The nonmoral virtues generally are considered as contributing to the moral life but also as more easily expropriated for immoral purposes. Even though most of the virtue systems don't deny that there are princip... ... middle of paper ... ...ion of correct action. Virtue theorists emphasise the admitted difficulties of employing these formulae together with the suggestion that we ought to abandon them in favour of their alternative systems. We ought instead, we are told, to concentrate on the kinds of persons we ought to be, rather than the particular actions we should take. Since persons of appropriate moral character do good deeds, we would save ourselves the headaches of having to employ complicated theories especially if those theories do not often offer us very convincing results.
Simply, moral terms therefore do not describe some objective state of affairs - but are reflections of personal taste and preference. Hence the statement above, which refers to both `doing good' and `doing bad' are not universal imperatives - but reflections of the specific intentions and desires of the contract and the individuals involved. Furthermore this raises the issue, as to whether one can do good or harm anyone who was done so to ... ... middle of paper ... ...ng surprising here: it is tough making it alone and so there are good reasons why humans will do better if they do co-operate with others. But does this prove that co-operation is just another form of selfishness that we care only about our own interests and we co-operate in order to further those interests? In effect an answer to this depends entirely upon the individual; such an ambiguous statement undoubtedly entails a great difference in answers and interpretation.
As one develop a solid set of morals and beliefs, and then one can create a path of righteousness that will benefit the value of character. As one lives life, one is able to adjust their view of happiness due to the experience
Deontologists create concrete distinctions between what is moral right and wrong and use their morals as a guide when making choices. Deontologists generate restrictions against maximizing the good when it interferes with moral standards. Also, since deontologists place a high value on the individual, in some instances it is permissible not to maximize the good when it is detrimental to yourself. For example, one does not need to impoverish oneself to the point of worthlessness simply to satisfy one’s moral obligations. Deontology can be looked at as a generally flexible moral theory that allows for self-interpretation but like all others theories studied thus far, there are arguments one can make against its reasoning.
Likewise in the case of Xunzi, being it bad, it needs to be cultivated for the obvious reason of making it good, otherwise it would not be possible to live a harmonious life in a harmonious society, and the men's own impulse to cultivate it comes from its own intrinsically bad nature, since from Xunzi's point of view, men seek what they don't have. Now to simplify, I risk to say that Mencius sees human nature as good, but with a tendency to get bad, while Xunzi sees it as bad, but with a tendency to turn into good (and is because of that that the man must strive to keep a child's heart, for Mencius, or to put in other words, to not let his good nature be lost, while for Xunzi, the mere fact that a man only seeks what he doesn't already – and since his nature is bad – is what makes him looks out and search for benevolence). In both cases, again, virtue is achieved through education, learning, self-cultivation and reiteration of the rituals. In his Article, Keightley argues that China possesses an epistemological optimism, and in his lengthy argument, that was supposed to focus on the Neolithic and Bronze Age periods, he ended up using a lot of later texts to justify his points of view, therefore ma... ... middle of paper ... ...us activities (in this case, the simple conscious activity of looking for what one doesn't possess, in the same way one who is poor will look for richness). Despite the fact that my essay is possibly too much influenced by my own interpretation and opinion, if my reading of Mencius and Xunzi is correct, they are not that different altogether.
Humanistic believe that we are all born with an innate drive to reach our potential as good, contributing persons to our society (contributing in whatever way suits our own strengths). b. This theory is essentially an optimistic one that views human nature in the best possible light; it provides a stark contrast to the conflict-driven psychoanalytic theory and the environment-driven behaviorist theory. Carl Rogers’s Self Theory Fully functioning person is one who gets along well with others by conditional positive regard and genuinely caring about them. Carl Rogers believed that we reach this goal primarily by receiving unconditional positive regard, which helps us develop positive self-esteem.
Ethics also includes the moral codes or values that a person holds, which are more personal than the codes of ethics. Some of the moral codes and values that I hold include; doing good to others, being fair to all, respecting others and their needs for privacy, being honest and ensuring that I contribute to the society in the best possible way. I believe that one should do good to others even when others do not do the same in return. The way others choose to treat a person should not determine how that person treats them because if the nature of that individual is to do good, then external factors should
It may seem like kindness, but a virtuous agent might foresee future problems and advise us not to act that way. Our understanding of the virtues is often flawed. Virtuous agents have insight into what virtue really asks as opposed to what we think it asks. It takes an expert to apply the skills correctly, which is why Virtue Ethics is a good theory to use. You have to have the character skills to
This principle promotes a life of more pleasure than pain by choosing actions that produce more happiness. These are conscious actions made that follow a life of utility and act in accordance with the “Greatest Happiness Principle.” Though Mill’s critics would argue that Utilitarianism is not a reasonable foundation for morality by not fulfilling a life of happiness, creating selfish or expedient people, and reducing human experience to animals, I would have to disagree. This principle promotes happiness and pleasure for all, along with aiding individuals to be less selfish, and an even slate for people of all characters. I find the “Greatest Happiness Principle” to be a relevant and altruistic foundation of morality. There is an emphasis on lives containing more pleasure than pain under the rule that one person cannot put their own happiness above others.
Incentives are efficient tools used to manipulate the human behaviour in order to achieve desired outcomes. However, it is deniable that incentives deliver the expected results all the time. Incentives do not always achieve its’ goals. This essay argues about the flaws in incentives due to the nature of incentives itself, discusses the effect of incentives that encourage cheating and the result of an ineffective incentive given the circumstances. Before scrutinizing the effectiveness of an incentive, it is fundamental to understand the nature of incentives itself.