Essay about Eth 316 Week 1

This paper is going to discuss Ethics and Ethical Theories. It will include an introduction to ethical theories, virtue ethics, and care ethics. There will be sections discussing absolutism versus relativism, consequentialism versus deontological ethics, and lastly, free will versus determinism. It will also include a discussion about the study of morality and identify which of the approaches (Scientific, Philosophical, or Theological/Religious) are closest to my own personal beliefs. There will be a discussion regarding the three sources of ethics

When observing the different ethical theories one may believe that although their differences are unique there are similarities in them. One may state that a similarity between utilitarian and deontology is that they both require one to consider their duty something that should be done and considering the character of an individual is if it will be done. If an individual has morals and character he or she may consider it their duty to do what is morally correct.

In Normative Ethics there are three distinct schools of thought, and each differentiate through moral intentions. Consequentialism relies on the consequences of an action in order to distinguish whether or not something is morally acceptable. Deontology considers the morality of an action by one’s reason for doing a certain deed. Lastly, virtue ethics bases morality off of virtuous character, and how a virtuous person would act given a certain predicament. Ultimately, consequentialism provides the most practical explanation for morality due to the notion of providing the best possible result. Contrarily, deontology and virtue ethics do not always provide an individual with the most sensible course of action, and therefore prove to be

The theories of virtue, utilitarianism, and deontology are similar in some aspects but for the most part are very different. Each of the theories will be explained to show their differences and the type of person that would gravitate towards that theory. Through the explanations one would also be able to consider where there morals or ethics may lie but can also see themselves in each theory.

When faced with adversity and difficult dilemmas, people have different ways to figure out what to do; some people make pros and cons lists while other people just go with their gut. Ethical theories like utilitarianism and deontology, can aid people in making these difficult choices. Utilitarianism focuses on the results of your actions, rather than the intent behind them, as the goal of the theory is the create the greatest good for the greatest amount people. On the other hand, deontology follows a strict moral code concentrating on the right or moral action rather than the results it yields. While utilitarianism and deontology focus on different aspects of decision making, the effect and the intent respectively, they often yield the same result; more often than not the more ethical decision leads to the greater result. These ethical theories are both used in Snow Falling on Cedars by David Gunderson where they both agree on the topics, yielding the same results.

1. A constitution is a charter that both establishes a government and delineates fundamental rights and obligations of that government and of individuals who fall within the territory covered by the constitution. The Constitution of the U.S. provided for a federal union of the states and a federal government divided into three branches (legislative, judicial, and executive) to operate the union. The fundamental rights of the Constitution are known as the Ten Amendments, which make up the Bill of Rights. The Constitution gives the government limited power and describes what they can and cannot do, how to govern the legal system, and give rights to citizens.

Virtue ethics is a normative theory whose foundations were laid by Aristotle. This theory approaches normative ethics in substantially different ways than consequentialist and deontological theories. In this essay, I will contrast and compare virtue ethics to utilitarianism, ethical egoism, and Kantianism to demonstrate these differences. There is one fundamental aspect of virtue ethics that sets it apart from the other theories I will discuss. For the sake of brevity and to avoid redundancy, I will address it separately. This is the fundamental difference between acting ethically within utilitarianism, egoism, and Kantianism. And being ethical within virtue ethics. The other theories seek to define the ethics of actions while virtue ethics does not judge actions in any way. The other theories deal with how we should act, while virtue ethics determines how we should be.

There are several theories that try to explain the morality of the actions; however, two stand out. the first is deontology, and the other one is utilitarianism. The former follow the idea that the consequences of you action hold no importance in what we ought to do. But rather, some actions are morally wrong or good by itself. The latter follows an opposite view in which the consequences of an action are what it makes an action moral. Specially, if that action produce the greatest happiness over unhappiness. In this essay I will focus on two Utilitarianism ramifications, act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. They both agree that consequences must be the greatest factor in deciding what we ought to do. Nonetheless they have one big difference. Rule Utilitarianism generalize acts and recreate the consequences of a rule. If the consequences are ultimately favoring, then it is morally right. By way of contrast, Act Utilitarianism evaluate each action individually, and similar situation would have different outcomes depending on the situation. There is no universal rule unlike rule utilitarianism.

