Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The ethical teacher
Teacher-students relationship
Teacher-students relationship
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The ethical teacher
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.
Mcnaughton, David. "An Unconnected Heap of Duties?" The Philosophical Quarterly 46: 433-447. Obtained from PHIL 250 B1, Winter Term 2014 Further Readings – Ethics. University of Alberta eClass.
asks “What are the costs?” and “What are the benefits?”. According to rule consequentialism, rules are selected entirely based on the goodness of their consequences and proceeds to claim that these rules govern what kind of acts are morally wrong. Basically, the rightness or wrongness of an action is contingent on whether it is obligatory or prohibited by an ideal set of rules. An ideal set of...
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.
Class notes from PHIL 330, Moral Theory, by Dr. Richard Lippke, Department of Philosophy, and James Madison University. Spring Semester 2002.
Consequentialism is ordinarily distinct from deontology, as deontology offers rightness or wrongness of an act, rather than the outcome of the action. In this essay we are going to explore the differences of consequentialism and deontology and apply them to the quandary that Bernard Williams and J.J.C Smart put forward in their original analogy of “Jim and the Indians” in their book , Utilitarianism: for and against (J.J.C Smart & Bernard Williams, 1973, p.78-79.).
Thiroux, J. P., & Krasemann, K. W. (2009). Ethics: Theory and practice (10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
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
A common objection to consequentialism, that agents are burdened with duties to help others at the expense of their own happiness, was not even addressed. This in itself seems to be one form of absolutism that riddles consequentialism in general. Nielsen made it clear that one should not be absolute about insisting on weighing consequences when they are barely known, but would he reject this notion as well? It is not clear that this absolutism, of always valuing the good of others over the agent’s own self, is separable from the concept of consequentialism; so it is not clear that consequentialism can escape absolutism as Nielsen concluded in the second argument recounted here.
This essay will provide a theoretical understanding of the four ethical frameworks: Consequentialism, Non- Consequentialism, Virtue Ethics and Care Ethics. When applied to a situation these frameworks help teachers to resolve and justify their decision making. The objective is to apply the four frameworks to the scenario Helping Molly, to establish the most ethical course of action. Finally, a recommended course of action will be justification. The overarching ethical issue present within the Helping Molly scenario is the community sponsorship and the alignment with school beliefs and initiatives.
Hursthouse, R. (2003, July 18). Virtue Ethics. Stanford University. Retrieved March 6, 2014, from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2013/entries/ethics-virtue
Hooker, B. 2003. Rule Consequentialism. Read in: Shafer-Landau, R. 2013. Ethical Theory: An Anthology, Second Edition. Wiley-Blackwell.
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.
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.