Basic Principles

Aum Amriteshvaryai Namah

Kohlberg’s 3 levels of Moral Development

Level One: Preconventional Stages

Stage One: Punishment and Obedience Orientation –

self-centered, fear of the stick approach

Stage Two: Instrumental and Relative Orientation – “i

should not hit him so that he doesn’t hit me”

Level Two: Conventional Stages

Living up to conventional norms of family, peers etc

Stage Three: Interpersonal Concordance Orientation

(phew!): Being “good” in order to conform to others’

expectations

Stage Four: Law and Order Orientation – Obeying the

laws of the land (out of respect for nation/society)

some of you may recall

“Heisenberg’s Uncertainty

Principle”

Level Three: Postconventional Stages

Questioning laws, values, conventions etc of society on the basis of his/her own moral beliefs

Stage Five: Social Contract Orientation – Awareness that people have conflicting moral views

Stage Six: Universal Moral Principles Orientation – “Right action” is based on reasonable, consistent & universally applicable moral principles

Gilligan’s Theory of Female Moral Development

For men, morality is impersonal, impartial and abstract!

For women, morality is primarily a matter of caring and responsibility (is it so?)

therefore, moral development in women progresses through better ways of caring and responsibility

caring for oneself --- > caring for others --- > caring for others and oneself

Perhaps, the best perspective is men DO care sometimes and women ARE impartial at times!!

Whatever approach you may take, ETHICS starts at the later postconventional stages of moral development

This is what we aim to stimulate in ourselves through the case studies and other discussions in forthcoming chapters

don’t accept what I say – think, discuss, criticize, analyse! (let’s create some “heat”!)

Which stage are you

in?

Research on Moral Identity

William Damon: Morality is not an important part

of the self until middle adolescence

the more morality becomes part of you, the

stronger will be your motivation to do what is

morally right

Augusto Blasi: Judgement of right and wrong

depend in part on the kind of person we think we

are (or want to be)

This is NOT “rocket science” … this is not QMM

So, here is the change in our approach:

Two students would present 2-3 topics in one session

Faculty will facilitate the discussion by giving examples from his experience

After all, we are learning this together, aren’t we?

Too much …? Consider the following:

You get to do this ONLY ONCE in the whole course … why?

21 x 2 = 42 < 57 ----------------- Ah! Some maths, at last!

We will have only PLACED students do this (incl those who have opted out of

placement!)

By the time “your” turn comes, hopefully (with God’s Grace) you would be placed too!

Will tell you the sections beforehand

Let’s make the course a bit more fun, engaging!

Another concept: “Devil’s Advocate”

Each of you should be an Ethics “brand ambassador”

But, for the class, 3-5 students should play the role of a Devil’s Advocate –

question, dispute whatever the faculty/presenters are saying

The reasoning process by which human behaviors, institutions, or policies are judged to be in accordance with or in violation of moral standards

An understanding – moral standards

Factual construct - information

A conclusion – moral judgment

6

"After this barbaric act, there cannot be business as usual with Pakistan. What happened at LoC is unacceptable"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-21023932

7

Moral standard – War is not fair, why war, let’s be in peace, an act of breach of rights, Inhuman

Factual information – Two Indian soldiers killed, India says one was beheaded, at LoC (line of control)

Moral judgment – The action is unacceptable , there cannot be business as usual with Pakistan

8

Israel launched a major offensive against Palestinian militants in Gaza on Wednesday, killing the military commander of Hamas in an air strike and threatening an invasion of the enclave that the Islamist group vowed would "open the gates of hell".

Panicking civilians ran for cover and the death toll mounted quickly. Ten people including three children were killed, the health ministry said, and about 40 were wounded. Also among the dead were an 11-month-old baby and a woman pregnant with twins.

9

The video tells us the extent of impact…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V46LtPueEq0

Exposure to these information and the set of moral standards within each of us, helps us arrive at certain individual judgments of ours

10

Moral Reasoning should be

Logical

Supported by evidences or information that is

accurate, relevant and complete

Consistent (“If you judge that one person is

morally justified in doing act A in circumstance

C, then you must accept that it is morally

justified for any other person to perform an act

similar to A, in any circumstances similar to C”)

11

4 steps leading to ethical behavior: Recognizing that a situation is ethical

Judging what the ethical course of action is

Deciding to do the ethical course of action

Carrying out the decision

Obstacles to recognizing an ethical situation: Euphemistic labeling

Rationalizing our actions

Diminishing Comparisons

Displacement of Responsibility

Diffusion of Responsibility

Disregarding or distorting the harm

Dehumanizing the victim

Redirecting Blame

12

Obstacles to judging (correctly) the ethical course of action: Biased theories about the world

Biased theories about others

Biased theories about oneself

Obstacles to deciding on the correct ethical course of action: Culture of an organization

“Moral Seduction” (slow but sure poisoning!) – vicious circle in which you are slowly drawn into doing smaller (and later bigger & bigger) unethical acts

Obstacles in carrying out your (ethical) decision: One’s strength or weakness of will (“do you have the spine??” )

One’s belief about the locus of control of one’s actions (“Is a 2nd invigilator justified in stepping into another invigilator’s territory?”)

13

Difference between being Morally Responsible and Moral Responsibility! I am morally responsible for that incident

I will help the poor, that is my moral responsibility

A person is morally responsible for an incident Only if he/she caused it (directly/indirectly), or

if he failed prevent it when he/she could & should have, and

He/she did it knowingly, and

He/she did so in his own free will

Workers’ health issues

Who is responsible? Is the owner responsible?

Analyse the Case Study in light of the

points mentioned in the previous slide

“Oh God! I feel so sorry that all my workers

have got lung injuries. But I don’t think it

was caused because of asbestos. All of them

were smokers!”

“Really? I didn’t know that asbestos would

create these health hazards, poor souls”

I am sorry, I was not free to prevent the

injuries. I gave them masks, but they

denied”

Moral Responsibility can be mitigated/removed by Minimal Contribution

Uncertainty

Difficulty

Moral Responsibility cannot be mitigated/removed by The cooperation of others

just bcos you were part of a group that did the wrongdoing does not mean you have no accountability for it

of course, the accountability is distributed amongst the group

Your own accountability may be mitigated by ‘minimal contribution’

Following orders (“loyal agent’s argument”)

Are Bull’s Eye and Bushmaster morally

responsible for the Washington D.C. victims’

deaths? Why or Why not?

Are gun manufacturers and/or gun dealers

ever morally responsible for deaths caused

by the use of their guns? Explain

Are manufacturers ever morally responsible

for deaths caused by the use of their

products? Explain

If you feel “guns” are not relevant to Indian society, think

of the questions in terms of cigarette/beedi

manufacturers/dealers!