How to Make Good Decisions and Be Right All the Time

Last updated
How to Make Good Decisions and Be Right All the Time
How to Make Good Decisions and Be Right All the Time.jpg
Cover of the first edition
Author Iain King
CountryUnited Kingdom
LanguageEnglish
Subject Ethics
Publisher Bloomsbury [1]
Publication date
2008
Media typePrint (Hardcover)
Pages256
ISBN 9781847063472

How to Make Good Decisions and Be Right All the Time is a 2008 book by Iain King. It sets out a history of moral philosophy and presents new ideas in ethics, which have been described as quasi-utilitarianism. [2] [3] [4] [5]

Contents

Summary

How to Make Good Decisions and Be Right All the Time has forty chapters, which are grouped into six parts.

Part I. The Problem: We Need to Make Decisions, But We Don't Know How (Chapters 1–6)

For ethical advice to be credible, the book says it cannot be perceived as arbitrary. The book cites The Dice Man – a man who makes choices based on dice rolls – as an example of advice-following which is arbitrary and so cannot be regarded as ethical.

Chapter three argues intuitions about what we should do can be more useful, but are undermined because our multiple intuitions often lead to contradictory advice (e.g. ‘help a stranger’ or ‘put family first’?). Philosophers have sought to eliminate these contradictions by locating right and wrong in a single part of the decision-making process: for example, in the actions we take (e.g. Kant), in our character (e.g. Aristotle, virtue ethics) or in the consequences of our actions (e.g. Utilitarianism).

Chapter four explains how ‘do whatever is best’ (utilitarianism) still dominates modern philosophical and economic thinking.

Chapter five cites seven faults with utilitarianism. These are that it can be self-defeating; that it considers only future events and ignores the past; that it places decision-making authority in questionable hands; that it doesn’t discriminate fairly between people; that it sacrifices individual concerns to the group interest; that it down-grades promises, fairness and truth-telling; and that it doesn’t offer any clear rules. [6] The chapter also argues that the main argument for utilitarianism is invalid, and ‘empty’. [7]

Part II. The Proof: Finding the Basics of Right and Wrong (Chapters 7–14)

Part II starts with a secular revision of Pascal’s Wager, [8] arguing “What does it hurt to pursue value and virtue? If there is value, then we have everything to gain, but if there is none, then we haven’t lost anything.” Thus, it rationally makes sense for us to pursue something of value. [8]

It says that “people ultimately derive their choices from what they want to do and what other people want to do” [9]

It then presents four different arguments for deriving a basic principle from which right and wrong can be developed. These are an adaptation of utilitarianism; an adaptation of John Rawls' theory; [6] an argument from evolutionary theory; [10] and a 'Sherlock Holmes' approach.

All four arguments converge on empathy, obligation and the ‘Help Principle’, which the book argues are kernels of a viable ethical system. [8] According to Audrey Tang, King's philosophy advocates: "If spending one unit of your effort could help another person by two units, he detailed in his book, you should help." [11]

Part III. The Principle: Refining the Help Principle (Chapters 15–22)

Part III defines the Help Principle more carefully, with a section on autonomy, [12] and a critique of the golden rule.

It results in an approach to ethics which combines deontology, consequentialism and virtue ethics. This has been described as quasi-utilitarianism. [13]

Part IV. The Program: Extending the Principles to Other Problems (Chapters 23–31)

Part IV attempts to distinguish white lies from bad lies. [14] [15] [16] Contradicting Aristotle, who believed no general rule on lying was possible, 'For he who advocates lying can never be believed or trusted,' and St Augustine, who believed all lies were sinful, the book presents a definition of good lies, and argues why it is credible and superior. [17] [18]

Chapters 28 and 29 reconcile individual human rights with group interests. Both individual justice and social justice feature.

Part V. Practical Advice: For Real People in the Modern World (Chapters 32–38)

Part V deals with situations when information is not certain, and other real world problems which are absent from much academic philosophy. These problems make effective altruism impractical and rare. [19]

Chapter 34 argues that the notion of integrity can only make sense in ethics if it is applied to the consequences people allow to happen rather than to people themselves.

Part VI. The Prognosis: How to Make Good Decisions and Be Right All the Time (Chapters 39–40)

Part VI claims a hybrid system can be internally-consistent and address several problems of the main schools of ethics. [8]

Chapter 40 concludes it is impossible to make good decisions all the time because we can never know enough about the world, and the consequences of our actions. Hence, ethics can never emulate the scientific revolution by offering a simple set of rules for every situation, similar to those derived by Newton. This is because Newton’s own rules can never be applied perfectly, because we can never know how the world really is.

