Session 5 - Moral Obligation Theory

Session #5: Examining the Moral Life Normative Obligation Theories and the Psychotherapeutic Psychologies : 

Session #5: Examining the Moral Life Normative Obligation Theories and the Psychotherapeutic Psychologies Frankena, Ethics, pp. 12-60; Browning, Religious Thought, pp. vii-20

Review: Three Types of Ethics : 

Review: Three Types of Ethics …Framing the clinical setting.

A. Normative Obligation Theory in Frankena’s Ethical Framework : 

Normative Obligation Theory Ask what is right, or obligatory Relate to a standard of conduct we live by Assert a normative judgment: what is right/wrong Give reasons for this judgment Debate with self or other about what is good, right Are prescriptive KEY QUESTION: What ought I to do? A. Normative Obligation Theory in Frankena’s Ethical Framework

Introduce One of the Threaded Discussion TopicsShoulds / Life Commandments : 

Introduce One of the Threaded Discussion TopicsShoulds / Life Commandments Students are referred to Handout 5(b) on Doc Sharing What are the most dominant “shoulds” you often tell yourself about yourself? 2. What are the most dominant “shoulds” you often tell yourself about others? 3. What emotions do you experience most frequently in relation to these shoulds? (frequency, duration, intensity)

A Practical Understanding of Normative Ethics : 

A Practical Understanding of Normative Ethics

Frankena’s Ethical Framework: : 

Normative Ethics Deciding what are desirable standards of conduct and character traits? Frankena’s Ethical Framework: Obligation Theory Virtue Theory The student is referred to Handout 5(a) on Doc Sharing

Obligation Theory: What am I to DO? : 

Deontological Theories Measure actions Dominated by principles rather than the end results. An action may be morally right even if it doesn’t promote a greater balance of good over evil. Rule-deontological - e.g. Kant’s Universal Maxim: “Act only on that maxim which you can at the same time will to be a universal law.” “We ought always to tell the truth.” An example of rule-deontology in Christian circles would be the Divine Command theory, which states that the standard of right or wrong is the will or Law of God. Why should we be moral? Because God commands it. Act Deontological – General ‘rules of thumb’ from particular judgments; e.g. situational ethics and many forms of existentialism Obligation Theory: What am I to DO?

Frankena’s Ethical Framework : 

Frankena’s Ethical Framework OBLIGATION THEORY Moral Obligations (Deontic) Non-Moral Obligations Deontology Teleology Rule Act Ethical Egoism Ethical Utilitarianism Hedonism Non-Hedonism Rule Act

Obligation Theory: What am I to DO? : 

2. Teleological Theories Emphasis on the end result Promote the greatest balance of good over evil Ethical Egoism – focus on one’s one good, with the key idea that if we promote our own good, the other’s good will follow. Hedonistic Ethical Egoism – Promotes the greatest amount of pleasure over pain Non-hedonistic Ethical Egoism – Promotes some other type of non-moral good, e.g. power, knowledge, perfection, etc. Ethical Universalism (Utilitarianism) – Promote the greatest general good, not our own good. Here you can have hedonists and non-hedonists. Rule-utilitarianism – similar to rule-deontology, but in this case we are interested to know if the rule promotes more good than evil, in other words, the end result is emphasized. Act-utilitarianism – appeal is to immediate utility of an act to determine end result, promoting good over evil, e.g., telling the truth must be weighted against the context Obligation Theory: What am I to DO?

Frankena’s Ethical Framework : 

Frankena’s Ethical Framework OBLIGATION THEORY Moral Obligations (Deontic) Non-Moral Obligations Deontology Teleology Agapism Rule Act Ethical Egoism Ethical Utilitarianism Hedonism Non-Hedonism Rule Act Rule Act

Obligation Theory: What am I to DO? : 

3. Is Agapism a Third Type? Created as a third option by Frankena Relies on revelation Rule-agapism – focus on one’s distinguishes between religious obligation “Thou shalt love the Lord your God …..” and moral obligation “…love your neighbor …..” b. Act-agapism - one pure act-agapism states that the situation is primary. Examples would be religious existentialists, situationists, antinomians. 4. Principles vs. Context: Which is Primary? Obligation Theory: What am I to DO?

Frankena’s Ethical Framework : 

Frankena’s Ethical Framework OBLIGATION THEORY Moral Obligations (Deontic) Non-Moral Obligations Deontology Teleology Agapism Rule Act Ethical Egoism Ethical Utilitarianism Hedonism Non-Hedonism Rule Act Rule Act

B. Ethics: The Analytic Dialogue that Formats the Debate : 

Ethics evaluates human actions Ethics applies special standards to actions and their consequences 3. The ultimate aim of philosophical ethics: to evaluate how much actions will increase or decrease human happiness, good-will, or well-being B. Ethics: The Analytic Dialogue that Formats the Debate

C. How the Christian Focuses the Moral Life : 

One does not need to be religious to be moral. Religion, and this case, Christian religion, focuses our morality by pointing us to our object of faith, who infuses our life with motivations that center around the vision and principle of mutuality and sacrificial love. 3. The ultimate aim of philosophical ethics: to evaluate how much actions will increase or decrease human happiness, good-will, or well-being C. How the Christian Focuses the Moral Life

D. The Contribution of Biblical Morality to Contemporary Life : 

As the people of God, we share a unique vision. The context of our life is important as the people of God. For the people of God, morality’s emphasis is on the heart, not on the law. Biblical morality revolves around repentance, forgiveness, mutuality, and sacrifice. D. The Contribution of Biblical Morality to Contemporary Life