Ethics and Moral Theory

First, I will explain what Divine Command Theory is in more detail, and why someone would believe this theory because of its claims to morality. Robert Mortimer is the creator of this theory and he makes many claims as to why God is the sole reason that morality exists. First, it must be known that people reject the idea

Divine Command Theory theorizes that God it is the author of moral law and the right actions are those willed by God and that God clearly defines right and wrong. This allows the concept that sometimes situations are only right or good because God deems it so. In the simplest terms, God can determine right and wrong since he is omnipotent. Since God is all powerful, he can establish moral norms. Critics of Divine Command Theory believe that if a specific action is only right because God wills it so then evil acts would also be right since God willed them into existence. For example, if God wills murder or torture than these actions would be considered morally right.

Certain concepts that appear normally in everyday life sometimes contain an air of uncertainty relating to their true definitions. Typically any attempt at defining these themes results in the use of metaphorical phrasings or synonymic words. Thus no clear and constructive definition can be formed from these types of discussions. This phenomenon appears most often during in depth discussions of time, probability, and ethics. During this paper I will be focusing upon the last of these three topics. By exploring the three fields of ethical philosophy—metaethics, normative ethics, and applied ethics—and establishing how they connect with one another, will enable us to better understand the purpose behind ethical reasoning. It is important to explore this field because situations where the idea of a person’s actions being “good” or “bad” come up nearly constantly when observing society. But despite their common usage, the meaning behind such labels often remain ambiguous. Only through clarifying the true nature of such expressions will we understand their relevance to social interactions.

Ethics are statements written that mirrors the principles of society it reflects society’s views of what is right or humanitarian. However, morals are not written and are codes setting out what is thought to be good enough or offensive behaviour.

Ethics derives from the Greek word ethos which means character. Essentially ethics is a theory of proper moral conduct. Essentially, in ethics one is trying to make a distinction between what is the case between what ought to be the case. A key player in ethics is the moral agent. A moral agent is a person that has an ability to reflect on moral issues. Moral actions conform to the law and immoral actions do not conform to the law.

The divine command theory states morality is dependent on God’s commands (Boss 136). Like ethical subjectivists, divine command theorists also do not believe in universal moral standards (Boss 136). Additionally they state God has the ability to change moral rules at any time (Boss 138). For instance, although the ten commandments state thou shalt not kill, a divine command theorist would claim the radical islamic terrorists responsible for 9/11 were morally correct in killing thousands of people because God commanded it then. However, a divine command theorist would also have to believe president George Bush was morally correct by sending over troops to Iraq to kill the terrorists responsible. These conflicting commands bring up one of many

“Great individuals have great ethics and great values.” Ethics and morality can be used interchangeably as they sound as if they mean the same although there is a wide distinction between them. “Strictly speaking, morality is used to refer to what we would call moral standards and moral conduct while ethics is used to refer to the formal study of those standards and conduct. For this reason, the study of ethics is also often called moral philosophy." (Gordana D 2007)

AVirtue ethics or the virtue theory, is an ethical theory that examines the character of a human for morality (Dreisbach, 2013). When discussing the ethical and moral reasoning behind the racial divide of incarceration rates, virtue ethics requires us to evaluate the morality of the person doing a given act, rather than the act itself (Dreisbach, 2013). Using virtue ethics, you can look at the racial disparity from two perspectives that of the offender and that of the people enforcing the laws. From the offender’s perspective you have to look at the values of each individual offender who breaks the law, you have to dissect their upbringing to determine their moral compass. As far as the government officials whether local, state, or federal each individual person’s morals have to be looked at, whether they are the person who drafts a law or bill to help or further harm the issue of racial disparity in incarceration rates.

A theory is an explanation for a problem or an observation. These explanations can vary based on which perspective is being used, such as a moral or sociological. Despite having different theories for the same problem, they all try to “...explicitly or implicitly suggest how to address [a] problem, which could then lead to appropriate action” (p.52).

Before I can argue against the divine command theory, it is important to first understand the belief. According to Russ Shafer-Landau in his book, The Fundamentals of Ethics, the divine command theory states that an action is right simply because God says so, and an action is wrong simply because God says so (Shafer-Landau). For example, rape is wrong only because God said it was wrong, and being kind to people is good only because God said it was good. Many religious people are proponents of the divine command theory, even though few religions today actually support the view (“Divine”). Although the divine command theory and the ideal observer theory are often thought to be interchangeable, they are different in many important ways. The ideal observer theory states that an action is morally right or wrong if a morally perfect and unbiased person would judge that action to be morally right or wrong (Brandt). One example of an ideal observer theory is the divine judgement theory. The divine judgement theory states that an action is morally right or wrong only if God would judge that action to be morally right or wrong (Robbins). Although both the divine judgement theory and divine

Everyone’s views of ethics and morals are different because we all have experience different things in life that have contributed to the way we view things ethically acceptable. Throughout my 21 years on this earth my views on ethics and morals have change. I think that ethics and morals are taught to us by the people we surround ourselves with and the environment that we are in. For example, the behaviors that I experienced in public school on the regular basis, would seem bazar to the people in the North Hills school district, where I transferred to in my junior year of high school. In public school people would roam the halls, talk over teachers, and do a whole lot of other things that aren’t normal in a high school setting.

Ethical and moral. The two words both relate to “right” and “wrong” conduct. Often times, the terms ethical and moral are used interchangeably; however they are very different. Ethical refers to rules pertaining to right and wrong behavior that are set by an outside influence. Moral is related to the an individual's

Another moral theory, also born of Deontological Perspectives, comes from WD Ross. In contrast to Kant, who stated that moral positions can be deduced by reason and are absolutely binding, Ross believes that we determine moral positions through intuition of the rightness or wrongness on the action. This intuition allows us to determine what our duties are while these duties are not dependent on the outcomes or circumstances, but how we rank these duties is dependent on a situation. In turn, this creates what Ross refers to as Prima Facie duties. Prima Facie duties are duties that are obligatory duties that can be trumped by other duties depending on our situation. Ross gives an example of seven of these prima facie duties in his writings: beneficence, non-maleficence, justice, self-improvement, fidelity, reparation, and gratitude. These duties arise because we intuit them to be true and binding duties. In Ross’s view, all of these duties are binding, but he does not exclude, as Kant does that these duties may overlap and run contrary to one another in any given situation. We can only act in accordance with what our perception is of the situation and try to do our best, but we may often fail as a result. While this theory is superior to Kant in that it does allow for more universal applicability and wiggle room to fit various cultures, the main issue with Ross’s theory is that it relies on the intuition of flawed humans to determine self-evident duties and does not

Morals are the intrinsic beliefs developed from the value systems of how we 'should' behave in any given situation. Ethics, on the other hand, are how we behave in the face of difficult situations (Bottorff, 2005).

Moral Philosophy is rooted in four areas of standards, one of which is the central focus of Hedonist thinking. The standard of moral philosophy that corresponds directly to Hedonism is known as the Value Theory. The Value Theory establishes what is “valuable in and of itself, what is worth pursuing for its own sake”1. Goods that are valuable in their own right are intrinsic values, as referred to in the previous sentence. Contrary to intrinsic values, instrumental goods have the ability to lead to valuable things, but don’t themselves hold significant value.