About the book

The book has a satirical title, [20] and was published on 1 December 2008. [21] It became a bestseller within the category of philosophy books in 2013. [22]

The book attempts to answer the Frege–Geach Problem, the Fact–Value Gap, and the Open-question argument, [23] although the given answers have been challenged. [24] [6]

The book has been used to reconcile utilitarian and rules-based ethics. [25]

Humanist psychologists have used the book to explain why only proven phenomena is needed to prove why morality exists, and what the parameters of morality should be. [26] Theists have commented on the way the book grounds ethics without recourse to religion. [27]

The book is used to apply ethical considerations to finance and accounting, [28] and has been used to justify certain bad actions as a ‘necessary evil’. [29]

The book has been used in freshman philosophy classes, to teach teenagers, [30] and in SATs. [31]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Consequentialism</span> Ethical theory based on consequences

In ethical philosophy, consequentialism is a class of normative, teleological ethical theories that holds that the consequences of one's conduct are the ultimate basis for judgement about the rightness or wrongness of that conduct. Thus, from a consequentialist standpoint, a morally right act is one that will produce a good outcome. Consequentialism, along with eudaimonism, falls under the broader category of teleological ethics, a group of views which claim that the moral value of any act consists in its tendency to produce things of intrinsic value. Consequentialists hold in general that an act is right if and only if the act will produce, will probably produce, or is intended to produce, a greater balance of good over evil than any available alternative. Different consequentialist theories differ in how they define moral goods, with chief candidates including pleasure, the absence of pain, the satisfaction of one's preferences, and broader notions of the "general good".

In ethical philosophy, ethical egoism is the normative position that moral agents ought to act in their own self-interest. It differs from psychological egoism, which claims that people can only act in their self-interest. Ethical egoism also differs from rational egoism, which holds that it is rational to act in one's self-interest. Ethical egoism holds, therefore, that actions whose consequences will benefit the doer are ethical.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ethics</span> Philosophical study of morality

Ethics or moral philosophy is the philosophical study of moral phenomena. It investigates normative questions about what people ought to do or which behavior is morally right. It is usually divided into three major fields: normative ethics, applied ethics, and metaethics.

Hedonism refers to the prioritization of pleasure in one's lifestyle, actions, or thoughts. The term can include a number of theories or practices across philosophy, art, and psychology, encompassing both sensory pleasure and more intellectual or personal pursuits, but can also be used in everyday parlance as a pejorative for the egoistic pursuit of short-term gratification at the expense of others.

Normative ethics is the study of ethical behaviour and is the branch of philosophical ethics that investigates questions regarding how one ought to act, in a moral sense.

In ethical philosophy, utilitarianism is a family of normative ethical theories that prescribe actions that maximize happiness and well-being for the affected individuals. In other words, utilitarian ideas encourage actions that ensure the greatest good for the greatest number.

Moral relativism or ethical relativism is used to describe several philosophical positions concerned with the differences in moral judgments across different peoples and cultures. An advocate of such ideas is often referred to as a relativist.

In environmental philosophy, environmental ethics is an established field of practical philosophy "which reconstructs the essential types of argumentation that can be made for protecting natural entities and the sustainable use of natural resources." The main competing paradigms are anthropocentrism, physiocentrism, and theocentrism. Environmental ethics exerts influence on a large range of disciplines including environmental law, environmental sociology, ecotheology, ecological economics, ecology and environmental geography.

A land ethic is a philosophy or theoretical framework about how, ethically, humans should regard the land. The term was coined by Aldo Leopold (1887–1948) in his A Sand County Almanac (1949), a classic text of the environmental movement. There he argues that there is a critical need for a "new ethic", an "ethic dealing with human's relation to land and to the animals and plants which grow upon it".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Virtue ethics</span> Normative ethical theories

Virtue ethics is an approach that treats virtue and character as the primary subjects of ethics, in contrast to other ethical systems that put consequences of voluntary acts, principles or rules of conduct, or obedience to divine authority in the primary role.

In moral philosophy, deontological ethics or deontology is the normative ethical theory that the morality of an action should be based on whether that action itself is right or wrong under a series of rules and principles, rather than based on the consequences of the action. It is sometimes described as duty-, obligation-, or rule-based ethics. Deontological ethics is commonly contrasted to consequentialism, utilitarianism, virtue ethics, and pragmatic ethics. In this terminology, action is more important than the consequences.

