Accueil
http://www.qcc.cuny.edu/SocialSciences/ppecorino/ETHICS_TEXT/CONTENTS.htm
"[Chapitre 1, section 3]
The difference between normative ethics and metaethics highlights something about both ethics, and philosophy in general: there are varying levels of abstraction in our reflection.
Webster's dictionary provides the following definition of abstraction:
"to consider apart from application to or association with a particular instance"
In other words, abstract and particular have to be understood in terms of one another. Perhaps it's best to begin with an example:
"I am feeling sad right now."
"Sad feelings often follow tragedies."
In the first statement, the speaker is not making an abstraction. That statement is quite specific, concrete, and particular. It refers to a particular person, a particular feeling, and a particular time.
In the second statement, the speaker is abstracting from experience. One might ask the question: from what is s/he abstracting? And the answer is clear: s/he is abstracting from himself (s/he's not talking about the feelings of a particular person), he is abstracting from a particular time, and he is abstracting from a particular feeling, or a particular occurrence of a feeling. He's talking about sad feelings -- in general; about people -- in general; and about the pattern of feelings and events -- in general.
Well, in ethics it is common to move between various levels of abstraction. We can make very specific, or particular statements, such as: it was wrong for that man to lie to Congress. That is a judgment, not a principle, and certainly not a theory.
So, it is helpful to discern three levels of abstraction in ethics:
1. Theories
2. Principles
3. Judgments
The least abstract are ethical judgments. At the level of judgment, we look at particular acts, decisions, feelings, aspirations, etc. and evaluate them. This is, I think, the most common type of ethical experience. It is here that we'll say, for example, that "Going through that red light was morally permissible for John last Tuesday night, because ....", or "It was right that Mary took her mom's car away when she did, since ..." (Keep in mind the distinction between morally permissible and morally obligatory.)
Ethical judgments almost always look above them for guidance. Usually we try to figure out what to do in particular circumstances by appealing to ethical principles. For example, we might think: "It's important to be honest. OK, then, I won't cheat on this upcoming exam." Principles are rules of behavior. Not just any rules, though. They not the same as etiquette, or prudence*. They are general statements about actions which folks ought to do, or ought to avoid. There is a great deal of agreement in principles -- most cultures and most people agree that, for example, it's important to tell the truth, to be kind, to be respectful of others, to avoid harmful manipulation, to live up to one's responsibilities to others, etc.
Many professions have detailed ethical codes of behavior. The AMA (American Medical Association), the APA (American Psychological Association), among many others, have written documents specifying ethical principles which all doctors, or all psychologists, should follow. What you'll find in these documents are statements about the principles that should guide behavior.
When people refer to "their morals", usually they are referring to their principles -- the moral codes by which they live their lives. Principles aren't usually beliefs or commitments that "I make up for myself." They are far, far, far more often inherited. We learn them from our elders, from our leaders, from our parents, from the texts and authors that influence us, from our ministers, etc.
But just as we refer to principles when we seek to figure out what we ought to do in particular circumstances, we look to theories to legitimate, refine, and critique principles. These are the most abstract, and they incorporate metaethical reflection."
-Stephen O Sullivan et Philip A. Pecorino, Ethics - An online textbook, 2002: https://www.qcc.cuny.edu/SocialSciences/ppecorino/ETHICS_TEXT/CONTENTS.htm
http://www.qcc.cuny.edu/SocialSciences/ppecorino/ETHICS_TEXT/Chapter_2_Moral%20Development/Why_be_Moral.htm
"[Chapitre 2: section 1, why be moral ?]
How are we to behave toward one another? Morality is a social phenomenon. Think about this. If a person is alone on some deserted island would anything that person did be moral or immoral? That person may do things that increase or decrease the chance for survival or rescue but would those acts be moral or immoral? Most of what we are concerned with in Ethics is related to the situation in which humans are living with others. Humans are social animals. Society contributes to making humans what they are. For humans there arises the question of how are humans to behave toward one another.
What are the rules to be? How are we to learn of them? Why do we need them?
WHY BE MORAL?
Consider what the world would be like if there were no traffic rules at all. Would people be able to travel by automobiles, buses and other vehicles on the roadways if there were no traffic regulations? The answer should be obvious to all rational members of the human species. Without basic rules, no matter how much some would like to avoid them or break them, there would be chaos. The fact that some people break the rules is quite clearly and obviously not sufficient to do away with the rules. The rules are needed for transportation to take place.
Why are moral rules needed? For example, why do humans need rules about keeping promises, telling the truth and private property? This answer should be fairly obvious. Without such rules people would not be able to live amongst other humans. People could not make plans, could not leave their belongings behind them wherever they went. We would not know who to trust and what to expect from others. Civilized, social life would not be possible. So, the question is :
Why should humans care about being moral?
REASONS: There are several answers.
Sociological: Without morality social life is nearly impossible.
Psychological:
People care about what others think of them. Reputation and social censure
Some people care about doing the right thing. Conscience
Theological: Some people care about what will happen after death, to their soul or spirit. For many religions there is an afterlife that involves a person’s being rewarded or punished for what they have done."
-Stephen O Sullivan et Philip A. Pecorino, Ethics - An online textbook, 2002: https://www.qcc.cuny.edu/SocialSciences/ppecorino/ETHICS_TEXT/CONTENTS.htm
