Virtue Theories And Non-Moral Consequences

Utilitarianism is another theory in which its main objective is to explain the nature of ethics and morality. Utilitarianism is an ethical theory which is based upon utility, or doing that which produces the greatest happiness. According to a utilitarian the morality of act is found just if the consequence produces the greatest overall utility for everyone. However, if the greatest possible utility is not produced, the action is then morally wrong. This view says that a person should act as to produce the greatest overall happiness and pleasure for everyone who may be directly or indirectly affected by the action. Therefore, a utilitarian would require that for every action the corresponding consequences for every action should be thoroughly weighed and alternatives proposed before deciding whether or not to perform such an action.

The modern theory of utilitarianism is a type of consequentialism--"the view that normative properties depend only on consequences;" that is to say, in other words,

Its general outline is the moral rightness of an action is determined by outcomes. For example, a student was struggling to help an old lady who has fallen on ground while other people do not even care about it and a student had to leave in a hurry. However, he helped her and a lady offered cordial thanks. As the example is illustrated, the act is good if its consequences are good, but if its consequences are bad then the act is wrong. Shaw et al(2013, p. 63) emphasizes that consequentialists determine what is right by weighing the ratio of good to bad that an action will produce. According to consequentialists, the decision of the Dean of Harvard Business School is simply explained as the result of decision which rejected all applicants who attempted to access the information derive a conclusion which Dean Clark observed their belief, principles and it shows making own decisions is always with responsibility for actions. In addition, utilitarianism will be applied on this case because this theory is in contrast with egoism which can be defined by Shaw et al(2013, p. 63) as egoism contends that an act is morally right if and only if it best promotes an agent’s long term interest.’. It means self-interesting is most important key point whether going into action or not. However, Utilitarianism is focused on more about ‘achieving the

The first theory I will compare virtue ethics against is ethical egoism. The two theories share a commonality apart from being normative in nature. They both seek what is best for the doer. Aristotle claimed that happiness is ultimately attained by striving for the “function of man” which is the excellence found within virtue. This is comparable to ethical egoism because of it’s principle of exclusively acting in one’s own best interest. While virtue ethics states that a virtuous character is the goal, ethical egoism is not specific to what is in a person’s best interest. If attaining a virtuous character is

In order to support the right answer to crucial moral problems, certain philosophers use theory. Theory is an abstract statement formulated to predict, explain, or describe the relationships among concepts or events. Theory is developed and tested by observations and research, using factual data. I’m currently studying the following theories: Intuitionism, Egoism, Utilitarianism, Divine Command Theory, Virtue Ethics, Cultural Relativism, Moral Nihilism, Ethics of Caring, Kantian Ethics and Social Contract Theory. I’ve read each one of them and have noticed their flaws. I was impressed with utilitarianism, which shows the most logically believed theory. I have no doubt utilitarianism is the best moral theory. I chose to defend utilitarianism because it has a major influence on the types of assessment methods. As a health care giver, I believe utilitarianism will be useful in deontological concerns and to evaluate alternative solutions in the health care system. Giving an overall explanation of utilitarianism, defining and contracting act utilitarian and rule utilitarian, and listing some reasons will prove that utilitarianism is the best theory yet.

The first ethical theory is Utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is the ethical theory that describes how the moral value or worth of an action is determined by how much benefit is gained from that action. It is measured by not only the amount of benefit gained but also

The premise of this theory is that an act is right if and only if it produces the greatest possible average outcome for everyone. Egoism and Utilitarianism are similar in the fact that they both make judgements that are purely dependent on the consequences. The largest difference between the two theories is that egoism has no primary regard for how actions affect others, while utilitarianism is concerned with the overall outcome for all.

Consequentialism and non-consequentialism are both action based ethical frameworks that people can use to make ethical judgments. Consequentialism is based on examining the consequences of one’s actions as opposed to non-consequentialism which is focused on whether the act is right or wrong regardless of the outcome (Burgh, Field & Freakley, 2006). The three sub-categories of consequentialism are altruism, utilitarianism and egoism.

This essay will provide a theoretical understanding of the four ethical frameworks: Consequentialism, Non- Consequentialism, Virtue Ethics and Care Ethics. When applied to a situation these frameworks help teachers to resolve and justify their decision making. The objective is to apply the four frameworks to the scenario Helping Molly, to establish the most ethical course of action. Finally, a recommended course of action will be justification. The overarching ethical issue present within the Helping Molly scenario is the community sponsorship and the alignment with school beliefs and initiatives.

We have learned about different kinds of theories, consequentialist and non-consequentialist we are going to see if these theories are accountable for its principles in terms of the standard ethical principles such as truth telling, generosity, misconduct, keeping promises, not offending people, etc. To me not all these theories are not 100% perfect and does not fully account for its principles.

Virtue Ethics is neither deontological nor teleological, since it is concerned with neither duty nor consequences, but rather the state of the person acting. Aristotle believed that once you are good, good actions will necessarily follow, and this belief is at the centre of Virtue Ethics. Rather than defining good actions, Virtue Ethics looks at good people and the qualities that make them good. The non-normative theory, although very effective in determining the morality of individuals, is particularly flawed when applied to whole societies. This weakness is largely due to its imprecision and abstraction; however, before these weaknesses can be considered, it is necessary to give an account of the theory itself.

Moral theories can apart to two parts, one is consequenlialist and another one is non-consequenlialist. Consequenlialist theory means if the consequences are good that can prove the action is also right. On the other hand, if the consequences are bad that must be the action is wrong( Shaw, Barry, Sansbury, 2009, P76). The examples of consequenlialist theory are egoism and utilitarianism. However, non-consequenliatist theory has a negative meaning to consequenlialist theory which is no matter the result is good or bad, if the act is wrong then the all things are wrong. And wen can talk about it

When most think of philosophy a list of people come to mind. You have your “greats” such as Plato, Nietzsche, and of course Aristotle. However, this does not mean that their ideas cannot be challenged and questioned, as no one is above criticism. Aristotelian Virtue Ethics have a major flaw that strikes at the heart of the idea. There is a severe lack of guidance both in what a virtue is, and what happens when they conflict. The mains question is, is one virtue more important than another?

I, think all the approach we studied this quarter are really important and interesting. Indeed, all of them can be really helpful in different case scenarios. What I mean is we can use the Deontology principle in a situation A and we can use subjectivism and emotivism principle on situation B, and who knows we can also combine both of them to solve one dilemma. Returning to the topic I think it is difficult to choose only one, so I will prefer to choose a combination of “The Doctrine of Double Effect”, and the Virtue Ethics. I like the DDE because in there we have to determine the legality or illegality of an action that may produce two effects (one is good and one is bad.) Also, the DDE, is helpful because it allows us to practice a morally

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.