A person’s actions are right, if their motives behind their actions toward a certain situation have a good intention and they performed appropriate response to certain their situations that life has given to them. For example, a person’s intentions are their motives behind their actions, where as an appropriate action is any response towards any situation which is proper to perform in certain situations that require people to help other people rather than themselves as society deems fit. The following situations are from page 412 of The Philosophical Journey: An interactive approach show about some ethical dilemmas, and the appropriate actions and intentions to figure them out which solution can make an action either right or wrong. In the …show more content…
Even, if Esther’s intentions behind her actions were good, stealing from other people is still wrong. In fact, Esther could have done a lot of things to make money for the fund raiser instead of stealing from somebody. For example, Esther could have organized a another fundraiser for the children like either a food drive to give cans of food to the starving children or organize a car wash to make money or even ask the stranger to donate to her cause rather than stealing from the stranger. This action not only makes Esther into a thief rather than a person who is out to help the poor. Compare to the other scenario, both Danielle and Esther had good intentions behind their actions, but both of their actions are inappropriate for each of the different situations that they were both …show more content…
Fred actions are morally correct because he has a good intent which is to save Reggie’s life and an action that is proving very ethical for the situation in the way that he is saving Reggie’s life. For instance, Fred had the right intent and action during the situation at hand because Reggie was in danger and Fred had to respond quickly to the situation because the brick was falling quickly so he saves Reggie’s life by shoving him. Without any doubt, Fred’s action is appropriate because he had little time and it was the right thing to do in order to save Reggie’s life. For this reason, Fred preformed the appropriate response to the right situation due to the fact that his motives were to save Reggie’s life. Therefore, Fred’s actions are morally right. In contrast to the other scenarios, Fred has both the right intentions and appropriate actions for the right situation; whereas Esther and Danielle have just the right intentions but applying inappropriate actions to their situations make their responses morally
Theory of right conduct for utilitarianism defined by Mark Timmons in the book Moral Theory is that, an action A is obligatory if and only if A has a higher utility than any other alternative action that the agent could perform instead. An action A is wrong if and only if A has less utility than some other alternative action that the agent could perform instead. An action A is optional if and only if (i) A has as high a utility as any other alternative action that the agent could perform instead, but (ii) there is at least one other alternative action that has as high utility as A. (in other words, an action is optional if and only if in terms of utility production it is tied for first place with at least one other action). According to Timmons, an actions rightness or wrongness depend...
Ross, William D.. "What Makes Right Acts Right?" The Right and the Good. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1930. 753-760. Obtained from PHIL 250 B1, Winter Term 2014 Readings – Ethics. University of Alberta eClass.
Are our decisions subject to the inclinations of our past actions, as behaviorist would proclaim? Or do we have governance over our actions, or in other words, free will, as Humanists would argue? Furthermore, what is “right?” Is it to succumb to the societal and religious expectations of “good?” Or is it to act on one’s own intent? These are the questions that Alex from Stanley Kubrick’s Film adaptation of Burgess’ “A Clockwork Orange” and Hamlet from Shakespeare’s celebrated tragedy both struggle in answering as they
Philosophical Ethical Theories As we know, philosophers divide ethical theories into three major classes. They are Metaethics(descriptive), Conceptual(applied), and Normative(prescriptive). Metaethics basically takes the scientific approach to concocting where exactly our ethical principals and philosophies come from (Feiser, 2005). Descriptions and explanations of moral behaviors and beliefs are provided on the basis of facts studied by such specialists of anthropology, sociology and history (Beauchamp & Bowie, 2005).
Right Action." In On Virtue Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003. Louden, Robert B. "On Some Vices of Virtue Ethics. "
Some of the deficiencies in the way cultural relativism addresses moral problems, according to Holmes; are that they remain impractical, they are subject to change depending on where you live, and that people tolerate the different cultures. As a professional business person, I agree with Holmes analysis. Allowing others perceptions or beliefs to get away with our own personal beliefs would be contradicting ourselves. It is important to stand up for our beliefs, and help educate others on ethical issues. Over time we can make a difference in the world by modeling moral beliefs and ethics.
