
manipulatively). He also said that we ought to follow
principles of action which we can universalize, or conceivably
require everyone to follow, so that the agent who universalizes
a rule does not end up contradicting himself or herself as to
what one ought to do. Kant held we must never lie, cheat,
steal, break a promise, kill others, commit suicide or
adultery.
Prima Facie Duties
Prima facie means 'On the face of it,' or literally 'at first
blush.' A prima facie duty appears to be a duty in general, but
in specific circumstances, it might not turn out to be our duty
after all (e.g., we cannot always keep our promises in
emergencies due to a conflict of prima facie duties). W. D.
Ross, a quasi-Kantian, holds a theory of prima facie duties,
including beneficence, nonmaleficence, promise-keeping,
generosity, reparation, gratitude, just treatment, and
self-improvement. He advocates deciding conflicts of prima
facie duties on the basis of "intuition." Ross, unlike Kant,
does not advocate observing certain duties no matter the
consequences, but if there is no conflict of duties, then
prima facie duties do indeed become absolute duties. Some
critics reduce Ross' view to a form of consequentialism, where
prima facie duties are justified, and, if necessary, mediated,
with reference to consequences.
Contractarianism
This theory claims that we all abide by an unwritten social
contract: an agreement to be "moral" because it is (a) in
everyone's self-interest that everyone treat each other that
way (Thomas Hobbes), or (b) an expression of natural human
compassion (Jean-Jacques Rousseau).
Revised Natural Law Theory
A traditional Roman Catholic moral theory rooted in the
teachings of St. Thomas Aquinas. Many "basic human goods" such
as theoretical knowledge, religion, practical reasonableness,
friendship, play, aesthetic appreciation, life and health are
held to have intrinsic value. This absolutist doctrine states
that we must never act against a human good, but tries to
justify killing in self-defence-and other things that are
apparent violations of the goods-using the Principle of
Double-Effect.
Ethical Relativism
The nihilistic theory that there are no universal standards of
morality, and that moral terms such as good and bad, etc., are
only intelligible in a given cultural context. For example, the
statement that killing humans for sport could be right for one
culture and wrong in our culture is an ethical relativist
statement.
Ethical Subjectivism
The view that there is no objective morality, and all moral
terms derive their meaning only in relation to specific
individuals.
Objective
True or false, real or unreal regardless of what anyone thinks,
feels, or wants to the contrary. We are objective knowers
insofar as we become aware of reality just as it is, in this
sense. Contrast with Subjective. Objectivity in ethics
typically refers to Cognitivism.
Subjective
Pertaining to an individual's unique view, feelings, desires,
or other mental contents. If a view is subjective, then it is
held by an individual, and may, according to
cognitivism,, be incorrect, or need not rightly refer to
any objective reality. Contrast with Subjective with
Objective. At the same time, other thinkers hold that
moral judgments are neither correct nor incorrect, as in
noncognitivism, or correct only relative to individual
world views, as in Ethical Subjectivism.
Cognitivism
The view that we can know or at certain things to be really
right or wrong, good or bad, just or unjust.
Noncognitivism
The school which claims that we cannot know anything to be
really good or bad, right or wrong, just or unjust.
Intuition
A fundamental premise or belief in an ethical system which is
taken to be a self-evident insight. It is not justified with
reference to any other belief. Some philosophers contend that
intuitions are necessary, otherwise one would end up with an
infinite regression of beliefs justifying beliefs justifying
beliefs...and so on, without any first belief that is
independently justified (and hence, perhaps, no justification
at all?). But which of philosophers' conflicting "intuitions"
are we to consider "self-evidently correct"?
Reflective Equilibrium
There are various versions of this theory, which essentially
means coming to a final view not immediately, by intuition, but
by balancing a consideration of particular judgments (e.g.,
that an action is wrong) with general principles (e.g., that
justice is important). Norman Daniels also adds 'background
beliefs,' such as scientific or sociological beliefs, as
additional factors to consider.
Skepticism in Ethics
Generally the same as Noncognitivism. Technically,
however, one may be skeptical about whether one can have
knowledge of moral truths or not.
Moral Realism
The view that moral realities exist objectively or
independently of moral agents.
Ethical Nihilism
The view that nothing is really right or wrong, good or bad,
just or unjust.
Intrinsic Value
Value of a thing in itself, as opposed to instrumental (or,
broadly, extrinsic) value, in which a thing is valuable only if
it results in something else of value (e.g., a tool for
building is typically of instrumental value). Friendship is
often said to be intrinsically valuable, since it is often
considered a good thing in and of itself, regardless of whether
it leads to other benefits such as getting a connection for a
securing job, etc.
Rights
Rights are construed, for the purposes of this overview, after
the thinking of Joel Feinberg, who states: "To have a right is
to have a claim to something and against someone, the
recognition of which is called for by legal rules or, in the
case of moral rights, by the principles of an enlightened
conscience." Rights are often used to protect individuals
against being exploited for a greater overall good, as certain
forms of utilitarianism might seek to justify.
Moral Agent
One who is capable of acting using moral concepts such as right
and wrong. S. F. Sapontzis claims one can be a moral agent
without such concepts if one acts virtuously, say, or out of
concern for others.
Moral Patient
One who is capable of being benefited or harmed. Some animal
rightists claim that any such being should have moral standing,
and be considered with respect in all ethical decision-making.
It is often said that one need not be a moral agent (or, for
that matter, rational, language-using, etc.) in order to count
as a moral patient, or to have moral standing.
Moral Standing
Ascribed to a being who is counted or considered in a moral
theory as being entitled to basic practical respect, possibly
rights, being a beneficiary of utilitarianism, or an object of
care.
Determinism
The thesis that states of the universe, at any given point in
time, could only occur one possible way, since they are
absolutely predetermined by prior causes (physics, genetics,
metabolism, psychology, reasoning, environmental influences,
social conditioning, and so forth). This is said to apply as
surely to human beings as it would to billiard balls. Some
philosophers believe that determinism is incompatible with free
will, for if we could never actually choose otherwise than we
actually do, then how could we be responsible for our actions?
Could not our entire lives, at least in principle, be predicted
billions of years in advance by any suitably omniscient being?
Would we be an inevitable, impersonal process, rather than an
agent with specific choices, as we may seem to ourselves? Other
philosophers claim that we are still free and responsible, so
long as we act without undue constraint, or voluntarily, or as
an expression of our characters. But if our volitions are, in
turn, determined, then are our actions really "our own"? Other
thinkers deny determinism altogether and believe that human
beings, at least, can freely choose among competing possible
courses of action, and are responsible for their choices. Still
others deny determinism as antiquated and mechanistic, but hold
that random indeterminism (as in the new physics) would also
erase moral responsibility of agents, and we would manifest as
a series of out-of-control flukes.
Principle of Double-Effect
The Aquinian medieval doctrine that an action may have two
effects: an intended one and an unintended one. We are
responsible for what we intend, but the unintended result is
just an accidental by-product of our action. For instance, in
lethal self-defense, we aim to preserve our life, not kill the
attacker. See also Revised Natural Law Theory.
Speciesism
A term coined in 1970 by Richard Ryder, meaning arbitrary
discrimination on the basis of species membership; typically
refers to human bigotry against nonhumans. Peter Singer, in
Animal Liberation, defined it as arbitrarily favouring the
interests of one species over those of another. Speciesism has
been called analogous to racism, sexism, ageism, homophobia,
and ableism in that it involves discrimination on the basis of
characteristics that are not considered to be morally
relevant.
