I will conclude by siding with consequentialism for various reasons that I will try my best to explain. Consequentialism The moral theory of consequentialism centers its view about morality as the production of all the kinds of consequences that are naturally good. In this theory according to Kalajtzidis (2013), the reference of consequences of a deed means the overall outcome of an action, the action itself being inclusive. Shafer-Landau (2012) cites that the people who propose and support consequentialism concur with the effect that morality is wholly concerned with issues to do with the creation of as much freedom in the world as can be naturally and humanly possible (Kalajtzidis, 2013). Moreover, supporters of this ethical approach acknowledge that it is the sole moral activity of human beings to spread happiness and provide relief to the individuals who are going through hard times and suffering (Shafer-Landau, 2012).
Discovering the meaning of friendship or finding out the order of one’s priorities can appear as unimportant tasks, but these activities bring fulfillment to people of all kinds. For example, Janie was extremely naïve when it came to concepts regarding love. She believed that marriage would bring her love eventually. She heard this from her grandmother, but was soon proven wrong as shown by the quote, “She knew now that marriage did not make love.” (Hurston 29). The latter quote is clear evidence that people should not leave it to others to inform them of how certain concepts in life work.
He states that ethical principles must be universal and that ethics are distinctively human. Kant also thought it was possible for pure reason to discover objective ethical truths. Kant believed that ethical truths must be categorical, universal, and be the product of reason. Kant’s categorical imperative states that a person should always act in such a way that they could will that act should be a universal law. This means that Kant thought that it was best to do the right thing, even if the person didn’t want to.
(Shafer-Landau, 119) Utilitarians would acknowledge the parents’ concerns that the disabled children may be harmed. A blind child could get easily robbed if he or she were not careful. However, pampering children for eternity would actually lead to worse consequences. First, even if the parent-dependent life is more pleasurable, children not
Kant’s categorical imperative as known as The Formula Of The End In Itself states that people should act in a certain way that you always treat humanity and always consider them as an end but never as mere means. This moral theory opposes to Utilitarianism, which supports the “greatest happiness principle”. According to “greatest happiness principle” people ought to act in such a way that produce the greatest amount of happiness for the
In addition, it might cause deterioration in the family relationship. When parents are in complete control over the daily life of their children, they would cause resentment towards their parents. Family conflicts would eventually exist and children might become more rebellious which is contrary to the original objectives of applying authoritarian parenting. Therefore, it suggests that this parenting style is not effective and authoritative parenting would be a great substitute to replace
Becoming a parent is no easy task, especially when the fate of your child’s happiness is at stake. Amy Chua and Hanna Rosin both have their children’s best interest at heart, their happiness. Everyone has a different style of parenting. Chua believes that the stricter you are with your children and the more success they have, the happier they become. Hanna Rosin has the complete opposite approach to parenting in regards to her children, she believes that letting the child choose their own path will instill happiness whether they succeed or not.
“No your not going to have a tantrum on me! (16). This shows me that when Melody was trying to help the little boy from the toy, Melody 's mom just figured she wanted the toy and thought Melody was acting like a little brat. If I where Melody I would be extremely upset that nobody is able to understand what I was trying to say. Also when Melody was young was going to the doctor to see what was wrong with her.
I feel like a parent should not tell their child who to date. Maybe who not too. Parents have the right to share their opinion especially when that relationship they are seeing is bad for their child. I feel like you shouldn’t date someone your family already disapproves of, because even if you hope that eventually they will approve of him/her they probably won’t you will just have lingering parents disapproval. Although it is that childs achievement to learn from the mistakes they have had.