Ethical and Philosophical Questions about Value and Obligation

People from all walks of life face many ethical dilemmas. These dilemmas have consequences. Our worldview determines how we deal with these dilemmas, and guides us to the right decisions. In this essay, I will examine an ethical issues through my Christian worldview. I will also present other viewpoints, and compare them to mine.

Immanuel Kant and Friedrich Nietzsche are two widely acclaimed philosophers due to the groundwork they made towards the philosophical principles of morality. However, even though they both have openly discussed their views, they have ended up contradicting each other. Kant implied that morality is not learned, but rather predestined, whereas Nietzsche alluded to a experience based morality, or one that is learned through actions and memories. Although these two men have accepted views of morality, the ideas of Nietzsche seem more applicable in relation to the present day; the world is constantly changing. There are two separate scenarios in which the issues of 'thou shalt not lie ' and 'thou shalt not steal, ' are morally assessed. The end results are supportive towards Nietzsche 's principles and detrimental towards Kant 's ideas. Overall, the moral concepts of Nietzsche will prevail as a result, illustrating the more probable use of his ideology.

Ethical dilemmas occur when there is a disagreement about a situation and all parties involved question how they should behave based on their individual ethical morals. (Newman & Pollnitz, 2005). The dilemma that I will be addressing in this essay involves Michael, recently employed male educator working in the nursery, and parents of a baby enrolled at the centre. The parents have raised concerns about male educators changing their child’s nappy as they have cultural practices that do not allow this practice to take place. This situation is classed as an ethical dilemma as there is a dispute between cultural beliefs and legal requirements within the workplace. There are four parties involved (parents, child, educator and director), all

1. What were the costs and benefits to stakeholders of the actions taken by Massey Energy and its managers?

The theory that I find true to the true nature of moral responsibility and its relation to human freedom and determinism would be compatibilism. Compatibilism is the claim that we are both determined and that we have moral responsibility (Lawhead 120).

Free will must be a will that gives itself autonomy. According to the formula of autonomy, every rational agent is universal and no experience can determine universality. A rational agent may ‘will’ to act a certain way, but because they are rational beings free from sensual temptations, their ‘will’ is what imperfectly rational people ‘ought’ to act. Therefore, a rational agent’s ‘will’ becomes a universal law in which people guided by empirical experiences should abide. A rational agent is only autonomous when one can make judgments not by external “impulsion,” but by “pure practical reason.” Just as Kant states good will is a will “good in itself,” he believes a rational agent is “an end in itself” who becomes the author of the universal law which he will obey and the rest will follow. If a person can act as if one is a law-maker of a “kingdom of ends” who can be responsible for the universal law of one’s people,

Scenario number one: I believe that in this scenario there is a moral obligation to act. I believe that as a police officer, even off duty, you know the laws and shouldn’t allow this to happen if you know it is wrong. I think that taking action is something that all police officers should do, even off duty because they are knowledgeable and know it isn’t the right thing to just let it go. This situation would require that the clerk at the counter gets in trouble because he is not abiding by the law. Selling these magazines isn’t a big deal, but it could be possible that this clerk was selling alcohol or cigarettes to minors as well. Goodwill is shown because it would be wrong for a cop to witness something he sees illegal happen, whether he is off duty or not he still knows the laws and the right thing to do would be to stop the clerk from selling minors the magazines. A deontologist would agree with me, all police officers should say something because they all have a duty to make sure others abide by the law. There should never be a situation in

Dear Leo, -I had a conversation with my case manager Ms., Mila from WSIB she told me that I needed to go to a specialty clinic to get a new diagnosis on my soft tissue injuries because you sent her such referral for me nonetheless I was never informed by you nor you discussed such referral with me in my first visit to the physiotherapy clinic where we met and you completed form 8 for WSIB conversely Dr. Daniels as a family physician with high ethical standards with his professional practice got very concerned that I might had internal bleeding when my co-worker took me after picking me from the stairs injured and upon my request he drove me to his walking clinic where my co-worker narrated to Dr. Daniels as a witness my accident Dr. Daniels

Mills thinks that we should know what to do based on experience and observation, also known as a posteriori. This is opposite from Kant believing that those factors should not count in moral decisions. Mill also believes that actions should be made in order to gain other things, this is call hypothetical imperative.

Values and ethics are one of the most important characteristic of an individual. They basically define who we are and what we believe. There are many factors that determine our values and ethics. Culture, religion, and many other factors affect our beliefs. Many times are values and ethics can clash with different people who hold different views and beliefs. This doesn't mean our values or ethics are wrong it just means we think differently than others. Most people have a good sense of ethics and values. Knowing between right and wrong is a good foundation to practicing good ethics and morals.

To begin with, Nietzsche’s contribution to the study of ‘morality’ has three core aspects: a criticism of moral genealogists, modern evolutionary theory, and a critique of moral values (Ansell-Pearson, xv). For Nietzsche, reading morality is complex due to the numbers of errors people have incorporated into their fundamental ways of thinking, feeling and living (Ansell-Pearson, xvi). Furthermore, these errors are the example of an individual’s complete ignorance of oneself and the world. For years, people have been

It is natural for human beings to subscribe to particular moral ideologies and to apply them to their day-to-day lives since we all live in societies that have norms and values. For many centuries, philosophers have tried to formulate frameworks upon which these moral principles can be based and measured. This paper tries to apply the moral theories of John Stuart Mill and Immanuel Kant is solving an ethical dilemma.

*Never treat people simply as means to an end but always at the same time as ends in themselves

German philosopher Kant was first to introduce the Kantian ethics; hence, the named after him. According to Professor Elizabeth Anscombe, Immanuel Kant was Unitarianism’s rival; he believed actions that are taboo should be completely prohibited at all times. For instance, murder should be prohibited. Even though nowadays a person cannot be punished if death is involved as a self defense, from Kant’s perspective this is still prohibited, although sometimes these actions bring more happiness to the big majority of people than sorrow. Kant stated that before acting, one should ask his/her self: am I acting rationally and in a way that everyone will act as I purpose to act? Is my action going to respect the moral law or just my own purpose? If the answer to those questions is a no, the action must be abandoned. Kant’s theory is an example of the deontological theory that was developed in the age of enlightenment. According to Elizabeth, these theories say that “the rightness or wrongness of actions does not depend on their consequences but on whether they fulfill our duty.”( Anscombe, 2001) Kant said that morality is built based on what he called “Hypothetical Imperatives”, but rather principles called “Categorical Imperatives” he referred to it as the supreme principle of morality. (Texas A&M University, n.d.) Cavico and Mujtaba reported on their book that Kant stated that morality

When we think about moral obligations and their directional structure, this involves the obligations that we have to other people. “Obligations are owed to the benefactor” (Timmons, 2015). This means that a person is obligated to someone who tries to help another person in some way, shape or form. So, let’s say for example I promise you to walk your dog. Since I have promised you this I am not fulfilling my promise because I told you I’d walk your dog, or because I want to keep my promises to you, but I fulfill my promise of walking your dog because you have the right to me walking your dog. As we learned in our reading, you now own my action. You have the right to be angry or upset at me if I fail to perform the act of walking your dog. You are able to demand me to perform that action. I think the directionality has more to do with the relationship that is developed as a result of your promising rather than how good the person you promised feels after you have performed the action.