New York, NY: Seven Stories Press, 2009. Howard Zinn and Anthony Arnove. Voices of a People’s History. New York, NY: Seven Stories Press, 2009. Williams, Appleman William.
Plato’s intellectual approach to the good life departs from the more common dependence on experience to acquire the knowledge involved in living a good life and finding happiness. His reserve about this idea, despite its significance in his metaphysics and ethics, is principally accountable for the vagueness of his notion of happiness and what it is to lead a good life, excepting the assertion that people are best off if they do what they want and according to self-preservation. In just what way the thinkers' knowledge offers a concrete foundation for the good life of the public and the however vacuous bulk of the citizens remains an open question; beyond the notion that ... ... middle of paper ... ... being content with ourselves. If we are constantly fighting our urges because some supreme being told us to, we are not fighting those urges for the right reason and we’re also less likely to follow the commands, however righteous they may be. Even if we are fighting urges, we’re still not content, and that means we are not at peace.
What I have found to be most interesting about both Deontology and Utilitarianism isn’t their approach to ethics, but rather their end goal. Deontology promotes “good will” as the ultimate good; it claims that each and every person has duties to respect others. On the other hand, Utilitarianism seeks to maximize general happiness. While these may sound rather similar at first glance (both ethical theories essentially center around treating people better), a deeper look reveals different motivations entirely. Deontology focuses on respecting the autonomy and humanity of others, basically preaching equal opportunity.
"Interpersonal Conflict and Conflict Management." Devito, Joseph A. The Interpersonal Communication Book. Boston: Pearson, Allyn & Bacon, 2009. 276.