際際滷

際際滷Share a Scribd company logo

Can we Teach Ethics-1.pdf

Mphow Parvo
Mphow Parvo

While there is debate around whether ethics can be taught, the document explores some key considerations: - Morality refers to individual principles of right and wrong, while ethics establish rules and codes of conduct for institutions. - The origins and justifications of ethics are complex, drawing from philosophy, religion, and culture, making universal agreement difficult. - Ethical theories like subjectivism, cultural relativism, and deontology present challenges for defining objective ethical standards to teach. - Rather than focusing on teaching contested ethics, the document concludes it is better to cultivate virtue and moral dispositions in students by acting as role models of good conduct.

1 of 19
Download to read offline
CAN WE TEACH ETHICS? Mackenzie Chibambo mackchibambo@gmail.com 1
Lesson objectives By the end of this lesson, you should be able to answer the question: Can teachers teach ethics? How can/should they teach? The challenges faced in the teaching of ethical and moral education. Explain the differences between morality and ethics. Trace the origins of ethics and morality. Explore some ethical theories as the sources of the challenges faced by moral educators. 2
Distinguishing Ethics from Morality The two maybe used interchangeably, but are different. Ethics refer to the justification of the rules. Ethical codes defines acceptable behavior but have nothing to do with cosmic righteousness. In institutions, ethics help build the image of the organization. Rule breakers are hence punished. Schools have codes of conduct teachers/students follow. 3
MORALS Morals are individuals' own guiding principles regarding right or wrong/good or bad. A moral person seeks to do the right and good thing. A moral precept is an idea driven by the desire to be good. A moral impulse usually means best intentions. Our idea of morals is shaped by our environment, values and or beliefs. 4
ORIGINSOF ETHICSANDMORALITY Pure ethical(moral) theories begin with ancient Greek philosophers (Sophists, Socrates and others). Later early English positivists joined the debates during the Medieval times in Europe and included it in their research. Other scholars believe ethics are derived from God (E.g The Hebrew Ten Commandments (see DavidHume) Sigmund Freud (Psychologist) and Emily Durkheim (sociologist) challenged this claim 5
Implicationsof associatingethicswith God The arguments by Freud and Durkheim that God was nothing but a projection almost discredits Humes claim. How do schools teach ethics whose origin is considered to be fraught and false? Likewise, thinking of ethics as coming from God puts schools (teachers/students) in awkward positions since not all schools ascribe to Christians beliefs. This means the teaching of ethics may promote exclusion of the other. 6
EETHICAL THEORIESAND THEIR CHALLNGES TO THE TEACHING OF ETHICS Subjectivism An individuals mental activity is the only unquestionable fact of experience not shared experiences What is good/bad depends on the individual. Implications on education: If the good/bad rests in a person, then schools would have to design ethics for each individual for them to be acceptable by everyone which is impossible. If individuals/schools make different moral judgments on one action, then accepting that action as morally right would be impossible. This could also lead to inconsistent judgments about the same act done by different students/staff. 7
CULTURAL RELATIVISM 8 An action is good/bad if it is judged so by society or culture. There is no universal truth in ethics but various cultural codes, and nothing more. This challenges our belief in the objectivity and universality of moral truth. By claiming that each culture has its own mode of perceiving truth/good, it means there is nothing absolutely right/wrong. This means no need to teach ethics because it is ethics of nothing. If each society has its own truth, then which societies ethics should schools teach since schools consist of heterogeneous societies. Thus, the teaching of ethics becomes almost uninspiring and impossible.
KANTISDEONTOLOGICALETHICALTHEORY We cant think of anything as good without limitation except a good will. States that an action is good if the principle behind it has duty to Moral Law, and arises from a sense of duty in the Actor. Kant identifie the Categorical Imperative (CI), (unconditional) and the hypothetical Imperative (conditional) for judging moral actions. 9
