Simone de Beauvoir warns against “ethical recipes,” suggesting instead that life and ethics are both inherently ambiguous. Choose one of the ethical “recipes” or “methods” offered by Manning, Kant, Mill.
What ambiguities remain even after the proper application of the ethical standard in question? (Be sure you are using “ambiguous” in the manner that Simone de Beauvoir uses the term.)
In your opinion, is any non-ambiguous ethical standard possible? Why or why not?
To address this question, let's first break it down into two parts. Firstly, we need to choose one of the ethical "recipes" or "methods" offered by Manning, Kant, or Mill. Then, we will discuss the ambiguities that still exist even after properly applying the selected ethical standard.
To choose one of the ethical standards, we need to understand the approaches of Manning, Kant, and Mill.
1. Manning's ethical standard: Manning is a virtue ethicist who emphasizes the importance of cultivating virtues such as kindness, honesty, and integrity. According to her, ethical decisions should be based on developing and embodying these virtues.
2. Kant's ethical standard: Kant proposed deontological ethics, which focuses on duty and moral obligation. According to him, ethical actions should be guided by the categorical imperative, a principle that commands us to act in a way that we could will to be a universal law.
3. Mill's ethical standard: Mill formulated utilitarianism, which states that ethical actions should maximize overall happiness or utility for the greatest number of people. According to him, decisions should be guided by the principle of the greatest happiness or the greatest good for the greatest number.
Now, let's move on to the second part of the question - the ambiguities that remain even after properly applying the selected ethical standard. Simone de Beauvoir argues that life and ethics are inherently ambiguous, meaning that any ethical recipe or method will face uncertainties or paradoxes.
Regardless of which ethical standard we choose, we encounter several ambiguities. For example, Manning's virtue ethics may raise questions about which virtues to prioritize in specific situations and how to balance conflicting virtues. Kant's categorical imperative can lead to dilemmas when two moral duties conflict, forcing us to choose one over the other. In utilitarianism, the ambiguity lies in how to accurately quantify and measure happiness or utility.
These ambiguities persist because ethical dilemmas often involve complex and context-specific circumstances, which may introduce a range of perspectives, values, and outcomes. Simone de Beauvoir's understanding of ambiguity goes beyond mere uncertainty; it acknowledges the complexity of life and the limitations of any single ethical standard to provide clear-cut answers to all moral questions.
Now, moving to the final part of the question - whether any non-ambiguous ethical standard is possible. It is challenging to argue for the existence of a completely non-ambiguous ethical standard because ethical decision-making occurs in a dynamic and diverse world. Different ethical theories offer valuable frameworks, but they cannot eliminate all uncertainties and ambiguities related to every ethical predicament.
However, that does not mean ethical standards are irrelevant or impossible to establish. Ethical standards provide guidance and help us navigate moral complexities, even if they cannot provide absolute certainty. They offer a starting point for ethical reflection, conversation, and judgment. It is important to understand that ethical principles and standards are not fixed, but they evolve as society evolves, reflecting changing values, perspectives, and understandings of morality.