In ethics, welfarism is a theory that well-being, what is good for someone or what makes a life worth living, is the only thing that has intrinsic value. In its most general sense, it can be defined as descriptive theory about what has value, but some philosophers also understand welfarism as a moral theory, that what one should do is ultimately determined by considerations of well-being. The right action, policy or rule is the one leading to the maximal amount of well-being. In this sense, it is often seen as a type of consequentialism, and can take the form of utilitarianism.

<i>Utilitarianism</i> (book) 1861 essay by John Stuart Mill

Utilitarianism is an 1861 essay written by English philosopher and economist John Stuart Mill, considered to be a classic exposition and defence of utilitarianism in ethics. It was originally published as a series of three separate articles in Fraser's Magazine in 1861 before it was collected and reprinted as a single work in 1863. The essay explains utilitarianism to its readers and addresses the numerous criticism against the theory during Mill's lifetime. It was heavily criticized upon publication; however, since then, Utilitarianism gained significant popularity and has been considered "the most influential philosophical articulation of a liberal humanistic morality that was produced in the nineteenth century."

Quasi-realism is the meta-ethical view which claims that:

  1. Ethical sentences do not express propositions.
  2. Instead, ethical sentences project emotional attitudes as though they were real properties.

Secular ethics is a branch of moral philosophy in which ethics is based solely on human faculties such as logic, empathy, reason or moral intuition, and not derived from belief in supernatural revelation or guidance—a source of ethics in many religions. Secular ethics refers to any ethical system that does not draw on the supernatural, and includes humanism, secularism and freethinking. A classical example of literature on secular ethics is the Kural text, authored by the ancient Indian philosopher Valluvar.

Animal ethics is a branch of ethics which examines human-animal relationships, the moral consideration of animals and how nonhuman animals ought to be treated. The subject matter includes animal rights, animal welfare, animal law, speciesism, animal cognition, wildlife conservation, wild animal suffering, the moral status of nonhuman animals, the concept of nonhuman personhood, human exceptionalism, the history of animal use, and theories of justice. Several different theoretical approaches have been proposed to examine this field, in accordance with the different theories currently defended in moral and political philosophy. There is no theory which is completely accepted due to the differing understandings of what is meant by the term ethics; however, there are theories that are more widely accepted by society such as animal rights and utilitarianism.

Population ethics is the philosophical study of the ethical problems arising when our actions affect who is born and how many people are born in the future. An important area within population ethics is population axiology, which is "the study of the conditions under which one state of affairs is better than another, when the states of affairs in question may differ over the numbers and the identities of the persons who ever live."

<i>The Methods of Ethics</i> 1874 book by Henry Sidgwick

The Methods of Ethics is a book on ethics first published in 1874 by the English philosopher Henry Sidgwick. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy indicates that The Methods of Ethics "in many ways marked the culmination of the classical utilitarian tradition." Noted moral and political philosopher John Rawls, writing in the Forward to the Hackett reprint of the 7th edition, says Methods of Ethics "is the clearest and most accessible formulation of ... 'the classical utilitarian doctrine'". Contemporary utilitarian philosopher Peter Singer has said that the Methods "is simply the best book on ethics ever written."

Negative utilitarianism is a form of negative consequentialism that can be described as the view that people should minimize the total amount of aggregate suffering, or that they should minimize suffering and then, secondarily, maximize the total amount of happiness. It can be considered as a version of utilitarianism that gives greater priority to reducing suffering than to increasing pleasure. This differs from classical utilitarianism, which does not claim that reducing suffering is intrinsically more important than increasing happiness. Both versions of utilitarianism hold that morally right and morally wrong actions depend solely on the consequences for overall aggregate well-being. "Well-being" refers to the state of the individual.

<i>The Right and the Good</i> 1930 book by Scottish philosopher David Ross

The Right and the Good is a 1930 book by the Scottish philosopher David Ross. In it, Ross develops a deontological pluralism based on prima facie duties. Ross defends a realist position about morality and an intuitionist position about moral knowledge. The Right and the Good has been praised as one of the most important works of ethical theory in the twentieth century.

