Moral Accountability As a Result of Choices Are we as individuals morally accountable for our actions if we are forced to make a choice under duress or extreme conditions? People every day make choices under their own volition. While some decisions seem simple and straightforward, others are more complicated when ethics and morality are of concern. We are ultimately responsible for our actions, however, if we are coerced, intimidated or manipulated into making a decision that is contrary to our belief system, our moral responsibility is negated. What are the motivating factors that affect our behavior and ultimately persuade us to make a moral decision?
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.
Dexter throughout the show lives by Harry’s rules. Different ethical philosophies such as Divine Command Theory and Economic Ethical Theory would have contradicting views on Dexter’s actions. This paper will discuss Dexter’s actions and how they are perceived in different ethical theories. Economic Ethical Theory is based on Consequentialist Theory. “Economists are ethical consequentialists: we judge actions and policies solely on the basis of their consequences/outcomes.” (Morey 4).
Mr. Gilmer, the prosecutor, used Tom’s race and physical strength to imply that Tom was just another stereotypical black man who targeted a fair skinned female. Mr. Gilmer hinted that because Tom was strong and coloured, Tom would rape and beat a white woman. Not only was Tom discriminated against on the stand, but after Tom was sent to the slammer, Tom was killed and shot at multiple times after he was already dead. “ ‘Seventeen bullet holes in him. They [the police] didn’t have to shoot him that much.’ ” (235).
The Moral Rights Rule defines a decision as ethical if it protects people’s fundamental rights. Under this rule, the decisions made by Lay and Skilling should be the one which protects the rights of all stakeholders of the company. The employees and stockholders on the corporation had a right to know the true financial status of the company because if affects their individual finances and livelihood. Therefore, by the definition of the Moral Rights Rule, the decisions and actions made by the executives were not ethical. However, they
In one case, during a bath one uncle drowns the nephew to collect the money. In another case, the other uncle, planning to attempt the same murder, walks in and the nephew trips and is knocked unconscious landing in the water and the uncle merely makes sure he drowns. It is argued that committing murder is worse than the second case where the uncle only watches the nephew die. It seems plausible that this be the case, especially because of how the legal system would treat both of these incidents in court. If the first uncle were to
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.
It would be absurd to think that there is a need to criminalize a conduct if an individual’s feelings are hurt or an individual is offended by another’s actions. The harm done must be towards protected interests and conduct that are not just offensive in nature. In response to the Report, Devlin argued that criminal law was not just for the protection of individuals but also for society as a whole. The society, Devlin felt, was a community of shared ideas about how people should live their lives. As such, the law is entitled to create laws that protect the society even if it means infringing on an individual freedom to make his or her own decisions.
While as per Thoreau, policies of the State should never be put above the individual's needs. It is true that one is accountable to obey just laws; similarly, one has the moral responsibility to speak against unjust laws. However, it would be an extreme statement that one should disobey unjust laws. Anyways, laws are based on majority vote and cannot always suit everyone in different situations. Unjust laws do exist, but there is a proper way to reform them.
Our generation is not simply more self-centered or less moral than our predecessors. I contend that this appearance of moral degeneration is more accurately perceived as moral confusion. When we ask why individuals act unethically, we must also be prepared to ask why it is that our ethics make it seem to be in the individual self-interest to do so. Because our common morality limits our freedom to behave in ways we might otherwise choose to, it