PHILOSOPHY 3352: ETHICAL THEORY
Spring, 1997
Curtis Brown

Description: This course focuses on ethical theory rather than on applied ethics: on general issues about the nature and source of ethics, not on particular moarl issues. The course divides into two main parts. In the first part, we will discuss normative ethics: we will consider what considerations determine whether actions are morally required, morally permissible, or morally impermissible. We will read and discuss contemporary essays which represent three broad traditions in ethical theory: consequentialism, historically defended by Jeremy Benthan and John Stuart Mill; deontology, whose most influential historical development is in the writings of Immanuel Kant; and virtue ethics, most influentially developed by Aristotle. Some knowledge and understanding of the writings of Aristotle, Kant, and Mill will be presupposed. The second part of the course will consider issues in meta-ethics. Such issues involve stepping back from particular moral theories, and asking questions about the nature and justification of the moral enterprise itself, in particular whether moral judgments can be true or false, and if so what sort of facts make them so.

Office Hours: Monday, 1:30 - 3:30; Tuesday and Thursday, 11:30 -12:30; Wednesday, 2:30 - 3:30. (I am usually in my office during office hours, but sometimes other commitments interfere; if you want to be certain I will be there, make an appointment with me. Other times can also be arranged by appointment.)

Texts:
Scheffler, ed., Consequentialism and Its Critics
Slote, ed., Virtue Ethics
Darwall, Gibbard, and Railton, ed., Moral Discourse and Practice Grades will be based on the following work:

1. There will be a mid-term examination, tentatively scheduled for Monday, March 2. This exam will contain questions on the terminology and basic ideas of the readings, and longer essay questions asking you to evaluate and compare the readings. The mid-term will count 25% of the final grade.

2. One substantial paper, of 10-15 pages, is due Friday, April 17. The paper should include discussion of some of the readings for the course; I will give you a longer handout about it soon. I will ask you to give an oral presentation to the class on the topic of the paper during the latter part of the semester. The paper will count 35% of the final grade. I will accept late papers, but the grade will be dropped one notch (e.g. from a B to a B- or from a B- to a C+) for every week day the paper is late. (By the way, you should be aware of the University policy on academic integrity, which I adhere to strictly.)

3. There will be a final examination on Wednesday, May 6, at 8:30 AM. The final will count 25% of the final grade.

4. Attendance and participation will count 15% of the final grade. Participation will include weekly one-page papers on the reading, due at the beginning of class each Monday. The one-page papers should be clearly written, and should address the reading in a focussed and explicit way. They may summarize the main points of the reading, raise specific questions about how the reading should be interpreted, pose objections to the theses advanced in the reading, or compare a particular reading with other materials we have read (or with materials you have read outside this class). References to the readings should include page numbers. One-page papers are graded only as satisfactory or unsatisfactory, but they must satisfy the criteria above to count as satisfactory. Note: Although in general participation counts 15% of the grade, excessive absence is grounds for a failing grade in the course, not just on this portion of the final grade.

Tentative Schedule of Topics and Readings

I. Normative Ethics

A. Consequentialism and Deontology 1. objections to simple consequentialism (utilitarianism) Does utilitarianism give justice any weight? Rawls, "Classical Utilitarianism" Does utilitarianism require too much? Williams, "Consequentialism and Integrity" Does utilitarianism require morally unacceptable actions? Nagel, "War and Massacre" 2. consequentialism modified Scanlan, "Rights, Goals, and Fairness"

Railton, "Alienation, Consequentialism, and the Demands of Morality"

 3. agent-relative (deontological) constraints A victim-based defense Nozick, "Side Constraints" An agent-based defense Nagel, "Autonomy and Deontology" Agent-relative constraints criticized Parfit, "Is Common-Sense Morality Self-Defeating?" Constraints and the Virtues: An Exchange Foot, "Utilitarianism and the Virtues"

Scheffler, "Agent-Centered Restrictions, Rationality, and the Virtues"

 B. Virtue Ethics 1. criticisms of deontology and consequentialism Anscombe, "Modern Moral Philosophy"

Williams, "Morality, the Peculiar Institution"

Wolf, "Moral Saints"

 2. attempts to develop an ethics of virtue Murdoch, "The Sovereignty of Good Over Other Concepts"

MacIntyre, "The Nature of the Virtues"

McDowell, "Virtue and Reason"

Foot, "Virtues and Vices"

 3. criticisms of the new virtue ethics Schneewind, "The Misfortunes of Virtue"

Louden, "On Some Vices of Virtue Ethics"

 4. virtue ethics: responses and new directions Hursthouse, "Virtue Theory and Abortion"

Slote, "Agent-Based Virtue Ethics"

Baier, "What Do Women Want in a Moral Theory?"

 II. Meta-Ethics A. Problems Moore, from Principia Ethica

Wittgenstein, "Lecture on Ethics"

Harman, "Ethics and Observation"

Mackie, from Ethics

 B. Solutions? 1. realism Boyd, "How To Be a Moral Realist"

Railton, "Moral Realism"

 2. anti-realism Blackburn, "How To Be an Ethical Anti-Realist"

Gibbard, "Wise Choices, Apt Feelings"

 3. sensibility theories McDowell, "Values and Secondary Qualities"

McDowell, "Projection and Truth in Ethics"

Wiggins, "A Sensible Subjectivism?"

 4. constructivism Rawls, "Kantian Constructivism in Moral Theory"

Scanlan, "Contractualism and Utilitarianism"

 5. overview Darwall, Gibbard, and Railton, "Toward Fin de siécle Ethics: Some Trends"

Last update: March 16, 1998 (added date of final exam)
Curtis Brown (cbrown@trinity.edu)
Philosophy Department 
Trinity University