References

  1. "How to Make Good Decisions and Be Right All the Time". Bloomsbury. 2008-10-16. Archived from the original on 2015-11-17. Retrieved 2015-11-16.
  2. Robert A. Segal; Kocku von Stuckrad, eds. (2015). "Commitment". Vocabulary for the Study of Religion. Brill Reference. Retrieved 2015-11-06.
  3. "Philosophy Documentation Center: Philosophy Now Issue 100". Jan 2014. Retrieved 2015-11-01.
  4. Bosman, Hendrik (2014). "From Divine Command and Prophetic Goals to Sapiential Character Formation: A Survey of Old Testament Ethical Reflection Informed by Philosophical Ethics". Scriptura. 113 (5112): 1–12. doi: 10.7833/113-0-907 . hdl: 10520/EJC164824 . ISSN   0254-1807.
  5. Quirk, Barry (2011). Re-imagining Government: Public Leadership in Challenging Times. Palgrave MacMillan. p. 222. ISBN   978-0-230-31442-9.
  6. 1 2 3 "How to Make Good Decisions... a 62 point summary (pdf)" (PDF). Retrieved 3 April 2022.
  7. [ dead link ]
  8. 1 2 3 4 Chandler Brett (2014-07-16). "24 and Philosophy". Blackwell. Retrieved 2015-11-06.
  9. "Did Angela do Good or Bad?". Petergreenwell.com. 2015. Retrieved 3 April 2022.
  10. "Moral Laws of the Jungle | Issue 100 | Philosophy Now". philosophynow.org. Retrieved 3 April 2022.
  11. "Open Source Enlightenment 2015 (Part 1)". www.linkedin.com. Retrieved 3 April 2022.
  12. [ dead link ]
  13. D’Souza, J. F. and Adams, C. K. (2016). "On Measuring the Moral Value of Action". Frontiers of Philosophy in China. 11(1), pp. 122–136.
  14. Watkins B, David (2013). Where's My Dog? The Search for Honest Leadership. WM Consulting. pp. 53–54. ISBN   978-3-033-03950-6.
  15. Schokking, David J. (2013). Honest, Authentic & Distinct: Ethical Not-For-Profit Branding (Masters). McMasters University. hdl:11375/14398.
  16. Ross Gendels. "Does Closeness Effect Lying Online Versus Lying In-Person?" (PDF). Christopherxjjensen.com. Retrieved 3 April 2022.
  17. "Sunday Observer (Sri Lanka), February 5th, 2012". Archived from the original on 2012-02-11. Retrieved 2016-07-31.
  18. "The Conundrum of Illicit Financial Flows, Teshome Abebe, November 14, 2014". Ethiomedia.com. Retrieved 3 April 2022.
  19. "Food for the Mind". Food for the Mind. Retrieved 3 April 2022.
  20. "Should Indiana Jones Eat the Monkey Brain?" (PDF). Public Diplomacy Magazine. Summer 2020. pp. 38–42. Retrieved 2 September 2020.
  21. "How to Make Good Decisions and Be Right All the Time (Review)". Publishers' Weekly. 2008. Retrieved 2015-11-06.
  22. "Philosophy catalogue 2013 by Bloomsbury Publishing - Issuu". Issuu.com. Retrieved 3 April 2022.
  23. "talks.cam : Moral Philosophy for Elves". Talks.cam.ac.uk. Retrieved 3 April 2022.
  24. Crocker, Geoff (2011). An Enlightened Philosophy: Can an Atheist Believe Anything?. Iff Books. pp.  85–86. ISBN   978-1-84694-424-6.
  25. D'Souza, Jeevan. "On Measuring the Moral Value of Action". Philos, China.
  26. Johnstone, Albert A. (2018-06-01). "Why Morality?". The Humanistic Psychologist. 46 (2): 188–203. doi:10.1037/hum0000090.
  27. "Atheism and Theism, A Grounding of Ethics". Red Pill Religion. 2017-12-27.
  28. DeZoort, Pollard and Schnee (October 2017). "A Study of Perceived Ethicality of Low Corporate Effective Tax Rates" . Retrieved 2 September 2020.
  29. ME Karim (2020). "Bad Action Being Moral Due to Necessary Evil, in Journal of the Arts and Humanities, Vol 9, No 2 (2020)". Journal of Arts and Humanities. ISSN   2167-9053 . Retrieved 2 September 2020.
  30. Monteath, Andrea (2011). Philosophy for Teenagers (Ph.D.). Edith Cowan University.
  31. "Home – SAT Suite of Assessments | College Board". satsuite.collegeboard.org. Retrieved 3 April 2022.