Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essays on ethics in education
How do ethics shape our society
Utilitarianism: for and against
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essays on ethics in education
Ethics permeates all aspects of society, both on an individual and societal level for it involves human interaction. The ethical decision-making models, like humans – are complex and do not exist in isolation, thus finding a set of uniform ethical values and standards in a multicultural society is highly challenging. This essay will briefly overview four Normative theories which help guide ethical decision making, regarding the hypothetical scenario case given from the teacher’s perspective.
Main Ethical Issue
This scenario offers a plethora of complex situations; however the main ethical issue appears to surround the lack of safety, understanding and respect due to different cultural views, perspectives, values and needs of others.
Consequentialism
In Consequentialism, the moral worth of an action is chosen (to be right or wrong) based primarily on the consequences or outcomes that will arise from performing an act (Preston, 2001). Right acts produce good consequences and eliminate possible negative outcomes. This perspective is most commonly utilised by teachers (Dr A. Sammel, personal communication, July 7, 2010) and society generally. Although there are several consequentialism perspectives, this paper focuses on the following key areas: (a) Egoism; (b) Altruism, and (c) Utilitarianism.
Egoism involves considering one’s wellbeing, welfare or self interest (Burgh, Field & Freakley, 2006), placing focus primarily on the individual, negating considerations for others. Three main forms of Egoism exist: (1) Physiological - teacher considers their own welfare and nobody else; (2) Ethical - an action taken by the teacher that is morally right to maximise one’s self wellbeing, and (3) Rational- the action by the tea...
... middle of paper ...
...thics and the community of inquiry: Education for deliberative democracy. Victoria: Thomson Social Science Press.
Hinman, L. (2003). Ethics: A pluralistic approach to moral theory. (3rd ed.). Ontario, Canada: Nelson Thomson Learning.
La Follette, H. (2007). The practices of ethics. Carlton, Victoria: Blackwell Publishing.
Preston, N. (2001). Understanding ethics. (2nd ed.). Leichhardt, NSW: The Federation Press.
Preston, N. (2007).Understanding ethics. (3rd ed.). Leichhardt, NSW: The Federation Press.
Shaver, R. (2002). Egoism. Retrieved July 7, 2010, from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/egoism/#3
Singer, P. (1995). How are we to live? Ameherst, New York: Prometheus Books.
Tannsjo, T. (2002). Understanding ethics: An introduction to moral theory. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press Ltd.
Sometimes in life there are instances in which and individual must make a decision that will question their moral fiber. These instances could vary from whether or not to help others in need, decide whether an action is right or wrong or even when deciding who should live and who must die. How does one logically reason to an ethnical conclusion to these situations?
Everyday individuals are faced with difficult situations, and in some cases these situations bring into question a person’s moral code. These dilemmas make people think about what the right thing to do is and what the wrong thing to do is. Any person can follow the four basic frameworks of ethics to figure out what needs to be done. Those frameworks being ethical egoism, utilitarianism, deontology, and virtue ethics. But first I will put you in a tricky situation and shed some light on the different routes an individual could take according to those four ethical frameworks. Then I will give my opinion on what I would do in the situation and I will state some objections a critic might have on my opinion.
Philosophy has been a field of study for centuries. Some philosophers have developed ways to determine what is ethical and what is not. This has led to several normative ethical theories describing how people are ought to live a moral life. Some of the most prominent of these theories have set the criteria for morality in very unique and peculiar ways. Two of which are the ethical egoistic theory and the utilitarian theory, each seeing morality in its own distinctive way. By comparing and contrasting the view these theories pose on morality and by analyze how each stands in some of the world’s most modern day issues, one can understand why utilitarianism is a
Review of “Situationism and Virtue Ethics on the Content of Our Character” by Rachana Kamtekatar
Ethical Egoism A rear assumption is that the needs and happiness of other people will always affect our moral ethics. If we accept this assumption, we think that our moral ethics balance our self-interest against that of others. It is true, that “What is morally right or wrong depends not only on how it makes us feel, but also how it affects others”. The idea that each person ought to pursue his or her own self-interest exclusively to do in his lifetime for others is known as Ethical Egoism.
