Duty Ethics And The Professional Military Ethic

Ethics can be valued in my personal opinion as the most powerful tool to stand for what is right and knowing the sense of principals an ideas that each individual caries within their moral and ethical foundation. Describing what I think ethics is begins with my core foundation that was instilled within me at the age of 20 at Parris Island, South Carolina. Before I had taken that step onto the notorious yellow foot-prints that the Corps had made home for three months, I didn’t fully grasp the idea of ethical principles the way Uncle Sam intended. Through multiple field exercises to long hours in the classroom, what I was taught and exercised in the Marine Corps, I expect to do so in a manger position role. A few terms that I associate with ethics

Deontology is an ethical theory concerned with duties and rights. The founder of deontological ethics was a German philosopher named Immanuel Kant. Kant’s deontological perspective implies people are sensitive to moral duties that require or prohibit certain behaviors, irrespective of the consequences (Tanner, Medin, & Iliev, 2008). The main focus of deontology is duty: deontology is derived from the Greek word deon, meaning duty. A duty is morally mandated action, for instance, the duty never to lie and always to keep your word. Based on Kant, even when individuals do not want to act on duty they are ethically obligated to do so (Rich, 2008).

Deontology is what some will see as a duty. With utilitarianism a person will do the right thing if the consequences of their actions are good. But with this reasoning if the actions are not good but the consequences happen to be good the act may be believed that this is a good ethical act. Police officer have a duty to do and lawyers ethically act good to make their client just as happy.

Ethics matter in any kind of business or organization, but they are especially significant when it comes to the US Army (Blackburn, 2001). The reason behind this involves the chain of command and the risk to life and limb that are such large parts of military life. When a soldier in the Army has no ethics, he or she can cause trust and respect problems with other members of his or her unit. The US military is a stressful organization for most people involved with it, and people's lives are on the line frequently. Issues like PTSD and other medical problems are commonplace for those who leave the military and must adjust to civilian life, so it is very important that those who are in the Army work with their colleagues and higher-ups to get the help and support they need during and after their service. There is more to ethics in the Army than the problems that military individuals can face, though.

Duty is one of the values outlined the Army values. In my opinion it is one of the most important of all of them. It is very important but without the other values, Duty by itself cannot assist in accomplishing the mission. We still have the other values like leadership, respect, selfless service, honesty, integrity, and personal courage. These all set up the framework for us to be able to accomplish or duty as soldiers. All of them work hand in hand with each other. Duty is defined in Webster’s dictionary as, “obligatory tasks, conduct, service or functions that arise from ones position.” It is one of the primary values in the Army today. Duty is the reason while we get up every day and prepare to and defend the United States of America with

Every organization, both large and small, will typically have a well-defined set of values that they wish to espouse. This is the template for a successful, trained work force. These values will guide individuals during the decision-making processes that they will encounter. This blue print helps to ensure the integrity of the company and the individual, as well. Our Army today is no different. We can find our values and creeds everywhere we turn. One quick trip to a company or battalion headquarters will yield all the information a Soldier ever needs to assist them in making ethical choices. We hang posters touting the seven Army values on every wall. Units will prominently display the

Duty-based ethics are based on duty or obligation. Kant argues that there are higher principles that are good in no matter the time, situation, or culture. Therefore, when faced with

Deontology based ethics relies on acts themselves, rather than the consequence of the act, to determine the morality of a situation. The ethics of deontology places special emphasis on the relationship between duty and the morality of human actions. Under this form of ethical behaviour, one cannot justify the morality of an action by showing that the result or consequence was good. Deontological ethics makes it imperative that a person fulfil’s his or her duty to act accordingly, despite a bed result. The two deontology based principles, the ‘Hypothetical Imperative’ and the ‘Categorical Imperative’, are described by deontology’s most influential philosopher, Immanuel Kant.

Kant believed in three things to test the moral worth of an action;

Theological beliefs endure many sides of a person’s life with guidelines, requirements, restrictions, and formalities. However, without even knowing it these practices violate basic human rights or ethical principles. As human beings, we have an understanding that we have the power of choice. We are capable of treating a person in such a manner that it makes a positive or negative impact on their lives. We also have the capacity to understand the position that we put another person in, because we are able to place ourselves in that situation.

The ethical theories can be divided to two categories: duty-based ethical theory and outcome-based ethical theory. Duty-based ethical theory is that when we face an ethical dilemma, we judge it based on duty standards. Different from duty-based ethical theory, in outcome based ethical theory, “an action is morally correct, or “right,” when, among the people it affects, it produced the greatest amount of good for the greatest number” (Roger LeRoy 53).

As an organizational- level leadership, he will confront many thorny problems and missions that challenge their moral criteria and military profession. In particular, when they receive the order from the upper- level, how he employ his expertise to exercise his moral leadership and undertake the tasks. Actually, both of the profession and ethic are interdependent, and inseparable. Thus, a professional commissioned officer should understand how to fit ethic into his expertise. Moreover, people would face the dilemmatic situation between the obedience of rules and the consideration of the consequence. When it comes to the moral or ethical, should I follow the deontology or consequentialism? Which one is the most critical priority to the stewardship

Have you ever felt that you should do something but never knew why? Duty Ethics are something that are said to be somewhat natural or born through an individual through a rigorous learning process called life. Duty Ethics can be applied in almost any circumstance and in multiple ways. Learning Duty Ethics can help an individual to gain more ground and save face when needed, and on top of all these great perks- your putting others first.

It bases its foundation on what we ought to do, in comparison to what kind of person we are and should be as in virtue ethics. Deontologists usually oppose consequentialism because consequentialism is based on consequences and not moral principles. In this paper I would like to present the views why consequentialism is criticized by Deontologists and what are the advantages of Deontology or also known as Duty ethics/ Kantian Ethics.

Duty ethics is focused on treating others, the people believing the person or persons, as the person or persons telling the information wants to be treated. Duty ethics supports this ethics thread on honesty because the person or persons giving out the information does not want to be lied to as much as the people listening to the person or persons. The person or persons do not want the people

The term "deontology" comes from the Greek word meaning duty ("Business Ethics: Kantian Ethics (Deontology)," 2005). Therefore, deontological ethics refers to the moral duty to act a certain way. Deontological ethics are the opposite of consequentialist ethics, which suggest that an act is morally justified if no harm is done. In other words, deontological ethics suggest that an act can be judged according to rules of right versus wrong, as opposed to judging the outcomes of the act.