KANTS ETHICS CONT 10 Principle of Universalizability( a C.I.) considers an action as right if it can be applied to everybody without contradictions. The principle of Human Agency (C.I): suggest that people be treated as an end in themselves. Principle of autonomy suggests that Rational Agents must be bound to the moral law by their own will. Hypothetical Imperative is an action where the good depends on a condition.
Kantstheory Cont There are two examples of duties: perfect and imperfect. Kant used lying as an example of duties. Because there is a perfect duty to tell the truth, we must not lie, although lying would bring benefits. A perfect duty (e.g. honesty) always holds true; an imperfect duty (e.g., lying) is transient and limited to place/time. 11
Implicationsof Kantstheory on moral education Since moral education makes a citizen valuable for a state, it is inadequate to teach students ethics. Thus Kant proposed teaching students how to think to enable them to act according to ethical laws. Since this theory is too abstract and just prescribes good actions not the right thing to do in particular situations, then teaching of ethics would be difficult. Alasdair MacIntyre argues that universality principle can be used to justify practically anything. If lying is wholly wrong; would hiding to a student whose mother has died to avoid distressing her be wrong? 12
Other Views on Ethicsand MoralEducations Challenges 1. Fredrick Nietsche Nietzsche (1844) believed that the energy that drives humans to achieve greater things is not as (Christians or Kant) believed, e.g. Love your neighbours but the will to dominate. If individuals act in pursuit of personal interests then schools would not serve as equalisers/places for socialization and resource redistribution. No school would willing to teach ethics that promote individualism and greed. 13
II. KOLHBEG AND MORAL EDUCATION Kolhbeg (1984) borrowed Kants claims that moral education is a rational activity. What is moral is defined by reason not actions. A moral person must offer justifiable rational arguments for their actions. Used Piaget (1965) theories of child development theory to redefine moral education. 14
Kolhbeg Cont Devised three stages of moral justification. Pre-conventional: a person judges something as moral/immoral if adults judge it so. Conventional: when pre-conventions are internalised, one begins to understand and justify actions as good or bad. Post-conventional: arises from conventional stage. Here rules of natural justice come into play. One may challenge the Law as unjust and reject it (Think of Zumas Case) 15
So, can we teachethics and morality? These debates have shown us that ethics can be taught though that does assure the creation of a moral or ethical person Thus morality (bes) cannot be taught. The problem on ethics (dos) lie on the disagreements over what is good/bad. Aristotle proposes that we must teach virtue (not ethics) because ethics are highly contested and contextual. 16
Implications of this school of thought Since this appeals to rational justice, it fails to account for other things such as compassionate, care, consistency and moral resilience. There is a possibility to forego justice based on other good factors and knowledge of the leaners. Schools as social institutions may reflect some values of society yet they must cultivate morality in learners. This often pose problems on the sort of ethics to be taught since society is broad and fluid. (Think of Corporal Punishment and its changes). Pre-conventional stage may work at early grades not at upper levels. 17
So can we teach ethicsand morality? Cont The notion that all ethics derive from God has been challenged giving rising to further complications on the teaching of ethics. Instead of focusing on teaching ethics, we should focus on cultivating peoples disposition to act in particular ways as (Aristotle) proposed. To cultivate virtue in our students, means we should act virtuously not teaching them ethics which are contested concepts. Try to be act morally to serve as a role model to the students. In conclusion, we cannot teach ethics but we can help them grow morally. 18
The end 19

