The answer to this question will vary. Some people are moral realists and hold that moral facts are objective facts that are out there in the world, these people believe that things are good or bad independently of us. Moral values such as goodness and badness are real properties of people in the same way that rough and smooth are properties of physical objects. This view is often referred to as cognitive language. Those who oppose cognitivists are called non cognitivists and they believe that when someone makes a moral statement they are not describing the world, but they are merely expressing their feelings and opinions, they believe that moral statements are not objective therefore they cannot be verified as true or false.
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
Ethical, Moral, and Legal Challenges in Mediation A mediator is lead by a core set values when it comes to decision making concerning right or wrong in a given situation with clients (Leviton and Greenstone, 1997). Even though the mediator is there to help the two parties to come into an agreement, the mediator is not the decision maker. As mentioned by Leviton and Greenstone, (1997) ethics are guidelines or principles of conduct that govern a person, based on the moral and values of culture. According to Kagle and Giebelhausen, (1994) professionals enter into dual relationships when they engage in more than one relationship with a client, becoming social worker and friend, employer, teacher, business associate, or sex partner. The main and most common ethical, moral, and legal challenge faced by professionals is sexual intimacy between the professional and a client.
Describe the potential tension between maintaining an individual’s Confidentiality and disclosing concerns? The issue of confidentiality and disclosure is a legal requirement. While confidentiality is highly regarded, disclosures of certain information is vital. Any information disclosed without recourse to the service user must be one that portent anger either to the service user or others. As a care worker, before you pass on any information about any service user to other person(s), you must seek consent from the service user.
separate the people from the problem Separating the people from the problem means separating relationship issues (or "people problems") from substantive issues, and dealing with them independently. People problems tend to involve problems of perception, emotion, and communication. Perceptions are important because they define the problem and the solution. While there is an "objective reality," that reality is interpreted differently by different people in different situations. When different parties have different understandings of their dispute effective negotiation may be very difficult to achieve.
One of the principal aims of Kant’s Metaphysics of Morals, especially of the Doctrine of Virtue, is to present a taxonomy of our duties as human beings. The basic division of duties is between juridical duties and ethical duties, which determines the division of the Metaphysics of Morals into the Doctrine of Right and the Doctrine of Virtue. Juridical duties are duties that may be coercively enforced from outside the agent, as by the civil or criminal laws, or other social pressures. Ethical duties must not be externally enforced (to do so violates the right of the person coerced). Instead, the subject herself, through her own reason and the feelings and motives arising a priori from her rational capacities -- the feelings of respect, conscience, moral feeling and love of other human beings, must constrain herself to follow them (MS 6:399-404).
Some people believe that culture is a way that morality can be established, but morality differs from culture to culture. In Doing Ethics, Lewis Vaughn talks about cultural relativism and lays out an argument for it. In the second premise it states “If people’s judgments about right and wrong differ from culture to culture, then right and wrong are relative to culture, and there are no objective moral principles” (Vaughn 26). He makes it clear that he does not support this premise and explains his points as to why this is false. Cultural relativism is the idea that the moral principles someone has are solely determined by the culture one lives in.
Integration of Mediation and Advocacy on a National Level Within The Human Service Agency of Planned Parenthood Carla Nelson BSHS/442-Advocacy and Mediation Elizabeth Thompson November 17, 2011 Integration of Mediation and Advocacy on a National Level 1 Human Service agencies are an important factor in areas of conflict; these agencies are often caught between the fundamental needs of mediation and advocacy. In the aspect of advocacy, they are expected to be supportive and stand up for the well-intentioned causes for human rights and the protection for those that are considered vulnerable groups. When looking at the mediation aspect the need arises to arbitrate between two groups that are looking to find a common ground within their issues between them. The mediator is responsible for providing a calm environment to support the outcome of a positive resolution. The role of mediation needs to be open-minded, unbiased and the mediator needs to be an honest individual with good ethics, so that the parties involved will be treated fairly and with respect.
Moral Relativism cannot and does not accept the idea that an objective moral system exists. If it did, you could evaluate other ethical systems meaningfully. A moral relativist would ask such questions as ‘what do we mean by wrong?’ when making a decision on something deemed wrong. Relativism is in direct contrast with absolute morality that is deontological, referring to looking at the action in itself. A moral relativist would believe that there is no definite set of rules that apply universally.
However, the most important duty for Kant was the duty to one’s self. Because for him, that is what made you the person you are. And if you failed your duty to your self, then you were not worth anything. He also tells us in relation to fulfilling your own duty that if you cannot do so, then you are not able to fulfill your duty toward others. Moreover, he tells us that the duty toward others can be divided into two groups: duties