Hursthouse presents an outline of these ethical approaches. First, deontology premise one the action is right if it follows the guideline of a “moral rule or principle”, and premise two a correct moral is either “required by rationality” or the “rational acceptance from behind the veil of ignorance and so on…”. Then she presents act-utilitarianism, premise one the action is correct if it comes out with the best outcome, and premise two if the best outcomes presents that “happiness is maximized”. Finally, the author presents virtue theory. Virtue theory, the action is correct “if it is what a virtuous agent what do in the circumstances”. She then explains what a virtuous person is, and discusses how a virtuous

Two seemingly contradictory normative theories are utilitarianism and Kantian deontology. By answering two hypothetical questions, I will contrast and compare the two theories. Though one is consequential and the other deontological, they share the concept of universalizing actions. After examining the two ethical conundrums, both of which I personally view as ethical, I prefer Kantianism because of its concepts of good will and human value.

There are a variety of different ethical systems that have developed of the course of millennia. However, even though the subject has been covered so thoroughly, it is still heavily debated. The varieties of ethical systems that are in existence look at various ethical problems from different perspectives and can be applied differently in different circumstances. Because of the subjective aspects to applying ethics, they can be as much an art as they are a science. Ethics are something that must be practiced and really cannot be perfected. In this way, studying ethics is a continual process that does not really stop. This paper will argue that ethics are the most important subject that an individual can pursue.

The term “Deontological” derives from the Greek word “deon” which means obligation or duty, it’s primary focus is based on rules. The Deontological moral theory is considered a Non-Consequentialist moral theory, it asserts that the nature of an action is not simply dependent on expanding the good if the action did go against it, it is considered to be moral. The deontological ethics are what one talks about when it refers to principles, which teaches that some acts are deemed right or wrong because of the sorts of things. One has a moral obligation to act accordingly, despite of the bad or good outcome that will be produced. One that follows the deontological ethics should do the right thing even if the out turn is harm. One’s main duty is to do right if the outcome is a negative result.

Deontology ( or Deontological Ethics) is the ethic theory that decided the morality of one action based on the action's adherence to a rule or rules. It is described as “duty” from the word “deon” from Greek (CVP, p.10). Deontology is also contrast from other ethic theory, such as consequentialism or virtue ethics. It judges the rightness or wrongness of actions themselves, as opposed to the rightness or wrongness of the consequences of those actions (Consequentialism) or to the character and habits of the actor (Virtue Ethics). In other words, the inside moral worth of actions is duties, aims and human beings, not the consequences. In order to determine what "right" is its settlement with a moral standard: right takes priority over good. For instance :

Virtue ethics is in my opinion the lesser of the three, because it gives no clarity in how it can resolve a dilemma. Deontology and consequentialism on the other hand do. Although deontology cannot give answer to a dilemma as the trolley problem, I will still argue that deontology is the most reasonable. In consequentialism it is a possibility to rationalize an unethical decision, which in my opinion is not a good thing. As explained, consequentialism has a need for an ideal observer, who can take ethical decision from an unbiased point of view. This also means that such a person will look at the whole of humanity and not to the individual. In deontology every individual has the same rights and is worthy of protection. Motivations are valued over consequences, which are beyond our control. Furthermore, deontology can provide guidelines for making moral decisions, without the need for a prediction of consequences, and possible outcomes. Concluding that although consequentialism can provide answer to certain questions. Deontology sees every person as an equal individual, and provides a clear set of objective guidelines. In my opinion, equal rights and such a set of guidelines are more reasonable than predicting

Virtue ethics focuses on the moral character of the person making the decision. It highlights the intent on the moral agent but is not always necessarily bound by absolute laws.