Meta-Ethics is a branch of ethics which is concerned with the language that is used in ethical arguments. Many would say that if we do not know what we are talking about, then there is not point to ethical debate. This differs from normative which deicides whether or not something is bad or good and gives us a guide for moral behaviour. Meta-ethics is about normative ethics and tried to make sense of the terms and concepts used. The terms good and bad are used a lot in day to day sentences - but what do they really mean?
Facts: Defendant Butler was charged with the murder of Joseph Anderson and assault with attempt to murder William Russell Locklear. At trial, Butler testified that Anderson had owed him money for the catering work that Anderson hired him to do and that Anderson kept putting off repayment. Butler testified he went to Anderson’s house to only threaten Anderson to repay him and that the gun went off when Anderson grabbed for it. Locklear tried to apprehend defendant but was himself shot and lost consciousness. Defendant was gone when Locklear regained consciousness.
Morals concern what is right and wrong. Right and wrong usually vary depending on what is normal in a specific culture or society. Many people would agree that what is “right” is moral, but it is James Rachels that explores what makes something right. Rachels argues that it is the cultural normality’s of a society itself, that makes an action morally right, while others would disagree and claim that there is a set of “universal moral codes” that people should live by. In different societies and cultures what is morally right and wrong can be determined only within the individual mind of a person.
Al Capone cornered the market for alcohol sales by killing anyone that got the way of his elaborate smuggling schemes and distribution of alcohol through the streets of Chicago. Al Capone put himself in a position of power by having a strong business plan. If any public official got in his way, he would either bribe or kill them. If the police got in his way, Capone would bribe or kill them. Usually, if a citizen bought liquor from another distributor, Capone would have him killed.
The Hutu killers drag Damascene out into the street to kill him. They do not kill him in private; they want everyone to see how wretched they are and humiliate him before he dies. Immaculee describes his vicious death in great detail. “He swung his blade down into my brother’s head, and he fell to his knees. Another killer stepped forward and, with a double swing of his machete, chopped off both of his arms.
The core element is defined through an assumption of a mutual agreement of individuals binding as a group (Oyserman et al., 2002). The right or wrong becomes judgment in a social context with situational constraints and social roles in a group perceptional and causal reasoning approach (Oyserman et al., 2002). Otherwise, what is the social mean standard within the social group agreed upon by the majority of the individuals within the social group? Legal and Ethical Issues in Counseling Related to My Own Ethical and Moral Reasoning The law or legal system and ethics have been a controversial debate for centuries. The laws are defined by the majority of a society influence through ethical reasoning.
“If we hope to sift style from substance, and discredit the willful muddling of the two that makes the unfamiliar look exotic, then we are looking not just for family resemblances or a behavioral lowest common dominator, but for moral threads and themes that can anchor norms to recognizably objective values (Goodman, 2010)”. Relativism is the reference to a variety of diverse thoughts that people have. The moral relativism affirms that morality is not being centered on one complete custom. Morality is centered on several customs of cultures and other things. The moral relativism can be centered on a person’s faith, the beliefs that their family instilled in him or
Ethics Awareness Inventory which is where I did my assessment which supports my principles that human beings are entitled to basic rights; consequently, actions have to respect the rights of others. Someone who does not respect other people is not respected person. This person has to treat others the way he would like to be treated. As individuals we suppose to have the right to make our own decision, and if those decisions affect others in a harm way we already know there are consequences for those who attend to break the laws they could have everything in their own way regardless of whom pays the consequence. Those unethical behaviors we could not accept, because that will have affected in us all.
Thoreau implies that people should not begin to act unless they are ready to face the consequences of their action. DR. King , with a different perspective, explains how one decides which laws to break or observe. He claims that there are two type of laws: just and unjust law. People have not only legal but also moral responsibility to obey just laws: A just law is a man made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law.
Meta ethics tries to make sense of the terms and concepts used in ethical theories such as Utilitarianism and Natural Law. Some people believe that ethical language is extremely meaningful as they argue it is essential to be able to define terms such as “good” and “bad” before we can even begin to discuss ethical theories. However others disagree with this and argue that moral statements are subjective so are meaningless, as they cannot be described as either true or false. Those who hold cognitive theories about ethical language would argue that ethical statements are not meaningless as they are about facts, and can therefore be proved true or false. Ethical Naturalism is a cognitive theory of meta ethics which holds the belief that