Theory of conduct

The following is a portion of , which consists of lectures given by Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger in courses that he taught at Ohio State University. Wikification and NPOVing are invited.

Related Topics:
Larry Sanger - Ohio State University

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The theory of conduct is "the study of right and wrong, of obligation and permissions, of duty, of what is above and beyond the call of duty, and of what is so wrong as to be evil." But matters can be simplified considerably. Each of these concepts, "right," "wrong," "obligation," "permission," "virtue," "vice," and so forth can be defined in relation to their opposing concepts. For example, by defining "right action," "wrong action" may then be defined as an "action that is not right." Examples: If an action is right, then am I obliged to do it? If I ought to do something, then would I be practicing a virtue if I did it?

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Typically, the one concept that ethicists focus on is "ought." So the task of the theory of conduct, as they typically see it, is that of giving an account, or a definition, of "ought." Or in other words, the task is to fill in the blank in the following: One ought to take action A iff ...

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

e.g., I ought to help a stranger on the roadside if, and only if --... This invokes a popular, seemingly very sensible rule, the Golden Rule: Treat others in a way that you would like to be treated yourself. The Golden Rule can be restated like this:

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

One ought to treat others in a certain way if you would like to be treated that way yourself.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

So, help the stranger on the roadside -- and why? Because that's how you would like to be treated yourself, if you found yourself stranded. That makes some sense. But unfortunately, the first or most common view of things is not always the best. As useful as the Golden Rule may be, it's not perfect.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

First of all, the Golden Rule only applies to actions that we take with respect to other people. It only advises us on how to treat others. What it doesn't tell us is how behave when we're at home, alone, and not interacting with others at all. It doesn't tell us that we should do our homework on time, or that we should get to bed at an early hour. When we formulate a theory of what we ought to do, that theory should tell us how to lead our personal lives, not just how to treat others.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

A possible objection is that what I do with my own life, on my own time, when it isn't hurting anyone else, is my own business. So it's not a matter for ethics. Consider the implications of what you're saying: you're saying that if some action doesn't affect other people, then morality has absolutely nothing to say about your action. So then consider some actions that morality would have nothing to say about. It would have nothing to say about smoking (as long as you did not breathe your smoke in other people's air); it would have nothing to do with heavy drinking (as long as you didn't let your drinking affect your job performance and so forth); morality would have nothing to say about whether you ought to do your homework, about whether you should get a good education, whether you should try to keep yourself healthy, and so forth. But surely morality does have a lot to say about those matters, about matters concerning how you should conduct your own personal life.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

I'm not saying you're not free to do whatever you like. In this country, that's pretty obvious. You're politically free to do all sorts of corrupt things, in this country, at present. And to be honest, I personally wouldn't advocate denying you those freedoms. But the question here is whether morality might have anything to do with leading your personal life in a virtuous or a corrupt way, so long as it does not directly affect other people. It seems to me pretty obvious that it does. In fact, I would submit to you that this is one of the most important things that a theory of conduct can do for us -- it can provide us with wisdom about how we should live all aspects of our lives, personal and social.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Since the Golden Rule doesn't address how we should live our personal lives, it isn't a complete theory of conduct. But there are other problems with it as well. A second problem is that, after all, other people may not want to be treated the way that you'd like to be treated. For example, I might be a masochist -- I get a great deal of pleasure from certain kinds of pain. So do unto others as I'd have them do unto me, right? Tie them up and hurt them, I guess! That's how I, the masochist, want to be treated! Well, that example might be a little flippant, and unfair to defenders of the Golden Rule, but there are plenty of other examples where that came from.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~