For example, if it is morally wrong to lie, then everyone should never lie. Even if the consequences of a lie are great, it must not be done. Kant’s theory is cold and unemotional. However, Kant viewed this as the best way to make ethical decisions. Kant’s view uses a categorical imperative, in which ethics is based upon an absolute, objective, deontologcial theory, in which intentions are more important than consequences.
The modern development of virtue ethics is often linked back to a paper by G. E. M. Anscombe entitled ‘Modern Moral Philosophy’. In this paper Anscombe questioned whether there could be moral laws if there was is no God. What do wrong and right mean if there is no lawgiver, she suggested eudaimonia is the obvious answer as it is not dependent on God. Other modern philosophers such as Alasdair Macintyre believed that ethical theories just resulted in disagreements and that morality should be seen
He didn’t think he needed to ask Express the moral problem so that everyone will believe that his or her moral concerns have been recognized and included. * This is a moral problem because his actions of using company funds for personal use wasn’t economically efficient productive system, it didn’t produce more of the products that people most want an less use of the resources people least value, which is a definite value to society. In addition to this, his actions wasn’t informed to everyone. * Effective use of resources, What are the economic benefits? * What are the legal requirements?
Philosopher King v. Despot It was a rather frequent occurrence for Socrates and his companions to gather in a public dwelling to converse about wisdom and life. On one of these occasions, the topic of rulers was brought up and thoroughly dissected. Socrates argued that a philosopher would be an idyllic ruler and pointed out how the despot is the exact opposite. A teacher tries to explain the different aspects of the conversation Socrates had with his disciples to a student. The teacher perceives that although the philosopher king would be the finest choice for a ruler, it was much more likely that for a despot to hold the position of power.
Week Two Learning Team Reflection During Week 1, we discussed the basic components of business research. We were shown how to recognize dilemmas and address issues related to corporate America, such as declining sales, increase in costs and any other issues that may have adverse impact on business. With that, business research becomes a problem solving tool in the decision making. However, ethics must first be weighed to ensure the social bottom line and productivity remains at its highest. Unethical behavior undermines positive gains.
And still, some may also see the crime as just or unjust, and not everyone will have the same opinion about the matter (8). Socrates then restates his earlier question as to how Euthyphro can still prove that proceeding against his father could be seen as just in the eyes of all the gods (8). Because of these statements, it is much harder to tell if it would be at all possible to prove Euthyphro's side of things. Though it would seem that he is getting closer to proving his own beliefs since it is his job to prosecute the wrong-doer, Socrates still wants him to understand the morals behind his
Austin Main Mr. Borges Philosophy of Ethics February 20, 2012 Report on Book II of The Republic by Plato In Book II of Plato’s The Republic, the Socrates points out the way he sees fit in the concepts of justice. He believes solely that he is correct and no longer wants to make due of the discussion, but Glaucon explains his theories about the three classes of levels of goodness. The first level of goodness, being those things we only find good in their consequences. These things could be studying, investing in stock markets, mowing the lawn, or impregnating your wife. The second level of goodness consists of those things that we find pleasure in themselves.
You are claiming that I am older than you yet are you wiser than I am in acknowledging the fact that people, who do harm, harm those whom they are closest to whereas good people do good things to their neighbors, but I am ignorant to understand this. This means that if I make one of my associate’s evil, I run the risk of being harmed by his evil intentions. Overall you are claiming that I am deliberately putting myself into danger. This Meletus is not true and I don’t believe you and I don’t think anyone else will. I do not corrupt the young, I do so unwillingly or you are lying.
Oddly enough, with this theory, it is prohibited to tell lies or commit suicide because that is morally wrong within itself and does not support the universal good of a rational decision, but if people acted in line with their duty to the universal law of their society, the results were of no consequence (Butts & Rich, 2008, Chapter 1). Kant stated that a person should act without emotion and with a complete sense of duty to serve the morally universal law of society and that the intention is of more importance than the result – consequences of the actions do not matter (Jasper, 1962). The theory of deontology follows this thought by setting demands that humans act at all times as though their actions would be universally accepted into an overall rule for society. He believed that duty and law are always one unit and cannot be separated and that with this duty to law, we shape our world. My criticism of this theory is that thought processes without emotions make our decisions too concrete.
Aristotle advanced the philosophy of ethics, where he demonstrated that it is a means of achieving an end to happiness. However, happiness means many things to different people. To Aristotle, the most adequate way to pursue happiness is through the virtue of excellence. In his writings, Aristotle connected his therory of virtue to economics, and leadership as well. It is a matter of connecting ones personal ethics to that of ones business ethics., simply because Aristotle made no disticntion between ethics and politics.