Classical Theories Of Morality Essay

982 Words2 Pages

The topic of morality was an essential for many philosophers around the world, and numerous theories are exist based on the different perspectives. Morality means acting responsible and be a real individual, which should be inspiring and promote motivation in society. However, there are few versions of “being good” and in this paper, I will overview the three “Classical Theories of Morality”, then align them with my cultural identity, and demonstrate how cultural identity influence social responsibility. Overview of Classic Theories of Morality
Today society is familiar with the three classical theories of morality that are ranging over a significant period and distance. They began with ancient Greece and Nicomachean Ethics of Aristotle
He believed that personal morality accomplished through human nature, regular activity, and happiness. Aristotle believed that individuals must have intellectual and moral virtues in sync to live sufficiently in communities. Aristotle persuade that “intellectual virtues can be taught, moral virtues must be acquired through habit and require a particular sort of community if they are to be realized” (Scalet & Arthur, 2014, p. 75). Therefore, he demanded that in order “to keep a certain character in our activities, since our moral states depend on the differences in our activities” (Scalet & Arthur, 2014, p. 79). Philosopher Immanuel Kant created the second classical theory of morality. Kant rejected the Aristotle’s theory and created a new based on principles of the metaphysic of morals. He argued that taken actions out of duty obligated to the moral ideals rather than the situation. Furthermore, those correct actions, which distinguishes right from wrong Kant named as the categorical imperative. “I affirm that we must attribute to every rational being that has a will that it also has the idea of freedom and acts entirely under this idea” (Scalet & Arthur, 2014, p.
Many Ukrainians would be agreeing with principles of a good will and gift of fortune. However, they are not accepting that “moral consist in nothing else than the conception of law in itself” (Scalet & Arthur, 2014, p. 83). Thus, the morality and humanity for Ukrainians appear to the condition that are components of happiness but depends on circumstances, judgment, and perception. “We may need to question familiar habits, overcome self-doubt” (Loeb, P.R., 201, p.28), but we value what we have been taught.
On the other hand, Ukrainian people still tend to live by Mill’s principles of utilitarianism, which are leftovers from dictatorships of the Soviet Union that do not crumbly easily. Back then, it was normal for people sacrifice if it is for the sake of greater masses. However, contemporary Ukrainian society realizes that and accepts that everyone’s feelings and interests are different.
Social responsibility of

Open Document