It says that the persons under this Ethic Lens their primary concern are protecting individual rights. For this kind of person equality is very important. The strongest point of the persons under Result Lens is that they want equality for each person. For them is a win-win situation. A good example of this is at work if there is a situation at work and you have to resolve it this person looks into different points of view and will do what it’s best for both.
He stated: “A person’s right to be treated with dignity, I now suggest, is the right that others’ acknowledge his genuine critical interests: that they acknowledge that he is the kind of creature, and has the moral standing, such that it is intrinsically, objectively important how his life goes. Dignity is a central aspect of the value we have been examining throughout this book:
Ethical Lens Inventory and Reflection My preferred lens is Rights and Responsibility. According to the game, I use my reasoning skills to determine my duties as well as the universal rules that each person should follow. My core value is independence and Rationality. My primary concern is protecting individual rights and believe that by doing this everyone in the community is treated fairly. I value rationality over sensibility.
Descartes ontological argument is trying to aims to explain the existence of God in itself. Descartes argument begins with his own definition of God being a ‘supremely perfect being’. He then continues to question and bring out the concept that if something is perfect then in order to fulfil its attributes it must have the attribute and full ability to exist and if God is perfect then he too must have this attributes and therefore concludes, that God must exits. In addition, Descartes extended his argument by stating that “God is the most perfect being possible, so he has all perfections.” It is understood and known that the idea of perfection links into attaining the concept of existence. As the most perfect being, God must exist.
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.
Ethics gain from personal experience. Ethics are derived from values. Values help individuals to choose ethically. Therefore, ethics provides the structure for conduct. Ethical issues vary from legal issues because ethical issues are individualistic and legal issues are embodied in a system that governs society.
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
The present dimension of faith is the life of obedience in which the believer demonstrates his or her faithfulness to God out of gratitude and love for the one whom he or she unconditionally trusts[2]. Theologically, it expresses the fundamental nature or response of the human person to God[3]. It is the assured knowledge that changes the believer and the means through which one
John 17:3 sums up the point of life: to know God. If there truly is this all-powerful, all-knowing, all-good God of which the Bible speaks, of course He would be the One worth knowing in this universe. Man was created in God’s image, so his life’s ambition should be to find what that image is and who that God
(Exodus 20:3 You shall have no other Gods me.) I would answer the Teleological question by saying, “We are the Kingdom of God, and because we belong to God’s Kingdom we have purpose and destiny on my life. Since God has purpose on our lives that means he has a plan. Jeremiah 29:11 states, “I know the thoughts I think towards you thoughts of good and not of evil to give you an expected