ETHC 445 Week 3 Discussion

ETHC 445 Week 3 Discussion | Devry University

Week 3: The Social Contract

Social Contract theorists say that morality consists of a set of rules governing how people should treat one another that rational beings will agree to accept for their mutual benefit, on the condition that others agree to follow these rules as well.

Hobbes runs the logic like this in the form of a logical syllogism:

1.    We are all self-interested,

2.    Each of us needs to have a peaceful and cooperative social order to pursue our interests,

3.    We need moral rules in order to establish and maintain a cooperative social order,

Therefore, self-interest motivates us to establish moral rules.

Thomas Hobbes looked to the past to observe a primitive “State of Nature” in which there is no such thing as morality, and that this self-interested human nature was "nasty, brutish, and short" -- a kind of perpetual state of warfare 

John Locke disagreed, and set forth the view that the state exists to preserve the natural rights of its citizens. When governments fail in that task, citizens have the right—and sometimes the duty—to withdraw their support and even to rebel.

Read the assigned textbook chapters and view the videos located in the Week 3 Videos module on the Social Contract.

FIRST LEAD DISCUSSION QUESTION:

Which view of the "state of human nature" seems most accurate to you, that of Hobbes or Locke? Explain why?  What evidence is there to support either viewpoint?  Answer in a threaded fashion, responding to a classmate's post.  I want to see exchange of your thoughts on this topic. 

FIRST LEAD DISCUSSION QUESTION LEARNING POINTS

The view of Hobbes and Locke- ie that of the Social Contract/Custom ethical theory -  is that society is the source of ethics/morality, though Locke finds certain rights inalienable, natural rights.  While in some countries the society may incorporate ethical/moral principles from other sources, (religion, philosophy) the view of Hobbes and Locke being that ultimately the society in which one participates determines the ethics/morals for those in the society (This concept that the society/group determines what is right and wrongful conduct can also be applied to all types of groups, formal, informal, large, small – i.e work, church, neighborhood, family, social group, nations).

While we do not know for sure what is the "state of nature" ( even Hobbes and Locke differ ), even ancient societies had forms of government and social rules, we can as does Hobbes and Locke, look to the disorder and way humans treat each other even with government to conclude that without any government there could potentially be greater disorder, if not ANARCHY and CHAOS!

If one disagrees with the societal standards, one has options though not always readily available - one can choose to obey reluctantly, try to change them, or leave. Staying implies acceptance of the rules, even those not to one’s liking.  Disobedience can lead to being fined and/or exclusion from the society – jail, deportment, capital punishment.

SECOND LEAD DISCUSSION QUESTION

Apply the Social Custom/Contract theory to the job interview scenario presented in Week 1 to decide whether according to this theory one would tell on one's best friend or not to deny one’s friend and get for ones self  a job for which they are both interviewing.

Also, each of you explain one different strength and weaknesses of using this theory to determine what is the right choice.

SECOND LEAD DISCUSSION QUESTION LEARNING POINTS

While the “Social Contract” ethical theory gives us a way to determine what is right or wrong - setting an objective standard applicable to all in the society- there are a number of problems. You ought to have read and discussed those criticisms raised by our textbook author in Chapters 2 and 5. For example, there is no world wide universal standard as each society can make its own determination of what is right - “cultural moral relativism. “ Or that within a society, not everyone may agree, that a majority is 50 +1, leaving many with an opposing view or views. And that over time opinions change, making what was once good, now bad, or vice versa. Example, slavery, gay marriage, use of certain recreational drugs.

As to applying this theory to the job interview scenario, what is right is determined by the relevant society in which one is participating.  Therefore what is the relevant society?  The employer?  The group of friends?  The school code of conduct? The industry within which the employer and the potential employee participates?  If this is a professional position is there an applicable professional code of conduct such as for lawyers or doctors?  More than one group code of conduct may apply as there may be overlapping groups each with different  codes of conduct- a pharmacist whose religious belief conflicts with providing birth control pills.