Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
roles of education as a social institution
consequentialism vs utilitarianism
effects of discrimination in society
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: roles of education as a social institution
The moral and ethical environment determines how we react in terms of justice, fairness, right, wrong, good, evil, tolerance, care, forgiveness and so fourth to the events that shape the world in which we live. Yet the forces that influence our views on such matters go mostly unnoticed (Burgh et al., 2006).
The purpose of this paper is to develop a critical response to the Helping Molly scenario where I believe the key ethical issue is discrimination. A theoretical understanding of four ethical frameworks, more specifically the Consequentialism, Non-Consequentialism, Virtue and Care Ethics frameworks will be offered before they each are applied to analyse the scenario. From this analysis possibilities will be developed and justified and finally, arguments will be drawn upon to recommend an appropriate and justifiable course of action.
The Consequentialism framework suggests decision making is an action-based process, that is, one that determines the rightness or wrongness of an act according to the relevant outcomes or consequences. Within Consequentialism there consists a variety of perspectives including egoism, altruism and utilitarianism. Like Consequentialism, Non-Consequentialism is also an action-based perspective. This framework however, focuses on the rules and principles related to an act rather then the consequences that may follow. Decisions are made with consideration to written and unwritten rules that fall under the subcategories of Natural Rights, Social Contract, Divine Command and Deontology.
The Virtue Ethic and Care Ethic frameworks differ from those mentioned previously. Unlike Consequential and Non-Consequentialism, the Virtue and Care Ethic frameworks are agent-based and consider the person pe...
... middle of paper ...
...GoodTeacher.pdf
Bentham, J. (1789). An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. Latest edition: Adamant Media Corporation, 2005
Burgh, G., Field, T., & M. Freakley. (2006) Ethics and the Community of Inquiry: Education for Deliberative Democracy. Thomson: South Melbourne.
Education Queensland. (2006). Code of Conduct. Retrieved 14 July 2010, from http://education.qld.gov.au/corporate/codeofconduct/index.html
Queensland College of Teachers. (2007, January). Professional Standards for Queensland Teachers. Retrieved July 15, 2010, from Queensland College of Teachers http://www.qct.edu.au/standards/index.html
Declaration of the Rights of the Child (1959) The United Nations and Human Rights, Department of Public Information, United Nations, New York 1995. Retrieved July 14, 2010, from
http://www.cirp.org/library/ethics/UN-declaration
Cahn, Steven M. and Peter Markie, Ethics: History, Theory and Contemporary Issues. 4th Edition. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009.
Virtue ethics is an approach that “deemphasizes rules, consequences and particular acts and places the focus on the kind of person who is acting” (Garrett, 2005). A person’s character is the totality of his character traits. Our character traits can be goo...
Nye, Howard. PHIL 250 B1, Winter Term 2014 Lecture Notes – Ethics. University of Alberta.
In everyday experience one is likely to encounter ethical dilemmas. This paper presents one framework for working through any given dilemma. I have chosen to integrate three theories from Ruggerio Vicent, Bernard Lonergan and Robert Kegan. When making a deceison you must collabrate different views to come to a one conclusion. Ruggerio factors in different aspects that will take effect. Depending on which order of conciousness you are in by Kegan we can closely compare this with Ruggerio's theories also. As I continue I will closely describe the three theories with Kegan and how this will compare with Lonerga's theory combining the three. While Family,
Ethics: The Big Questions , edit ed by James P. Sterba, 259 -275. Malden, Massachusets: Blackwel Publishers Ltd, 1998.
In his article "The Schizophrenia of Modern Ethical Theories," Michael Stocker argues that mainstream ethical theories, namely consequentialism and deontology, are incompatible with maintaining personal relations of love, friendship, and fellow feeling because they both overemphasise the role of duty, obligation, and rightness, and ignore the role of motivation in morality. Stocker states that the great goods of life, i.e. love, friendship, etc., essentially contain certain motives and preclude others, such as those demanded by mainstream ethics.11 In his paper "Alienation, Consequentialism, and the Demands of Morality," Peter Railton argues that a particular version of consequentialism, namely sophisticated consequentialism, is not incompatible with love, affection and acting for the sake of others. In the essays "War and Massacre" and "Autonomy and Deontology," Thomas Nagel holds that a theory of absolutism, i.e. deontology, may be compatible with maintaining personal commitments. The first objective of this paper is to demonstrate that despite the efforts of both Railton and Nagel, consequentialism and deontology do not in fact incorporate personal relations into morality in a satisfactory way. This essay shows that Stocker’s challenge may also hold against versions of Virtue Ethics, such as that put forth by Rosalind Hursthouse in her article "Virtue Theory and Abortion." The second objective of this discussion is to examine criticisms of Stocker made by Kurt Baier in his article "Radical Virtue Ethics." This essay demonstrates that in the end Baier’s objections are not convincing.
At the outset of the nineteenth century, an influential group of British thinkers developed a set of basic principles for addressing social problems. Extrapolating from Hume's emphasis on the natural human interest in utility, reformer Jeremy Bentham proposed a straightforward quantification of morality by reference to utilitarian outcomes. His An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (1789) offers a simple statement of the application of this ethical doctrine.
Shafer-Landau, R. (2013) Ethical Theory: An Anthology (Second Edition). West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Cahn, Steven M. and Peter Markie, Ethics: History, Theory and Contemporary Issues. 4th Edition. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009.
Weston, Anthony. A Practical Companion to Ethics. 4th ed. New York: Oxford UP, 2011. Print.
Let us discuss consequentialism first. Consequentialism focuses on consequences as the most important factor in the decision making process (Donaldson 3). For consequentialists the motives of an act are not as important as what comes out of it. Utilitarianism is one of the branches of consequentialism. Utilitarianism believes in the greatest good for the number (Donaldson 3). This method along with egoist consequentialism was probably the one that w...
One of the major players in ethical theories has long been the concept of utilitarianism. Utilitarianism states that in general the ethical rightness or wrongness of an action is directly related to the utility of that action. Utility is more specifically defined as a measure of the goodness or badness of the consequences of an action (see quote by Mill above). For the purposes of this paper, Utility will be considered to be the tendency to produce happiness. There are two types of Utilitarianism; these are “act” and “rule”. An act utilitarian uses thought processes associated with utilitarianism (i.e. the principle of utility) to make all decisions, this requires a lot of thought and careful calculation. For example, an act utilitarian deciding from a list of possible day trips would sit down and calculate out the utility of each possible decision before coming to a conclusion as to which one was preferable. Contrary to an act utilitarian, a rule utilitarian uses the principles of utility to create a set of rules by which they live. Rule utilitarians are not incapable of calculating a decision; they just do not see a need to do it all the time. For example, a rule utilitarian might have some rules like this: in general do not kill, in general do not steal, in general do not lie; but if they found a situation that might except the rule they would do the cal...
Mayhew, Robert. The Journal of Ethics , Vol. 1, No. 4 (1997) , pp. 325-340
United Nations (1989). Convention on the Rights of the Child.[online] Available at: [Accessed 1 April 2014].
In order to arrive at a sound solution for ethical issues requires critical thinking and analysis. Marian Mattison, (2000) summarized: