At the same to time I think it right to help the less fortunate and to recognize every person as they are, a human being. While I believe that every human being should have the pursuit of happiness and fulfill their self-interests, one should also show concern for our fellow man. Ethical egoism is the normative ethical position that moral agents should do what is in their own self-interest. Ayn Rand believes that this doctrine is one that every man should follow for fear of becoming a society that lives for others and only others, like the dystopian society in her novel Anthem. While ethical egoism sounds appealing to me, I do not believe that is my only duty.
Assess Utilitarianism Utilitarianism is a consequentialist approach to ethics, meaning the consequences of an act are what matters. The utilitarian answer as to what to do in any situation is that we should always act to maximise utility. There are two different interpretations of utilitarianism; the positive being that we ought to do that which brings about the greatest happiness of the greatest number and the negative being that we ought to do that which minimises pain or suffering. Utilitarianism is teleological, or goal orienteered, meaning that the end matters more than the means used to achieve the end. The various forms present two major problems; the problem of justice, and the issue of having to predict the consequences of an action.
However this is an unrealistic expectation for Kant to think. This is because we may all value moral faculty based on reason but not everyone uses this ability. This is unrealistic because Kant is assuming that all humans are the same. This also follows on to the fact that all humans are different but Kant says that humans are aware of our categorical ought. This is unrealistic because although we maybe aware of our categorical ought i.e we should not steal and lie however people still do this.
James Rachels’ on Normative Cultural Relativism Every culture has its own customs, traditions and beliefs that dictate the actions of its citizens. Cultural relativism states that although practices and ethical beliefs differ from society to society, it must be accepted as good, relative to each respective culture’s beliefs and moral code. Rachels believes that an act that may be frowned upon in one culture may in fact be totally acceptable in another. The theory of Cultural Relativism puts in action the idea of what people believe is morally right and how it relates to the culture that it is practiced in. Morals concern what is right and wrong.
Utilitarianism on the other hand determines the moral value of an act by the consequence of that action. Furthermore, Utilitarianism determines the morality of an action by “how much it contributes to the good of the majority.” (Pollock, 2007) Utilitarianism suggests that a person can predict the consequences of his/her actions. Critics of this doctrine are concerned that this form of ethical structure ignores individual rights and determines the moral value by how the action
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
Deontology, as espoused by Immanuel Kant, would argue against the morality of lying from a moral absolutism standpoint. Lying is wrong no matter what, and any good that comes from it is discounted by the evil of lying. Utilitarianism, as espoused by John Stuart Mill, would consider lying to be acceptable as long as a greater good for society at large to come from it. A virtue ethicist such as Aristotle would look less at the act of lying but more at the decision to tell a lie and what that says about the person in question as a moral being. A person that lies to protect someone’s feelings or pride isn’t
Consequential is a type of ethical theory; it’s built upon moral views of acts, rules, etc. purely due to the consideration of their consequences, where the norm of consideration is worked as the norm of non-moral goodness. Happiness is a part of acquiring what could be an unsatisfying truth that we do not have a solid handle of our control or impact in our world; giving into the greatest good, as well as, ignoring what can bring negativity. It is important to make the best out of life as possible that represent positive and negative, and take the rest as life wants to give it. The theory of “good” and bad is really not a matter of concern; we have our own particular views, so what can be bad may actually be good.
In searching for what nonconsequentialist believe, I found that it is the opposition of consequentalism. One view that is in opposition to consequentialism is deontology. Alexander describes dentology: 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 domain of moral theories that guide and assess our choices of what we ought to do (deontic theories), in contrast to (aretaic [virtue] theories) that—fundamentally, at least—guide and assess what kind of person (in terms of character traits) we are and should be. And within that domain, deontologists—those who subscribe to deontological theories of morality—stand in opposition to
Consequentialism assumes that if human being would weigh the outcome of their taboos and beliefs, then happiness can be achieved and pain reduced. But utilitarianism assumes that people can only value a virtue if it is deemed beneficial in accomplishing human happiness. For example utilitarians believe that truth will make a better society while consequentialists believe that truth will make a better society only if the outcome causes no harm. Basically utilitarianism assumes that the wrongness or rightness of an act depends on the moral good produced as a result of doing that act. This implies that an act is right if it minimizes violation of a certain moral right thus no one should violate moral rights for happiness sake and be justified.