Advertisement

Teaching Practical Ethics

  • Elaine E. Englehardt
  • Michael S. Pritchard
Chapter

Abstract

For several decades, we have had an interest in introducing ethics across the curriculum at our universities, especially in areas that help students prepare for their working careers. This has involved encouraging faculty from a variety of disciplines other than philosophy to reflect with their students on the ethical problems one is most likely to face in professional and working life. Many students are already working and are anxious to discuss the ethical difficulties that occur daily in their work places. Without a strong background in philosophical ethics is it appropriate for faculty in these disciplines to take on the educational task of trying to help their students anticipate and think through possible solutions to the ethical problems they are likely to encounter? Our answer is, yes; and, as we will maintain below, we believe Thomas Reid would give the same response.

Keywords

Ethical problems Philosophical background Thomas Reid Curriculum System of morals Grand theories Euthyphro Perplexing problems 

References

  1. Bazerman, M., & Tenbrunsel, A. (2011). Blind spots. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Callahan, D. (1980). Goals in the teaching of ethics. In D. Callahan, & S. Bok (Eds.) Ethics teaching in higher education. A Hastings Center Monograph. New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Davis, M. (2009). The usefulness of moral theory in practical ethics: A question of comparative cost. Teaching Ethics, 10(1) Fall, 69–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Davis, M. (2011). The usefulness of moral theory in teaching practical ethics: A reply to Gert and Harris. Teaching Ethics, 12(1), 51–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Harris, C. E. (2009a). Is moral theory useful in practical ethics? Teaching Ethics, 10(1), 51–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Harris, C. E. (2009b). Response to Michael Davis: The cost is minimal and worth it. Teaching Ethics, 10(1), 79–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Harris, C. E. (2011). A reply to Bernard Gert. Teaching Ethics, 12(1), 41–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Harris, C. E., Pritchard, M. S., Rabins, M., James, R., & Englehardt, E. E. (2014). Ethics in engineering: Concepts and cases (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Cengage.Google Scholar
  9. Plato. (1975). The trial and death of socrates (trans: Grube, G. M. A.). Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing.Google Scholar
  10. Pritchard, M. S., & Englehardt E. E. (2015). Ethical theories and teaching engineering ethics. In S. S. Sethy (Ed.) Contemporary ethical issues in engineering (pp. 111–120). Hershey, PA: IGI Global Publishing.Google Scholar
  11. Reid, T. (2007). Practical ethics. In K. Haakonsen (Ed.) Practical ethics. Pennsylvania: Penn State Press.Google Scholar
  12. Reid, T. (2010). Essays on the active powers man, edited by K. Haakonsen, & J. Harris. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Stewart, D. (1829). The works of Dugald Stewart, Vol. 5: The philosophy of the active and moral powers of man. Cambridge: Hilliard and Brown.Google Scholar
  14. Werhane, P. H., Hartman, L. P., Archer, C., Englehardt, E. E., & Pritchard, M. S. (2013). Obstacles to ethical decision-making. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Whewell, W. (1864). The elements of morality, Vols. I and II, 4th ed. London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Utah Valley University (UVU)OremUSA
  2. 2.Western Michigan UniversityKalamazooUSA

Personalised recommendations