Annette Baier discusses justice and care in an interesting way and she does so by distinguishing between the justice perspective of people like Kant and Rawls as well as what Gillian’s perspective about care. Baier also touches on the justice perspective and discusses the “inadequate” as a moral theory. This shows inequalities between people, it has an unrealistic view of freedom of choice, and it ignores the importance of moral emotions such as love. However, she also says that the best moral theory, she claims, is one that harmonizes justice and care. She goes on to also explain the theory of moral development which has two dimensions.
BARRIERS TO CRITICAL THINKING 1. Egocentrism: Egocentrism is the tendency to see reality as centered on oneself. Egocentrics are selfish, self-absorbed people who view their interests, ideas, and values as superior to everyone else’s. There are two forms of egocentrism such that the first one is self-interested thinking. It is the tendency to accept and defend beliefs that harmonize with one’s self interest.
While ethical relativism has its advantages, such as that it could create a peaceful society, that is not always the case. Relativism does not accept that certain moral values are universal. Just because cultures differ, that does not mean there are no moral values and norms, like murder or child abuse. Determining what is morally right or wrong is a difficult thing, and each individual has a different belief about it. So, by allowing everyone to follow their own moral code, it could lead to a chaotic society.
Emotions play an important role in moral judgment. In Sentimentalism Naturalized, Shaun Nichols points out that normal people have a capacity to be guided by norms or rules of various kinds, and certain non-moral emotional dispositions, such as the disposition to have an emotional response to suffering in others. Nichols is arguing against the neo-sentimentalist, who believe that, to think an act x, is wrong is to accept norms that recommend a person feel guilt for x, and that others feel resentment. The purpose of this paper will discuss Nichols’s own version of sentimentalism and point out some of it’s problems. The argument that Nichols is making is against neo-sentimentalist on the view that the capacity for moral judgment depends on the capacity for judging the appropriateness of guilt.
They are looking to see if the idea of Cultural Relativism is convincing and ethical or not. Different cultures have different moral codes is one of the most defining characteristics of Cultural Relativism. The Rachels state that there is no universal moral truth. Meaning a customs cannot be truly right or wrong because all cultures and their customs are different. If we were to say that a custom was correct or not, it wouldn’t be true in terms of Cultural Relativism due to us using our own culture to judge and that doesn’t take into consideration of other cultures.
This is where culture intersects with ethics. Since interpretations of what is moral are influenced by cultural norms, the possibility exists that what is ethical to one group will not be considered so by someone living in a different culture. According to cultural relativists this means that there is no singular truth on which to base ethical or moral behavior for all time and geographic space, as our interpretations of truths are influenced by our own culture. YOU MIGHT BELIEVE THAT YOU SHOULD ACT ONE WAY OR ANOTHER BECAUSE IT IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO. THIS IS YOUR PERSONAL ETHIC AND WHICH STEMS FROM THE SOCIETY/CULTURE ONE BELONGS TO.
When there is a sign of a cry for help what is the first instinct one 's mind comes to? To deceive or to help others? There has always been a debate about the question of whether humans are naturally altruistic, helpful, or naturally egoistic, selfish people. Many believe that it depends on the situation where a person has a choice in being helpful or deceitful by considering a person’s ethnicity, personality, or circumstances. Altruism versus egoism has also lead down to conclusions allowing people to believe that is natural to be both selfish and helpful.
According to me, no party can be judged to be absolutely right or wrong in any given situation; it is a lot more subjective. It depends solely on which imperatives you value most. Simply put, one decision may be unethical on the basis of the consequences of the decision (Consequentialists) but that same decision could be ethical based on the motives of making that decision (Deontologists).
Candidate Name Richard Candidate Number 0167 Centre Number MMOO4 Project title Belief system. What are the impacts of having a belief system. The impacts of a belief system are both positive and negative for an individual, but can have negative impacts for countries and larger institution. Belief is a state of mind in which a person thinks something to be the case with or without being empirical evidence to prove that something is the case with factual certainity. Philosophers use the term belief system to refer to personal attitudes associated with true or false ideas and concepts.
While you’re following a religion, does that mean you are above all? Or does it mean you will never face problems? Religion or what I say self-reliance is the process to make yourself dependable and peaceful simultaneously when you faced with adversities. Similarly, proper religion doesn’t work to make you a chaotic person. i It works for your peace, and it doesn’t hide anything, for instance, if you think that something is fishy, or somehow you are frequently hidden from the fact, hence it is not a religion, it is a dogma without verity.