More Related Content

Can we Teach Ethics-1.pdf

  • 1. CAN WE TEACH ETHICS? Mackenzie Chibambo mackchibambo@gmail.com 1
  • 2. Lesson objectives By the end of this lesson, you should be able to answer the question: Can teachers teach ethics? How can/should they teach? The challenges faced in the teaching of ethical and moral education. Explain the differences between morality and ethics. Trace the origins of ethics and morality. Explore some ethical theories as the sources of the challenges faced by moral educators. 2
  • 3. Distinguishing Ethics from Morality The two maybe used interchangeably, but are different. Ethics refer to the justification of the rules. Ethical codes defines acceptable behavior but have nothing to do with cosmic righteousness. In institutions, ethics help build the image of the organization. Rule breakers are hence punished. Schools have codes of conduct teachers/students follow. 3
  • 4. MORALS Morals are individuals' own guiding principles regarding right or wrong/good or bad. A moral person seeks to do the right and good thing. A moral precept is an idea driven by the desire to be good. A moral impulse usually means best intentions. Our idea of morals is shaped by our environment, values and or beliefs. 4
  • 5. ORIGINSOF ETHICSANDMORALITY Pure ethical(moral) theories begin with ancient Greek philosophers (Sophists, Socrates and others). Later early English positivists joined the debates during the Medieval times in Europe and included it in their research. Other scholars believe ethics are derived from God (E.g The Hebrew Ten Commandments (see DavidHume) Sigmund Freud (Psychologist) and Emily Durkheim (sociologist) challenged this claim 5
  • 6. Implicationsof associatingethicswith God The arguments by Freud and Durkheim that God was nothing but a projection almost discredits Humes claim. How do schools teach ethics whose origin is considered to be fraught and false? Likewise, thinking of ethics as coming from God puts schools (teachers/students) in awkward positions since not all schools ascribe to Christians beliefs. This means the teaching of ethics may promote exclusion of the other. 6
  • 7. EETHICAL THEORIESAND THEIR CHALLNGES TO THE TEACHING OF ETHICS Subjectivism An individuals mental activity is the only unquestionable fact of experience not shared experiences What is good/bad depends on the individual. Implications on education: If the good/bad rests in a person, then schools would have to design ethics for each individual for them to be acceptable by everyone which is impossible. If individuals/schools make different moral judgments on one action, then accepting that action as morally right would be impossible. This could also lead to inconsistent judgments about the same act done by different students/staff. 7
  • 8. CULTURAL RELATIVISM 8 An action is good/bad if it is judged so by society or culture. There is no universal truth in ethics but various cultural codes, and nothing more. This challenges our belief in the objectivity and universality of moral truth. By claiming that each culture has its own mode of perceiving truth/good, it means there is nothing absolutely right/wrong. This means no need to teach ethics because it is ethics of nothing. If each society has its own truth, then which societies ethics should schools teach since schools consist of heterogeneous societies. Thus, the teaching of ethics becomes almost uninspiring and impossible.
  • 9. KANTISDEONTOLOGICALETHICALTHEORY We cant think of anything as good without limitation except a good will. States that an action is good if the principle behind it has duty to Moral Law, and arises from a sense of duty in the Actor. Kant identifie the Categorical Imperative (CI), (unconditional) and the hypothetical Imperative (conditional) for judging moral actions. 9
  • 10. KANTS ETHICS CONT 10 Principle of Universalizability( a C.I.) considers an action as right if it can be applied to everybody without contradictions. The principle of Human Agency (C.I): suggest that people be treated as an end in themselves. Principle of autonomy suggests that Rational Agents must be bound to the moral law by their own will. Hypothetical Imperative is an action where the good depends on a condition.
  • 11. Kantstheory Cont There are two examples of duties: perfect and imperfect. Kant used lying as an example of duties. Because there is a perfect duty to tell the truth, we must not lie, although lying would bring benefits. A perfect duty (e.g. honesty) always holds true; an imperfect duty (e.g., lying) is transient and limited to place/time. 11
  • 12. Implicationsof Kantstheory on moral education Since moral education makes a citizen valuable for a state, it is inadequate to teach students ethics. Thus Kant proposed teaching students how to think to enable them to act according to ethical laws. Since this theory is too abstract and just prescribes good actions not the right thing to do in particular situations, then teaching of ethics would be difficult. Alasdair MacIntyre argues that universality principle can be used to justify practically anything. If lying is wholly wrong; would hiding to a student whose mother has died to avoid distressing her be wrong? 12
  • 13. Other Views on Ethicsand MoralEducations Challenges 1. Fredrick Nietsche Nietzsche (1844) believed that the energy that drives humans to achieve greater things is not as (Christians or Kant) believed, e.g. Love your neighbours but the will to dominate. If individuals act in pursuit of personal interests then schools would not serve as equalisers/places for socialization and resource redistribution. No school would willing to teach ethics that promote individualism and greed. 13
  • 14. II. KOLHBEG AND MORAL EDUCATION Kolhbeg (1984) borrowed Kants claims that moral education is a rational activity. What is moral is defined by reason not actions. A moral person must offer justifiable rational arguments for their actions. Used Piaget (1965) theories of child development theory to redefine moral education. 14
  • 15. Kolhbeg Cont Devised three stages of moral justification. Pre-conventional: a person judges something as moral/immoral if adults judge it so. Conventional: when pre-conventions are internalised, one begins to understand and justify actions as good or bad. Post-conventional: arises from conventional stage. Here rules of natural justice come into play. One may challenge the Law as unjust and reject it (Think of Zumas Case) 15
  • 16. So, can we teachethics and morality? These debates have shown us that ethics can be taught though that does assure the creation of a moral or ethical person Thus morality (bes) cannot be taught. The problem on ethics (dos) lie on the disagreements over what is good/bad. Aristotle proposes that we must teach virtue (not ethics) because ethics are highly contested and contextual. 16
  • 17. Implications of this school of thought Since this appeals to rational justice, it fails to account for other things such as compassionate, care, consistency and moral resilience. There is a possibility to forego justice based on other good factors and knowledge of the leaners. Schools as social institutions may reflect some values of society yet they must cultivate morality in learners. This often pose problems on the sort of ethics to be taught since society is broad and fluid. (Think of Corporal Punishment and its changes). Pre-conventional stage may work at early grades not at upper levels. 17
  • 18. So can we teach ethicsand morality? Cont The notion that all ethics derive from God has been challenged giving rising to further complications on the teaching of ethics. Instead of focusing on teaching ethics, we should focus on cultivating peoples disposition to act in particular ways as (Aristotle) proposed. To cultivate virtue in our students, means we should act virtuously not teaching them ethics which are contested concepts. Try to be act morally to serve as a role model to the students. In conclusion, we cannot teach ethics but we can help them grow morally. 18