Practical Rationality To Explain Why One Ought To Act Morally

As indicated by Aristotle, we as a whole try to thrive as people, with a term Aristotle named as eudaimonia. Such thriving requires that we satisfy our unmistakable capacity as individuals, which is to live in accordance with reason. Virtue amounts to living in accordance with reason. While scholarly ideals (intellectual virtues) are found out from educating, the ethical temperances (moral virtues) must be created essentially through practice. Despite the fact that we can possibly create both vices and virtues, neither virtue nor vice is innate. Virtue relates both to how we feel and to how we act. A virtuous response is always balanced, falling at the “golden mean” between excess and deficiency (Burnor and Raley, 224).

Virtue Theory is one of many different moral theories that exist today. It is based off of Aristotle’s Virtue Ethics which focuses on having an ideal character. The main focus of Virtue Theory is the role of one’s character, which is closely related to its roots in Aristotle. A Virtue Theorist would do things because it is who they themselves are, not because it is good to do them or because they will get something good from doing them.

Virtue ethics is a theory of ethics in moral philosophy in which it emphasizes that the notion of virtue is key to a

The Virtue Theory, also know as Virtue Ethics, refers to the character of each person. This theory states that every person should try for excellence. The characteristics of each individual are made up from their environment that they are a part of. The theory would further suggest

Under a general character-based approach, decisions result from a tendency to act in way that is virtuous. When faced with the moral decisions of daily life, a person of good character usually decides to do what is morally and socially acceptable without much consideration to the specifics of their situation because they are inclined to take action through a strong consideration of their character, as opposed to the consideration of the possible consequences and repercussions. The actions that are made are not dependent on the ever changing environment of the agent, but instead on the agent himself, whose character is evident through his tendencies and usual mannerisms. As a result, one following a character-based approach is consistent and

Morality, distinctly defines what is right and what is wrong, but theory of virtue ethics is the mechanism an individual uses to make those moral decisions. Virtue is essentially having a good moral character. And ethics are a set of rules that influence an individual’s behavior, but are subjective; because in part, these rules are developed by the individual’s perception for what is morally good or bad. One aspect of virtue ethics is that, the decisions are not as important as the process an individual uses to develop of one’s moral character over time. Comprehension of this concept is important, as it will allow an individual to achieve the ultimate goal of happiness. As there was no economics concepts in the thirteenth century, moral philosophies such as the theory of virtue ethics heavily determined how individuals behave and engage in the

However, if morality is so important, are the motives behind acting morally really all that significant? According to psychological egoism “every human action is motivated by self interest” (Rachels 64). As humans we are incapable of acting unselfishly. So what makes anyone think we could behave morally for altruistic reasons?

Ethics serve as an arrangement of ethics, and afterward moral choice making is the livelihood of that framework to settle on decisions. The longstanding perspective of moral conduct is that it is activities indicated to be equitably ethically rectify by means of allure to a hypothesis of ethically right (or reasonable, compulsory, attractive, and so on.) activity, and that it is "moral" definitely on the grounds that it is the conduct which is needed by the hypothesis Bommer et al., (1987). Badaracco (1998) states "a moral choice normally includes picking between two choices: one we know not right and another we know not

when we know that we can reap tremendous benefit from acting immorally?” Moreover, why should we do the “right” thing if we can do the “wrong” thing and get away with it? None of us will likely have the opportunity to become invisible, but we all certainly have had and will be faced with situations in which we stand to benefit personally and/or professionally from immoral actions that can easily go overlooked or for which there are no negative consequences. What, then, motivates or should motivate us to avoid moral wrong-doing and to undertake that which is morally good(Williams & Arrigo)?

Bernard Williams emphasizes that morality is about people and their real lives. That acting out of selfishness or even realistic self-interest are not inconsistent to moral action is shown in his "internal reasons for action" argument. “We do not judge actions by their consequences”, Williams argued. This is an ongoing appeal of Williams to human identity and nature, in contrast to the objectivity characteristic of Ethical

A. Moral Reasoning: The ability to judge right and wrong through the process of logical thinking.

​A rational agent desires, in every action, to maximize his total utility, or the complete sum of his happiness and contentment. This is not a particularly difficult premise to accept since we so often consider those who deliberately bring harm unto themselves to be irrational. Qualifying this first premise, the method by which rational agents choose their actions is based upon the principle of maximized expected utility, which posits that rational agents wishing to maximize their utility commit to the action that they expect to yield the most benefit. It is obvious that fully rational agents do not choose actions that they believe will minimize, or at least yield a lesser, utility. If so, the rational agent would be willing that his total utility not be maximized. Further, every state of affairs possesses a

Moral theories can help justify the decisions that are made. Each theory has separate viewpoints in which other theories borrow elements from. Moral theories attempt to explain what it is that makes some actions right and others wrong. These are then used as a guide to making choices. They operate at a more general level than moral or legal principles and rules. The four main groups that one should be aware of are: Utilitarian, Kantian, Aristotelian and Feminist.

Trying to understand logic and reason behind everything can be complicated. Some old mathematicians believe, for instance, that we cannot represent the greatest number, if it exists, because N+1 or when adding 1 to the greatest number, N will no longer be the highest number. Similarly, morality makes sense only as long as it remains in the practical domain. Generally, there are two important factors that affect our moral actions which are rationality and reason. Rationality is the way of analyzing the relationship between cause and effect, but reason is just an approach that is used to understand what the moral and immoral actions are. Some people may say we act morally because it makes our society function better, as well as our and other’s lives. Others may believe that acting morally can be due to the existence of religion and God, to whom we owe obedience and calls us to follow his moral commandments. These reasons make differences in relativeness which can differ from person to person. There are different moralities in different situations. In other words, when someone sees certain beliefs from other person’s reasoning, he may see them as immoral. Accordingly, a rational person may use reason to justify the immoral actions. According to Kantian ethics, actions should be reason-based or rational to be ethical. In other words, the rational behavior is the most ethical when it is reason-based

Morality and ethical behaviour within the human population is vital in order to conceive a healthy society. Although throughout history, morals and ethics have been used interchangeably, they are in fact not one in the same. Morality is within oneself and develops over a period of time as a result of meeting and resolving moral issues as they come forth, whereas ethics is essentially a moral compass, or a set of rules one follows throughout the course of their life (Crebert, Patrick, Cragnolini, 2004). From a personal perspective, I believe each individual has several distinguishing moral codes they live by, even if they may not distinctly know it. I personally have several moral foundations that I live by, including transparency,