• Once more, the ordinary science’ proves itself as the master of classification, inventing and defining the various categories of Egoism. Per example, psychological egoism, which defines doctrine that an individual is always motivated by self-interest, then rational egoism which unquestionably advocates acting in self-interest. Ethical egoism as diametrically opposite of ethical altruism which obliges a moral agent to assist the other first, even if sacrifices own interest. Also, ethical egoism differs from both rational and psychological egoism in ‘defending’ doctrine which considers all actions with contributive beneficial effects for an acting individual
Every day, in a plethora of different situations, virtually every person has to make a multitude of decisions regarding how to interact with other people. Despite many centuries of intense study and theorizing by some of the most brilliant philosophers in the world, there is no single consensus on how people should choose to act towards others. What have been developed, however, are different systems of ethics describing idealized ideas of how human beings should treat themselves, treat others, and what they should strive for both personally and for society as a whole. In addition, many people cobble together their own personal systems of ethics based on personal experience and various degrees of formal ethical education.
Workplace ethics engages in judgements and collective agreements regarding a suitable guide of behaviour. The ethical decision making framework (EDM) presents, business decision is ethical or unethical.EDM provides an indication of traditional decision making process and issues that manipulate ethical decisions. Employees tend to fraud because they can experience the unfair treatments or situation that they face. Manages may ask employee to work long hours, and then they can take additional time off. Good performance leads to remunerations and appreciation managers than workers.
Egoism considers the best outcome for the decision maker. From an egoist perspective the most favourable outcome for the teacher to do is minimise the stress and conflict of possible outcomes in his/her life. It is therefore in the teachers’ best interest to not upset the principle, to align a similar view to her and not accept the offer of further promotion of funding.
In philosophy, there are many different views regarding what is thought to constitute ethical behavior. Among them are the cultural relativist, utilitarian, and Kantian. Given a situation where someone must choose to either kill one person out of thirty so that the others could live or let all thirty people die in order to maintain their moral duty, the distinctive philosophical views would lead to varying responses. They contribute opposing ideas on what the right decision is. Generally, these three ethical theories have the power to influence what happens next.
Egoism is a teleological theory of ethics that sets the ultimate criterion of morality in some nonmoral value (i.e. happiness or welfare) that results from acts (Pojman 276). It is contrasted with altruism, which is the view that one's actions ought to further the interests or good of other people, ideally to the exclusion of one's own interests (Pojman 272). This essay will explain the relation between psychological egoism and ethical egoism. It will examine how someone who believes in psychological egoism explains the apparent instances of altruism. And it will discuss some arguments in favor of universal ethical egoism, and exam Pojman's critque of arguments for and against universal ethical egoism.
Act-consequentialism is a moral theory that maintains what is right is whatever brings about the best consequences impartially considering. The main and most renowned form of act-consequentialism is act utilitarianism which advocates agents choosing the moral path that creates the greatest good for the greatest number, this being the most widely known form of act-consequentialism is the moral theory that I shall be concentrating on though out my discussion. Impartiality is the notion that everybody should count for one and nobody more than one, which is often considered to be a “double-edged sword” (Jollimore, 2017) meaning there is debate as to whether impartiality is a strength or weakness of the theory. Throughout my essay I attempt to point out an important misunderstanding made by theories that uphold impartiality as a weakness of act-consequentialism and how this could lead to the view that impartiality is in fact a strength of both act utilitarianism and act consequentialism.
Consequentialism and non-consequentialism are both action based ethical frameworks that people can use to make ethical judgments. Consequentialism is based on examining the consequences of one’s actions as opposed to non-consequentialism which is focused on whether the act is right or wrong regardless of the outcome (Burgh, Field & Freakley, 2006). The three sub-categories of consequentialism are altruism, utilitarianism and egoism.
As a function, ethics is a philosophical study of the moral value of human conduct, and of the rules and principles it should govern. As a system, ethics are a social, religious, or civil code of behavior considered correct by a particular group, profession, or individual. As an instrument, ethics provide perspective regarding the moral fitness of a decision, course of action, or potential outcomes. Ethical decision-making can include many types, including deontological (duty), consequentialism (including utilitarianism), and virtue ethics. Additionally, subsets of relativism, objectivism, and pluralism seek to understand the impact of moral diversity on a human level. Although distinct differences separate these ethical systems, organizations
Introduction Generally, ethics is defined as standards of performance that explain how human beings should opt to react during many circumstances in which they meet with friends, citizens, parents, teachers, children, professionals, and businesspeople, among others. However, ethics is different from feelings, as feelings make significant information’s available for our ethical preferences. Although some people possess highly mature behaviors that cause them to feel awful when they get involved in the wrongdoings, most of the people normally enjoy doing bad things. Ethical decision-making And frequently people will feel uncomfortable when they are mandated to make difficult decisions.