We choose how we act and what rules to follow. Ethics Awareness Inventory Analysis I interpret the obligation as basing my decisions on responsibility and obligation. I make moral decisions on my home training and personal and professional experiences. As a child I was taught to respect others and treat them
I use my rationality to determine how I can ensure equality to all others. I learned that my blind spot is I trust too much in just outcomes for everything. I tend to forget that although every person should have equal access, not everyone does. Even though I want everything to be fair, I know it is not and I often rely on ethical decisions to come up with a fair system. We all have our strengths and weaknesses.
Perhaps more so than Emotivists, Prescriptivists see ethical language as fairly meaningful. They believe that the terms used are able to create absolute rules that everyone ought to follow. It would seem that ethical language is seen by many as very meaningful, although for varying reasons. However agent centred theories such as Virtue Ethics would argue that our main focus of morality should be on becoming as virtuous as possible, rather than deciding what is meant by ethical language. Therefore it would seem that perhaps morality should be more focussed on individuals’ actions rather then defining what is meant by ‘good’ and
My decision is virtuous as the individual was creating an unsafe environment, and I was following a moral code. If I were to issue a citation for every circumstance, it would be seen as deontological ethics. Conclusion In conclusion, through the comparison and dissimilarities of the three theories one can gain further understanding of the importance that ethics and social responsibility. The similarities between the three theories represent the good in people, their strive for excellence and justification. The differences in the three theories begin with the ethics and morality.
In professional community, integrity enhances personal commitments to the code of ethics set forward by the professional organization. It involves decision making in the frame of mind as to what is right, instead of what will make me look better than others. It will help people act in a fair and a responsible manner. In personal settings, integrity leads
“The possession of knowledge carries an ethical responsibility.” Evaluate this claim. The right to study and possess knowledge is a fundamental right for every human which is enshrined in nearly every single country’s constitution. However, the decisions that are made when this knowledge is applied could potentially have repercussions. At this point, ethics becomes involved in the use of knowledge. In order to evaluate the claim that the possession of knowledge carries ethical responsibility, it is important to understand ethics and knowledge in the general sense To put it simply, ethics is moral philosophy, or rationalization of conduct as either right or wrong.
“The possession of knowledge carries an ethical responsibility.” Evaluate this claim Knowledge is being valued and cherished in this world as everyone acquires and absorbs knowledge on a daily basis. Knowledge on its own is just ideas and understandings towards every single thing and it differentiates from person to person. But the possession of knowledge can be powerful, it can lead to effectively achieving the goals set by every individual themselves. These goals set by different individuals vary from each other, thus leading to different results. This ambiguous and vague claim above is stating that an ethical responsibility will be placed on you if knowledge is being possessed by you.
The weaknesses of virtue ethics outweigh the strengths, discuss (35) The definition of a virtue is habitually doing what is right; being a virtuous person requires the practice of a certain kind of behaviour. There are a number of arguments for and against virtue ethics, most argue for the formation and growth of us via practical wisdom, which allows us to make the right decisions by using out conscience. Virtue ethics is mainly supported by Aristotle, Phillipa Foot and Alisdair Makentyre. Vitue ethics is based on different virtues which a person should possess in order to reach Eudemonia, Eudemonia should be the ultimate goal in everyone’s life as this leads to ultimate happiness and therefore a healthier and better society. One major strength of virtue ethics is that it allows the moral agent to make ethical decisions based on his or her moral well-being, not just based on what is legally right.
In order to make someone else happy, you must be happy with yourself. Life’s choices, treatment of others should be made with the best of intentions and cause no harm to others. Scalet and Arthur (2014) have suggested the quality of life is determined by activities and that a happy person will never do what is hateful and mean but will live life with dignity and always do what is best. Kant’s theory suggests that actions determine morality and one must not only act in accordance to duty but for the sake of
This is a forward thinking process. However, there is a negative aspect to virtue ethics as it has a grey area when using precedence within decision making. The lack of guidance carries a negative similarity between virtue ethics and deontological theory. Deontological theory is defined in contemporary moral philosophy, deontology is one of those kinds of normative theories regarding which choices are morally required, forbidden, or permitted. In other words, deontology falls within the field of moral theories that guide and assess our choices of what we should do (deontic theories), in contrast to (aretaic [virtue] theories) that — fundamentally, at least — guide and assess what kind of