Together, these rules are based upon the importance of empathy and this ethic of reciprocity has been what many different cultures have resolved conflicts with. However, the Golden Rule is no panacea. Think about it: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” This is based upon the assumption that other people would like to be treated the same way that you would like to be treated. And we know instinctively that this cannot always be true, because everyone is different and has differing tastes and preferences. So now what?
Paige Fisher Letters to Birmingham “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly” These words were spoken from Dr. Martin Luther King jr. a man whom believed all people are created equal in spite of there differences or the color of their skin. This quote from Letter from Birmingham Jail struck me because it speaks of how all humans are inevitably connected with one another. Dr. King points out that humans are of the same “classification” despite their color, and that color should not affect the way we view or treat others.
However, the citizens wanted to make their own rules to follow, sensible and understandable rules. Further on Paine explains “the sun will never shine on a cause of greater worth?” I think that Paine is saying that it is such an issue that we should look to reform it in any way so that it is more fair to all citizens. The struggle of having a King or a Monarchy for the people at that time was difficult. The community wanted a more fair and equal government, while the king was not giving that to them. Let’s take for instance when Paine refers to the past writings of another author, Mr. Pelham “they will last my time.” The name of ancestors will be remembered for their great deeds by future generations with destinies of their own.
The rule utilitarian believes that there are enough human motives and situations to justify setting up rules that apply to all humans and situations. Kant’s duty ethics were broken down into categorical imperative and practical imperative. According to categorical imperative an act is immoral if the rule that would authorize it cannot be made into a rule for all humans. Practical imperative states that no human should be thought of or used merely as a means for someone else’s end but rather each human is a unique end in himself. There are similarities and differences between these two groups of categories.
Therefore the law did not resolve conflicting interests but imposed the interests of one group over another. While this can still happen today it seems that the law does try hard to make sure everyone is satisfied and everyone’s interests are accounted for. Rudolf von Jhering said that the law is the main way of ordering society, his views was that the rights of the majority should take precedence over the individual. He said that society is made up of conflicting interests that cannot all be satisfied and that the role of the law was to balance them out so the individual conformed to the needs of society. Roscoe Pound said that interests are both individual and social and that conflicts are only resolved through considering them on the same level.
Numerous similarities between the two codes are noted; differences are attributed to respective worldviews. Discussion As of the law, ignorance of the respective codes of organizations to which a counseling professional belongs is no excuse. The American Counseling Association (ACA) and American Association for Christian Counselors (AACC) implicitly state that member counselors have a duty to adhere to the regulations set forth in their codes. At the core of the both codes is the universal moral principle of nonmaleficence. Though, theoretically, all principles are given equal weight, nonmaleficence, is considered by some to be the most critical (Forester-Miller & Davis, 1996) and is covered in depth by the AACC (2004) standard ESI-100, to “First, Do No Harm”.
“Analyze Beccaria’s argument against the judicial torture within the framework of Enlightnment values, and explain if you find his position still relevant today.” Cesare Beccaria, an enlightenment era philosopher that argued against the many problems that were wrong with the judicial system. He argued against the judicial torture by using the enlightenment ideas, since torture it was a big concern in his time and that it was lacking fairness and usefulness. Beccaria’s fundamental faith that he truly believed in was that all human beings are rational creatures that can join each other in peace and harmony in order to achieve a mutual benefit. Since the enlightenment ideals consisted of a social contract that all made political authority a legitimate authority because of the individuals within the society who joined together for a mutual benefit. Meaning that the authority that was elected by the society had to be beneficial to the society; as well as the right and wrong actions depended on the effect that these actions had on the unhappiness and happiness of an individual.
According to Kant, right actions are not done by following inclinations, impulses or obeying the principle of greatest happiness but are done simply and purely from the sense of duty. Kessler says that some ethical truths and norms are appropriate to everyone in the society, and therefore, people should always act morally irrespective of the outcome for their morals. In deontology ethics, actions are done for the sake of duty. The intrinsic moral feature determines the rightness or wrongness of the act taken by individuals. The duty should always be done by taking the right.
Ethics area a code of conduct we are all expected to follow so we tend to respect the guide lines that are put in place a normal behavior to be considered as society norms. In field of psychology discipline is no exception in fact it is a most when it comes to ethics and code of conduct. These ethics and codes are particularly important since scientific discipline usually deals with unsound individuals. It is extremely import to not counsel anyone. Work at a rehab people will ask you opinion and in giving that opinion you are crossing the line of counseling in many cases.
The Completely Equal Societies; Proving They do not Work Many societies strive to make every person as equal as possible to the next, believing that this makes everything fair for everyone. In all truth though, society cannot function in this way; no matter what, there will always be someone or some group that has more power than everyone else. Equality should only concern the important issues, such as equal rights for all races and each gender. Both the novel Animal Farm by George Orwell and the short story “Harrison Bergeron” by Kurt Vonnegut Jr. are the quintessence of inequality and prove this point; all equal societies do not work. There are many similarities the book Animal Farm shares with the short story “Harrison Bergeron”, one being that no one is truly equal in either society, the second being that there is a group with supreme power that dictates what every person does and manipulates them, lastly the characters in each society look the other way when something terrible happens, no one wants to challenge the government for fear of serious punishment.