Ross, William David Essay ⋆ Criminal Justice Essay Examples ⋆ EssayEmpire

The term prima facie duty literally means a “first appearance duty,” or some act that is at first blush or at a first glance a duty. A prima facie duty contrasts with “a duty sans phrase” or “a duty simpliciter, that is, a duty without qualification, or a pure duty. The philosophical doctrine of prima facie duties originates from the work of Sir William David Ross (1877–1971). Ross was a Scot who went to Oxford to do graduate work and stayed there for the whole of his long and distinguished career. He was knighted more for his public service as a member and chair of governmental committees than for his academic work. He was the most distinguished editor and interpreter in the 20th century of the works of Aristotle. He was also well known as a moral philosopher and as a member of the British intuitionist school of moral philosophy that included such men as G. E. Moore, H. A. Prichard, and A. C. Ewing.

The idea behind the doctrine of prima facie duties is illustrated in the following example: A man bakes a nutritious chicken pie because he has promised his wife to cook such a dish for dinner. However, a destitute person comes to the door looking for food. It would obviously be good to give him the pie. The pie’s maker is placed in an ethical dilemma because he has a prima facie duty to keep promises and a prima facie duty to act beneficently to promote the welfare of others. Prima facie duties, in other words, are, as Ross himself acknowledged, not really duties but things related in a special way to duties. They are moral principles or norms of a general character. As such they will conflict in particular situations, thereby creating moral dilemmas. As Ross also acknowledged, the term prima facie is not ideal either, as it might give the impression that these duties are just so-called duties and not real ones. But for Ross prima facie duties are not illusory; they are real. Taken as moral principles, they are objectively sound moral principles. Ross’s own list of prima facie duties included fidelity, reparation, beneficence, doing no harm and preventing harm, gratitude, and self-improvement. The list can be supplemented by other plausible principles.

Ross’s intuitionism appears in two places in his theory. With respect to the status of the prima facie duties themselves, they have that status; Ross compares them to the fundamental axioms of mathematics. With respect to the final decision on what to do in a particular situation— what the duty simpliciter is—that, too, is something that is just seen. The pie maker might just see that he should give the destitute person the pie, for he could always make some alternative arrangements later to satisfy his promise to his wife.

The doctrine of prima facie duties has some appeal for criminal justice ethics because it seems to reflect reality. A parole officer, for example, has a client who misses two or three appointments in a row and thus is in violation of the conditions of parole. But then the officer discovers that the client had been spending the time on a project that will actually contribute a good deal to his or her rehabilitation. The parole officer has a prima facie duty of fidelity to law and a prima facie duty to promote the good of the client and of society. Each of these duties can in principle be overridden; they are not absolute. The final decision will be the best answer for that client in that situation. Each of the duties or principles would continue to be ethically sound in general even if overridden in this case.

However, the doctrine of prima facie duties is also criticized and found unpersuasive for two reasons: (1) it does not make any attempt to prioritize some prima facie duties over others, and (2) it does not give any concrete guidance about the hard decisions in actual cases. These may not be fair criticisms. Consider the difference between a cooking recipe that call for half a cup of chopped parsley and one that calls for “a handful” of chopped parsley. Certainly the first one gives specific guidance; but so also does the second in the proper circumstances. The second assumes some pre-existing expertise in cooking, some sense of how much parsley would be too much for that set of ingredients and that dish, and how much would be too little.

The criticism of the doctrine of prima facie duties that it does not give specific advice expects the doctrine to be like the first recipe, whereas it should be understood as being like the second. In this respect, the doctrine of prima facie duties is similar to virtue ethics. Virtue ethics, however, does not necessarily have the commitments to objective ethical value that the doctrine of prima facie duties embraces.

Bibliography:

Banks, Cyndi, ed. Criminal Justice Ethics. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2013.
Ewing, A. C. Ethics. London: English Universities Press, 1953.
Moore, G. E. Principia Ethica. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1903.
Prichard, H. A. Moral Obligation: Essays and Lectures. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1949.
Ross, W. D. The Right and the Good. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1930.
Williams, Christopher R. and Bruce A. Arrigo, eds. Ethics, Crime and Criminal Justice. 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson, 2012.

This example Ross, William David Essay is published for educational and informational purposes only. If you need a custom essay or research paper on this topic please use our writing services. EssayEmpire.com offers reliable custom essay writing services that can help you to receive high grades and impress your professors with the quality of each essay or research paper you hand in.