Introduction
In the scenario ‘Helping Molly’, the teacher is faced with a number of ethical issues that must be resolved. The main ethical issue this essay will attempt to deconstruct using the four ethical frameworks is whether to agree or deny helping McJacks promote their fast food chain and receive a donation of instruments, even though their promotion contradicts the schools health program. Another underlying ethical issue is that of discrimination. McJacks has stipulated that Molly is not to be involved in the promotional shots as her ‘big build’ is not keeping with the image the company is trying to project.
Consequentialism
Consequentialism focuses on the consequences, outcomes and results of an action. (Holsinger, 2009) The idea is to eliminate the negative consequences to make the best possible decision. (Gensler, 2009)
Egoism:
Egoism relies on the idea that a person ought to do what is in their own self-interest. It is thinking about the consequences of an action, only considering how it best benefits them. (Kay, 1997)
In this scenario the best outcome for the teacher would be to not be held responsible regarding the decision to accept or deny the donation and promotion proposal. Therefore the teacher is able to avoid any repercussions that may arise as a result of the decision.
To reach this outcome the teacher ought to refer the decision on to other stakeholders involved in the scenario, such as, the principal, parents (P&C associations), and other staff members.
Altruism:
Altruism is where a person considers the consequences in terms of benefiting others involved and sacrificing their own self-interest. (Smith, 2003 - 2010)
In this case the following stakeholders must be considered:
Molly:
Th...
... middle of paper ...
...p://www.jcu.edu/philosophy/Gensler/exercise.htm
Gensler, H. J. (2009). Gensler's Philosophy Web-Exercises. Retrieved July 15, 2010, from Ethics 11 - Nonconsequentialism: http://www.jcu.edu/philosophy/Gensler/et/et-11-00.htm
Holsinger, K. (2009, November 27). Consequentialist vs. non-consequentialist theories of ethics. Retrieved July 15, 2010, from http://darwin.eeb.uconn.edu/eeb310/lecture-notes/value-ethics/node3.html
Kay, C. D. (1997, January 20). Varieties of Egoism. Retrieved July 15, 2010, from http://webs.wofford.edu/kaycd/ethics/egoism.htm
Smith, S. (2003 - 2010). What is Altruism. Retrieved July 15, 2010, from WiseGeek.com: http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-altruism.htm
United Nations. (1948, December 10). The Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Waller, B. N. (1995-2010). Consider Ethics: Theory, Readings and Contemporary Issues. Pearson Education.
Nye, Howard. PHIL 250 B1, Winter Term 2014 Lecture Notes – Ethics. University of Alberta.
To best define consequentialism the famous English philosopher G.E. Moore declared in his book Principia Ethics that “Acts are morally right just because they maximize the amount of goodness in the world.” Moore believed that if you failed to accept the idea that it was right to maximize good, you did not know what you were talking about (297). What is unique about consequentialism is that it asks us to act in a way where the greatest benefit is made for the greatest number of people. Consequentialism asks us to look at the consequences of our actions. If the result will produce the most good, then the end justifies the means. The direct opposite of consequentialism is the ethical theory of deontology. Deontology suggests that no matter ...
Ethical egoism is the normative view that each individual should seek out their own self-interest (Robbins). One ought to act and do what is in one’s own maximum interest, benefit, or advantage; and, the action must be moralistic for it to produce happiness. According to this theory morality is based on everyone promoting their self-interest or selfish motives. In the article “Ethical Egoism” by Jan Narveson. Narveson quotes Bishop Joseph Butler’s theory of rational behavior as “the rational agent acts so as to maximize the realization of one’s interest.” Meaning that one will only act if they are carrying out an action with the intention to achieve their interest to its full extent.
In philosophy, egoism is the theory that one's self is, or should be, the motivation and the goal of one's own action. There are many different forms of egoism, for example, there is psychological egoism, ethical egoism, rational egoism and much more. All these different types of egoism differ in different types of ways but in of all of them it is implied that we are all self-interested and not interested in others.
Ego is a self-maximizing choice. Egotism is roughly defined as self-centeredness and conceit, especially represented in writing or conversation. Men showed a fair amount of narcissism in the early 1900’s, and this was represented in the writings from that time. Ego entails one person thinking that the world revolves around them, and that they should be the center of attention at all times. In the novels The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald and Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck, the authors portray the antagonists, Tom Buchanan and Curley, to be extraordinarily egotistic and domineering, which had a negative effect on the relationship the men had with their wives.
Psychological Egoism is a claim that one’s own welfare is the governing aim that guides us in every action. This would mean that every action and decisions humans make come with an intention for self-benefit, and personal gain. The fundamental idea behind psychological egoism is that our self-interest is the one motive that governs human beings. This idea may be so deep within our morals and thought process that although one may not think selfishly, the intention of their action is representing to a degree of personal gains.
Altruism regards the individual life as something one may be required to sacrifice for the sake of
Consequentialism, which is a segment of the grander Value Theory, asserts that the rightness or wrongness of an action is a matter of measuring the outcome of the action itself. Moral decisions can then depend on the latent costs and/or benefits that result from doing the action. Utilitarianism, the most popular form of consequentialism, is in the same vein with regard to moral actions and their likely consequences. A utilitarian will attempt to question the results of an action as would a consequentialist, however they ask the additional question: “furthermore, how much pleasure (happiness) would be created by the action?” A utilitarian’s moral concentration is on maximizing pleasure, as the utilitarian maxim affirms that one should act always as to maximize total pleasure. Maximizing total pleasure, a utilitarian believes, is equivalent to minimizing total pain, and this forms the basis for morality.
• 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
Life is not a contest between each and every person, but a test. Just because someone believes that always making a decision that is in the best interest of themselves is right doesn’t mean that they are out to make the decision that worsens others around them. Personal ethical egoism is the idea that people should act in the best interest of themselves. I believe in altruism and that ethical egoism is an unacceptable theory because it’s proven to be inconsistent and incoherent.
For someone who believes in psychological egoism, i t is difficult to find an action that would be acknowledged as purely altruistic. In practice, altruism, is the performance of duties to others with no view to any sort of personal...
Consequentialism is a term used by the philosophers to simplify what is right and what is wrong. Consequentialist ethical theory suggests that right and wrong are the consequences of our actions. It is only the consequences that determine whether our actions are right or wrong. Standard consequentialism is a form of consequentialism that is discussed the most. It states that “the morally right action for an agent to perform is the one that has the best consequences or that results in the most good.” It means that an action is morally correct if it has little to no negative consequences, or the one that has the most positive results.
Consequentialism is an ethical perspective that primarily focuses upon the consequences resulting from an action and aims to eliminate the negative consequences. Within this framework there are three sub-categories: Egoism, Altruism and Utilitarianism.
Ethical egoism states that an act is good if and only if it serves self-interest. It is a normative theory holding that people ought to do what is in their self- interest
Ethical egoism can be a well-debated topic about the true intention of an individual when he or she makes an ethical decision. Max Stirner brings up a very intriguing perspective in writing, The Ego and its Own, regarding ethical egoism. After reading his writing some questions are posed. For example, are human beings at the bottom? Following Wiggins and Putnam, can we rise above our egoism and truly be altruistic? And finally, if we are something, do we have the capacity to rise to a level that we can criticize and transcend our nature? These questions try to establish whether or not we are simple humans, bound to our intrinsic nature, or far more intellectually advanced than we allow ourselves to be.