Exam 12: Ethical Theories, Moral Principles, and Medical Decisions

Not all utilitarians accept the principle of utility as the standard for determining the rightness of an action.

One of the most serious objections to utilitarianism is that it may justify the imposition of great suffering on a few people in order to benefit a great many of people.

Utilitarianism focuses solely upon some inherent feature(s) of an action itself and is unconcerned with the consequences that an action produces.

One problem with virtue ethics is that it provides us with no explicit guidance on how to act in a particular circumstance.

Autonomy is an absolute right and should never be restricted under any circumstances.

The capabilities approach takes health as its primary focus.

Immanuel Kant believes that an action is right when it is in accordance with a rule that satisfies a principle that he calls the "categorical imperative" and thus he believes that the consequences of an action are morally irrelevant.

One criticism of feminist ethics is that it is too unified and dogmatic a view to prove useful.

Rule utilitarians hold that the principle of utility should be applied to particular acts in particular circumstances.

According to the Principle of Effort, the president of a company should receive a greater share of social "goods" than his/her file clerk (assuming that they both work equally as hard) because the president's contributions to society are inherently more important and difficult.

Act utilitarians maintain that the principle of utility should be used to test rules, which can in turn be used to decide the rightness of particular acts.

Identity-based theorists reject the use of universal moral concepts.

If an ethical theory is based solely on intuitions then, Nussbaum claims, it has no relevance to real problems.

W.D. Ross rejects pluralistic approaches to ethics in favor of a duty-based approach.

Martha Nussbaum endorses a capabilities approach to ethics.