Socrates believes that there is moral knowledge but it cannot be taught. Protagoras, on the other hand, believes that moral education is real but moral knowledge doesn’t exist. Protagoras is only teaching people to mimic the actions of others, but not necessarily learn about what they are doing, therefore in the end, they have no knowledge of what they are doing. They just do these things because it is in the pattern that they are supposed to be following. Protagorean moral education does not yield moral education because it gives us habits, rather than knowledge.
They believed that the rules of Confucianism were a human creation and didn’t follow nature. My first reason I think Daoism would be helpful for North is because it doesn’t set rules. Although, some may think not having rules would be bad, I think this idea is good because it would filter all those
Simpler questions would be “Is Dr. Smith’s intentional practise of omitting important information relevant to his client’s treatment ethical?” or “Is Dr. Smith’s failure to report his client’s actions to the authorities morally justifiable?” Both would be good questions, but I believe the question the study guide asks us to consider embrace both of these questions. The possible answers to the question are “yes” or “no”. I will be using rule-based utilitarianism and Kantian deontology to analyse this case study. There is not enough information to consider act-based utilitarianism: Act-based utilitarianism essentially says that one should perform that act which will bring about the greatest amount of good (“happiness”) over bad for everyone affected by the act. Each situation and each person must be assessed on their own merits (Thiroux, 2004, p. 42).
A doctor does not have the right to do this because he or she is not God and should not ‘play God’. This is why euthanasia is opposed. Followers of Natural Law would argue that euthanasia, with regards to the quality of life, might end a person’s suffering which was causing them to have poor quality life, but it does not consider that a person could have gotten better if they were not euthanized and their quality of life could have improved. This is why a follower would object to euthanasia. The case study of Dr Nigel Cox can be used.
When you get down to the core concepts humans are selfish in that they only care for themselves. Thus we do not engage in act of generosity without intentions of self-gain. We help the disabled to raise our self-image. We help tutor a fellow student not just to help them improve, but as we’ll make ourselves feel superior. Although we might not show our selfish intentions we become arrogant and full of ourselves.
“Conversely, a person who has a reputation for scientific misconduct is more likely to be judged harshly for plagiarizing because of his consistent past of unethical behavior (Penslar, Robin, L., 1995). The fact that this ethical theory does not consider a person’s change in moral character; it is one of its weaknesses. Utilitarianism is more concerned with the good for all. “According to this theory an individual’s rights may be infringed upon in order to benefit a greater population.” (2013) Utilitarianism, in terms of ethics, is an individual trying to make a positive change for a larger group, and morally would guide themselves in decision in regard to the group they are associated with or belong to. There are two types of utilitarianism, act utilitarianism which a person performs the acts that benefit most of the people regardless to a person’s feeling or the laws, and rule utilitarianism which takes the law
The Imperial secretary Sang Hongyang declares “abolition of these measures is not expedient.” This statement means that Legalists believe the policies are necessary to keep the empire running and that it is not practical to abolish them, for then the treasuries would be depleted and funding for defense for the soldiers would be obsolete. Then he goes on to explain how “equitable marketing” was established and how it contributes to their country. Before this system, the people would send respective products as tributes to support the country, but the Legalists think that people are untrustworthy and should be governed by laws to force them to do good. They came up with this set of laws, i.e. setting up transportation offices, forcing the people to send their goods to these places because the government did not trust the quality of the products sent from the people.
Alexandra Loza Eng 101-042 Corissa Eisenman The Myth of Universal Love Universal Love is impossible because the love between families is a natural human instinct, rather than a decision, and also because we are raised by family that teaches cultural traditions and customs that will carry on throughout our lives. Asma’s opinion of universal love was that it was a good idea because “Helping a stranger in need makes you feel better about yourself” but in reality it would not do anything because there’s no guarantee that a stranger would do the same thing back for another stranger. “The Myth of Universal Love” by Stephen Asma deals with this argument stating the advantages and disadvantages of choosing either
In the rant called “The Smart Gap,” Eric Maisel explains his personal opinion on brain power of individuals. Grit, however, isn’t something that he believes will help people find success. Although some may not agree with what was stated, Maisel brings up many persuaded key points to help get his point across. Throughout Eric Maisel’s rant, many key points are brought up. First, he explains that we will experience emotional pain when we recognize that the work we would love to do might just be unavailable enough to make us doubt that we can proceed.
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.