With the natural selfish mindset geared towards potential personal rewards and understandable fear of negative consequences, it is unreasonable to believe people act morally right for the sake of acting in such a way. Therefore, it seems to be no reason for humans to act morally right. Overall, it can be viewed that acting morally right or being just hold no intrinsic value since such an act is not voluntarily, willingly or genuinely done by no
There are many essays, papers and books written on the concept of right and wrong. Philosophers have theorized about moral actions for eons, one such philosopher is John Stuart Mill. In his book Utilitarianism he tries to improve on the theories of utilitarianism from previous philosophers, as he is a strong believer himself in the theory. In Mill's book he presents the ideology that there is another branch on the utilitarian tree. This branch being called rule-utilitarianism. Mill makes a distinction between two different types of utilitarianism; act-utilitarianism and rule-utilitarianism. Rule-utilitarianism seems like a major advance over the simple theory of act-utilitarianism. But for all its added complexity, it may not actually be a significant improvement. This is proven when looking at the flaws in act-utilitarianism and relating them to the ways in which rule-utilitarianism tries to overcome them. As well one must look at the obstacles that rule-utilitarianism has on it's own as a theory. The problems of both act and rule utilitarianism consist of being too permissive and being able to justify any crime, not being able to predict the outcomes of one's actions, non-universality and the lose of freewill.
the way in which we come to find out what actions are right and which
It is morally permissible to do an illegal act if the action is morally right and good. An action could be morally right and illegal at the same time, when it represents the lesser of two evils, or when the intentions of the person performing it are noble and have for goal to achieve his duty. An action can be morally right, but still illegal because in a situation where there is no good option, the lesser of two evils is the morally best option to do, even if it is illegal (Thomson 39). For example, in Dallas Buyers Club, Ron Woodroof acted rightly by choosing the lesser of two evils: sell illegal drugs to help AIDS patients feel better and live longer, instead of letting them suffer and die (Dallas Buyers Club). If he would have chosen to obey the law, a great number of AIDS patient would have suffered more and died of their illness, and he would have been guilty of not helping them according to the Harming by Omission Thesis (HOT) and the Equivalence of Evil Thesis (EET) (Mieth 17). These thesis affirm that omitting to help someone in need would be as bad as hurting the person directly. Thus, Woodroof acted in a morally permissible way even if he broke the law because he chose the lesser of two evils (Matheny 16). Also, someone can act justly e...
It has more to do with character and the nature of what it is to be. human, than with the rights and wrongs of our actions. Instead of concentrating on what is the right thing to do, virtue ethics asks how. you can be a better person. Aristotle says that those who do lead a virtuous life, are very happy and have a sense of well-being.
When asked what is the definition of ethics, many responded that being moral meant doing the right thing. But how can we justify what is a good action and what is a bad action? All humans were created equal, but our principles, and ways of thinking can be extremely different. Some may say doing the right thing means following your heart, your inner feelings and intuition. But emotions can be misleading. Others say in order to do what is the morally right thing means to follow the law and do what is right by society, to be accepted. But today’s society is judgmental and can be corrupted with numerous opinions due to the diversity of cultures. So what does it mean to be ethical? Being ethical means doing what is right in terms of virtues, fairness, duties, responsibilities, obligations, and moral believes all which derived from cultures and family backgrounds.
A natural way to see whether an act is the right thing to do (or the wrong thing to do) is to look at its results, or consequences. Utilitarianism argues that, given a set of choices, the act we should choose is that which produces the best results for the greatest number affected by that choice.
Life threatening situations can be some of the most difficult situations that one can go through. During these types of situations moral lines can be blurred in such ways that what one may think is right for that situation is not actually a moral solution that one should do. In the case of the Heinz dilemma what is verses what isn’t moral is a hard decision to make. In the case of Heinz I feel personally that there were two wrong-doings that were done in order that one right-doing could be achieved. The shop owner was in the wrong for over pricing a drug and refusing to help Mr. Heinz ailing wife, but at the same time Mr. Heinz was in the wrong for stealing from the drug dealer. At the same time he was only forced into that situation due to
Ethics is a system of moral principles and a branch of philosophy which defines what is acceptable for both individuals and society. It is a philosophy that covers a whole range of things that have an importance in everyday situations. Ethics are vital in everyones lives, it includes human values, and how to have a good life, our rights and responsibilities, moral decisions what is right and wrong, good and bad. Moral principles affect how people make decisions and lead their lives (BBC, 2013). There are many different beliefs about were ethics come from. These consist of; God and Religion, human conscience, the example of good human beings and a huge desire for the best for people in each unique situation, and political power (BBC, 2013).