Action Based Ethical Systems
One criticism would be that Action- Based Ethics lack a motivational
component.
Critics claim that action based ethics are uninspiring and very
negative. They would say that it fails to inspire someone to action.
Most of the commandments and rules in such systems are innately
negative "Thou shalt not…"
There is something unfit about a morality which is so unevenly defined
in terms of "Thou shalt nots", emphasising innocence instead of an
"energetic pursuit of the Good". The only sure principle is a
reciprocal duty to do no harm. This kind of theory places a very low
value on morality, judging it mainly as a necessary evil. The aretaist
rejects this judgement, they see morality as an intrinsically
worthwhile activity.
Another criticism is that action based ethics are founded on a
theological- legal model that isn't really appropriate. Moral language
in traditional schemes usually has a structure that resembles that of
law. Traditional, natural law ethics used this model with integrity,
for it saw moral principles as terminology to law and God as alike to
the sovereign. Now, however, ethics has become autonomous activity, so
that it is now an inarticulate metaphor.
The virtue ethicists reject this model. Ethics should help us develop
admirable characters that will generate the kind of insights needed
for the difficulties of life.
In this regard, the legalistic bent of modern moral theory has the
effect of weakening the spirit of morality. Rules often get in the way
of kindness and spontaneous charity.
Also, action based ethics often ignore the spiritual dimension of
ethics. Action based ethics reduce all moral judgement to judgements
about actions and neglect the spiritual qualities of gratitude, self
respect, sympathy, having one's emotions in proper order, and aspiring
to become a certain kind of person.
Virtue ethicists often cite Kant's theory as a model of an anti-
virtue ethics. They point out that a trial of Kant's extreme action-
centred approach highlights the need for a virtue alternative.
We have one resident in the long-term facility who has stage four cancer of spinal cord and he has been suffering from intense pain. Every time when I enter his room, he cries and implore to the god that he can minimize his suffering. He has prescription of hydromorphone 8 mg every 4 hourly PRN , oxycodone 5 mg every 6 hourly and 50 mcg of fentanyl path change every 3rd day. After giving all scheduled and PRN medicine his pain level remains same as before. When I see that patients I feel like to give highest dose of medicine as well as alternative pain management therapy so that he can have some comfort but ethically I have no right to do that. He is hospice but he has no comfort at all. Following are the nine steps of Uustal ethical decision making model.
In my film analysis I will be discussing some of the fourteen principles of a satisfactory moral system and a good ethical decision. I will also discuss how some of the characters use the theory of care ethicist (care ethicist is to treat others as a human being fairly or equally) and virtue theorist (virtue theorist is doing the hard thing). My movie analysis is on John Q.
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?
Immanuel Kant is steadfast in his belief that before anyone can do anything absolutely moral, they must reason what would occur if every person on Earth did this exact thing, or as he puts it, “Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law” (Kant, Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, 30). This philosophy seems sound, but is actually inherently flawed, as when it comes into conflict with his opinions on lying, it makes both points to be somewhat impossible to live by. It also does not account for different people operating in different situations all over the world, instead opting for some sort of absolute, infallible morality. This casts ethics in a disturbingly black and white
Ethics is the study of how people should live. people have different views and beliefs of how they're supposed to live their life. people from all over the world have different ethical beliefs and different ways to determine which beliefs are right and which are wrong. when you visit a different country, you notice things they are doing and those things might seem wrong to you and you would never consider doing what they have just done but in their society its normal and everyone does it. inside the margins of this paper I am going to analyze the top three models used to determine a morally significant being based on the criteria in your book. I will first define a moral agent and a morally significant being then take you through the steps to deciding what a significant being is and which criteria you would use for each.
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).
There are many ethical systems that were created over the years, each created to support curtain people’s beliefs, cultures, and ideologies. Out of all the systems that were presented in this course I believe that relativism and absolutism most aligns with my beliefs. Relativism is the fact that there is no absolute and that what is considered right and wrong varies from person to person and society to society. While absolutism “is the ethical belief that there are absolute standards against which moral questions can be judged and that certain actions are right or wrong, regardless of the context of the act”.(Philosophy, n.d). I believe that there is a right and a wrong in the world (absolutism) but,
Of the three main ethical systems discussed in class that I chose was, ethics of virtue. Ethics of virtue is an ethical theory that emphasizes an individual’s character (morals/virtues), rather than following a set of rules. If people focused on being good people then maybe the right actions will follow. Virtue is a skill that cannot be taught, it’s a way of living that can only really be learned through experience. Aristotle stated that, “a virtuous person can be seen as someone who has ideal character traits”. It requires a person to seek the ultimate good according to their moral virtues. I use this ethical system all the time because of how I was raised and it defines the type of person I am. The outcome and motive is
I will be analyzing the following dilemma under the ethical formalism (Pollack, 2017). I am a defense attorney and a see a judge in my jurisdiction having dinner with a prosecutor and they are married to other people. I have a case in front of this judge and the prosecutor is my opponent. I consider requesting the judge to recuse himself from the case, but it could cause animosity for my client in his case if the judge refuses to do so. I could keep quiet and use the information on appeal., but my client could spend years in prison. Finally, I could do nothing and hope the judge is not biased toward the prosecution in his ruling. How would I handle the situation?
Both Kantian and virtue ethicists have differing views about what it takes to be a good person. Kantian ethicists believe that being a good person is strictly a matter of them having a “good will.” On the other hand, virtue ethicists believe that being a good person is a matter of having a good character, or being naturally inclined to do the right thing. Both sides provide valid arguments as to what is the most important when it comes to determining what a person good. My purpose in writing this paper is to distinguish between Kantian ethics and virtue ethics, and to then, show which theory is most accurate.
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
One main reason that Virtue Ethics is more convincing and better than the other systems of ethics that we have covered is because it goes further than looking at actions as good or bad. Now before I go any further
Many people have different views of what ethical behavior is. Ethical behavior is defined as “Acting in ways consistent with what society and individuals typically think are good values. Ethical behavior tends to be good for business and involves demonstrating respect for key moral principles that include honesty, fairness, equality, dignity, diversity and individual rights (Ethical behavior, 2016).” In this paper, I explored ethical decision making with examples. In addition, I discuss how ethical decision making benefits from a Christian worldview.
Ethical theories are a way of finding solutions to ethical dilemmas using moral reasoning or moral character. The overall classification of ethical theories involves finding a resolution to ethical problems that are not necessarily answered by laws or principles already in place but that achieve justice and allow for individual rights. There are many different ethical theories and each takes a different approach as to the process in which they find a resolution. Ethical actions are those that increase prosperity, but ethics in business is not only focused on actions, it can also involve consequences of actions and a person’s own moral character.
Ethical awareness has and continues to be a debated concept in the business community. The notion of what motivates ethnical awareness is at the core of the debate. In other words, are decisions made about business practices motivated by an obligation to the community, sense of corporate responsibility, a leader’s view of right and wrong or political influences. Although the perspectives on what motivates ethical awareness differ among business leaders, ethnical awareness is fundamental in the decision making process. This essay outlines the ethnical awareness principles of Drucker, Alahmad, Friedman, and Murphy and how business decisions are influenced by such principles.