
Why is murder wrong? It is a far more difficult question than most people realize. The search for an answer will take us on a journey through philosophical ethics.
Does the prohibition of murder exist in a spiritual reality? And if so, do our souls come from that same spiritual reality?
Is the prohibition of murder simply a human convention? And if so, can humans simply change that convention?
Was the prohibition of murder established as part of a social contract? If so, can anyone opt out of that social contract?
Is the prohibition of murder simply based on personal, subjective feelings? If so, is ethics simply a matter of taste, like preferences for food?
Can different cultures have different ethical rules? If so, does one culture have the right to judge another culture?
Is God the source of ethical rules? If so, can God change these rules and come up with new ethical rules?
Is it true that humans are created with a final purpose? Is living an ethical life the final purpose of being human?
Can we learn ethics by studying nature? Or is nature often too cruel to be a source of ethics?
Is ethics simply about power? Is it the strong who decide what is ethical?
Does ethics require a life of self-sacrifice? Should we ignore our own needs to meet the needs of others?
Is ethics only about maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain? How do we make such a calculation?
Is ethics simply a matter of duties? If so, what if various ethical duties conflict with each other?
Do women approach ethical issues differently than men? Or is it improper to speak at all about gender differences?
Do we know the answer to ethical questions through intuition? If so, why do we humans argue about so many ethical issues?
Perhaps we cannot speak about moral facts at all. This is the approach of J L Mackie, who writes that if moral facts exist, they would be queer indeed (queer meaning different.) Both postmodernism and existentialism raise the issue of whether we can find a stable foundation for ethics. Finally, we will turn to Emmanuel Levinas who sees ethics as first philosophy.
Why is murder wrong? It is a far more difficult question than we may think. This course will give a series of answers to this question, and raise difficulties to each of these answers. It will be a journey that will begin in ancient Greece, take us to the Enlightenment, and end with contemporary thinkers. It will include such thinkers as Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Thomas Hobbes, Immanuel Kant, David Hume, Jeremy Bentham, Friedrich Nietzsche, John Rawls, Jean Paul Sartre, and Emanuel Levinas. We will begin with metaethics, exploring the nature of ethical statements. What is the difference between ethical realism and ethical nominalism? We will then look at relative ethics, where ethical statements vary from person to person or community to community. This section includes lectures on social contract theory, ethical subjectivism, cultural relativism, and divine command theory.
There are three sections on universal ethics. First, we will look at ethical systems based on the teachings of Aristotle, including both virtue ethics and natural law.. Then we will explore consequential ethics, where the ethical is whatever leads to the best consequences. This will include ethical egoism, ethical altruism, and finally the most popular approach, utilitarianism. We will compare this to the duty ethics of Kant, and explore the feminine care criticism of Kant. Or perhaps the source of ethics is intuition. Finally, we will ask whether ethical statements have any meaning at all, or perhaps we need to accept ethical nihilism.
In the end, we will suggest a solution to the question, what makes murder wrong. Enjoy this journey through the fascinating world of philosophical ethics. Lawyers in Florida can get Continuing Legal Education credits for this course.