CONSISTENCY AND DETERMINACY
Mutimura Charity
PHILL 2306
03/04/2022
- Explore the difference between Consistency and Determinacy? Describe Consistency in detail. Describe Determinacy in detail. What differences are there between the two factors? Be explicit and specific about their differences. Why is each factor important when it comes to judging the accuracy of moral theories? Explain.
Introduction is job is to tell the reader what is up!
In this paper, we explore differences between Consistency and Determinacy. These are things we use to judge moral theories. I will describe these factors in this paper. They are different factors, and in this paper, I will tell you three differences between these factors. It is important to judge the accuracy of moral theories based on these factors. My thesis is that when it comes to judging moral theories, consistency and determinacy are crucial. [revise this if some parts don’t make sense to you. Check for grammar. We did this kinda quick. Feel free to emphasize or de-emphasize ideas that you think your paper is doing.]
Describe Consistency in detail
Consistency is one way we judge moral theories. When a moral theory has Consistency, it does not have any contradictions in itself. A moral theory would not produce two or more moral verdicts for the same situation. Moral verdicts are the labels of obligatory, or wrong, or optional. These labels are about whether an action is morally required, morally forbidden, and permitted. When a moral theory only produces on of these labels, and only one of them, it helps the moral theory be consistent. For instance, if a moral theory says that lying is obligatory to avoid a creep, then it will not ever state that lying is wrong to avoid a creep.
Based on the moral principles and the moral situation we are looking at, it produces one answer. Consistency has to have factual information that is reliable to produce a moral verdict It is also has to with the moral principles of a moral theory (Michael 1965, p. 118). Consistency is when a moral theory presents principles used to judge what moral verdicts one should apply for any moral situation. [explain that] [add the ideas we spoke about when it comes to Consistency in a moral theory. If you want, you can use the Army example but make it very brief. The lying example is fine as well. Feel free to fiddle with this section.]
Describe Determinacy in detail
This section is about Determinacy. A moral theory should feature principles that yield a determinant moral verdict about the morality of persons, actions, and other moral evaluations in a wide range of cases (Igneski, 2001, 607). Sometimes ideas are vague or ambiguous in moral theories. moral theory doesn’t fit anywhere; hence no moral verdict. It is not good for a moral theory to lack a moral verdict. A moral theory needs to allow for verdicts to be made, but sometimes relevant facts fail to work. Determinacy is when judging things by typically picking factors that meet specific criteria. Often determinacy verdicts are given based on whether the action was obligatory, wrong, or optional (Igneski, 2001, 609). When the action fails to meet the three categories, the aspect of “Niceness” is often considered with the goal of associating it with any of the verdicts to understand action. Sometimes, there is a chance that one cannot determine what sort of idea is needed to label something as wrong, obligatory or optional. Often in such cases, the idea of “Niceness” cannot be defined as either attractive, polite, or kind. Therefore, a determinate verdict is not yielded, thus undeterminable following vagueness hence not matching factual information. [you have the good stuff here. Just reorganize it a bit. I like the emphasize on nice as the ambiguous thing. Like, if you were supposed to nice to people and you lied to the creep. What does nice mean?]
What differences are there between the two factors? .
On the other hand, in inconsistency, two or more answers can always be found depending on solid interpretation.
While still using a movie, consistency is used to judge the degreed situation aspect. For instance, instead of limiting the options to positive or negative effects, one has a scale to make a rating. Sometimes, consistency depends on external support for a verdict to be reached according to factual information (Schroeder, 2018, 200). unlike determinacy that can singularize a factor in the movie, consistency looks into a wide range of factors. Therefore, one can judge the quality of the film using a variety of aspects, including acting, quality, presentation, among others. Thus instead of saying that the movie was the worst kind, one would easily state that they rate the movie two out of ten or any figure depending on the enjoyment attained. A moral theory needs to allow for verdicts to be made, but sometimes relevant facts fail to work (Máhrik, 2018, 7). Therefore, in some situations, the ethical theory has less consistency. [cut out the movie example. It is eating up all of your space you can use to explain the differences between consistency and determinacy. If you use an example, use a moral situation.
Why is each factor important when it comes to judging the accuracy of moral theories? Explain.
Consistency is crucial in judging the accuracy of moral theory following its constant moral verdicts. Often, consistency is reliable in producing a moral verdict. Besides, a consistency that is non-contradictory does not create more than one moral verdict for any given case (Michael, 1965). The accuracy of consistency lies in its moral theory does not provide two verdicts. It only results in one. Moral theory must give one answer as directed by factual information. Therefore, consistency cannot be obligatory n wrong at the same time. Always produce the correct answer for consistency to be attained. Similarly, determinacy is accurate in its judgment when presented with a moral situation. Often the verdict considers offering only one solution. For example, it points out that a particular action is wrong without mentioning other verdicts. Both consistency and determinacy are guided by factual information. Consistency is crucial for ethics to ensure that moral actions, standards, and values are not contradicted (Schroeder, 2018, 199).
References
Igneski, V. (2001). Distance, Determinacy and the Duty to Aid: A Reply to Kamm. Law and Philosophy, 20(6), 605–616. https://doi.org/10.2307/3505158
Máhrik, T. (2018).The golden rule of morality–an ethical paradox. Ethics & Bioethics, 8(1-2), 5-13.
Michael A. G. Stocker. (1965). Consistency in Ethics. Analysis, 25, 116–122. https://doi.org/10.2307/3326726
Richards, C. (1998). Belief and Context Determinacy in Interpreting Fiction. Diacritics, 28(2), 81–93.
Schroeder, S. A. (2018). Is consistency overrated? Journal of Medical Ethics, 44(3), 199–200.
