- when a politician acts immorally to achieve a greater good

- conflict between ordinary life and political life

- consequentialism

- "if the stakes are high enough, the rules should be broken"

- John Stuart Mill

- actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness

- founded by Plato and Aristotle

- emphasizes virtues and moral character

-  A virtue ethicist would focus less on lying in any particular instance and instead consider what a decision to tell a lie or not tell a lie said about one's character and moral behavior

- moral requirements are based on categorical imperative

- universality (society would fall apart, otherwise)

-unconditional moral oblication that is binding in all circumstances

- not dependent on a person's inclination or purpose

- if we all lied, society would fall apart (cat. imp.)

- lying is justified in certain situations

* overwhelming harm can be altered only through deceit

* completely harmless

* duty to others to protect their secrets

1. Importance of goal of deception

2. Availability of alternative means for achieving the goal

3. Identity of the victims of deception

4. Accountability of deceivers (the possibility of approving the deception in advance or discovering it later)

5. Containment of deception (its effects on other actions by officials)

- the struggle of competing interests and their PACs for access or influence in a diverse and many-sided legislative contest

- the # of PACs is increasing and the average PAC is spreading its contributions to more candidates rather than increasing the sums of $ it gives to each

1. quid pro quo: pre-arranged deals (trades of votes for money)

2. monetary influence: it is corrupt for office-holders to perform their public duties with monetary considerations in mind

3. distorition: campaign contributions do not reflect the balance of public opinion and thus distort policymaking through their influence on elections

- when a person who used to work for a particular industry takes a position in government or vice versa

- sub-issue of conflict of interest

1. integrity-based (deference to conscience)

2. justice-based (to oppose and reverse a program you believe is unjust)

3. policy-based (judgements of policy)

- leave quietly (hope for the best/resist inside)

- leave quietly

- leave with public protest

1. what is the right thing for people to do given their convictions?

2. How should government react if they disagree with conviction?

Persuasive: hopes to force majority to listen to argument and chnage its mind

Non-Persuasive: aims to increase cost of pursuing the majority - favored program in hope that majority will find new cost unacceptably high

- issue must be deeply unjust

- no alternatives

- there must be a chance that action will work

1. collection of the facts to determine whether injustices exist

2. negotiation

3. self-purification (doing it for the right reasons)

4. direct action

1. Just Cause/Right intention

2. Comparative Justice (injustice suffered by one party must significantly outweigh that suffered by the other)

3. Competent Authority (must be initiated by a political authority within a political system that allows distinctions of justice)

4. Probability of success

5. last resort

6. proportionality (anticipated benefits of waging a war must be proportionate to its expected evils or harms)

1. distinction (combatants v. non-combatants)

2. proportionality

3. military necessity (minimum force)

- dominance: if you have a good that has the ability to purchase all other goods, youo have dominance in society

- tyranny: one form of power used to dominate everything else

-principle of equality: all people may legitimatley make the same claims on social resources

- principle of differentiation: people may legitimately make varying claims on social resources

- norms of distributive justice (strict equality, need, investment, results, ascriptive)

1. hierarchy (people have some autonomy even within the chain)

2. collective