In all theories of justice, the reciprocity, necessity, cooperation are the most important concepts defining the idea of justice and they provide me a solid base for rejecting the rationality assumption. The relation between functionings, capabilities and agency seems to be very important in order understand the human motivation that cannot be taught separately from the social relations.If good life is defined in terms of the set of valuable “beings and doings”, it is then important to focus on what people can ‘actually do’, namely their substantive freedoms and more importantly their autonomy degrees and fields that can be thought only in relational terms. In this sense, I find very useful to think with Bourdieu’s concepts in order to understand the framing of what one can ‘actually do’, because although these theories are useful to gain a normative framework, Bourdieu’s analysis are more practical (Calhoun & Wacquant, 2002) and aim to understand the processes and experiences of inequalities. The capabilities (which I find very interesting conceptual and also methodological tool) which makes me think about the concept of habitus, are shaped by not only laws and policies, but also by a set of norms and values that are legitimated and reproduced in discourse, perception and
According to Kant, the categorical imperative is “what makes a will good is its conformity with the moral law”. His categorical imperative is a deontological ethical theory, which denotes the idea of existence
much can be gained from ethical theory utilitarianism, more specifically rule utilitarianism. In this essay, I will explain what rule utilitarianism is and two of its types. I will discuss situations where rule utilitarianism can be looked at as somewhat morally wrong , to show an objection on the theory. I will give an objection to how the general guiding rules are made and also to give an analytical view on the principle of utility. Utilitarianism is a popular type of consequentialism, rule utilitarianism is a form of utilitarianism.
Devine command theory The theory, Devine command theory, also known as theological voluntarism is philosophical perspective and view to what Gods will is relevant to determine moral status of some set of entities. The theory holds that morality is Gods command, doing what is morally right is implementing Gods command. In this writing, I aim at giving a characterization of the theory, argue for the theory and against the theory, I will present my own views, arguing for and against the philosopher 's arguments, I 'll evaluate the theory, point out objections to the theory and present approach to respond to the objection. Metaethical and Normative Theological Voluntarism Defined as voluntarism. All human beings believe in the existence of Supreme Being.
According to Rand Observation-Based Principle of Rights Theory (2011), he reasoned that man’s life is the standard of moral value, because each person should act to sustain and further his own life. 1.3.4 Justice Theory: Rawls 's theory of justice (2005), revolves around the adaptation of two fundamental principles of justice which in turn, guarantees a just and morally acceptable society. 1.4 Evaluation of Alice’s decision alternatively Theories, Laws, and organizational policies are often involved in complex cases, and Alice should understand that social workers are often legally obligated to take a particular course of action. Allen and Friedman (2010) suggest that, it is also
Corrective justice is one of the most influential non-economic perspective of tort law.it is clear from the principle of corrective justice that an individual has a duty to correct the faults his own wrongful action causes. Distributive justice comprehends more than achieving, lessening of inequalities. It is nothing but a remedial measure in keeping with the policy of the state for rendering social and economic justice. Corrective justice is based on the norm that any wrong committed by any person must be corrected to bring back the status quo. I am in favour of view that corrective justice takes as found the positive law measure of those interests who merit protection in individual’s interaction with others, and explain on which account holding that corrective justice is
Introduction Morality and contract law look like two separate concepts, however, if we consider deeply, we will discover the relationship between them. Morality and legality are traits of law. Consulting the fact that contract law should consider the acceptance of both sides, it will involve more problems about morality. If we attempt to understand the linkage, we should interpretation correlate notions of morality and contract law. What I intend to demonstrate is to hold the understanding of the purpose of contract law constant while analyzing varying understandings of morality.
Ethical egoism is a consequential moral philosophy which dictates that the individual take care of themselves first by putting their goals and interests first and foremost. The ethical egoist is not concerned with the overall good of others, or the results of their actions, they are only concerned with what is good for themselves. I think this applying this moral theory to the above-mentioned issues makes the most sense. The actions of the ethical egoist always benefit the individual first and may have a positive, negative, or neutral impact on others. For me, this is a logical way of thinking when dealing with life and death situations, like euthanasia or abortion.
What makes lying wrong? In the following piece, I will evaluate different ethical theories about lying and determine which one is the best. There are many different ethical theories, which can be used as a basis for an ethical judgement, these range from Utilitarianism to Native Spirituality, from the manically consequential to the incredibly passive. In this piece, I will focus on Utilitarianism, Virtue Ethics and the Golden Rule. I will begin with utilitarianism.
Throughout this essay I will be discussing how we should handle moral disagreements. Specifically I will focus on the ethical theory of Utilitarianism, it benefits but also its disadvantages which shows it is a theory which should not be used to handle moral disagreements. Utilitarianism is a type of relativist consequentialist ethic. Consequentialist ethical systems focus on the outcome of an action, rather than the agent or the action itself. Utilitarianism is a relativistic ethic because each time the outcomes of each ethical questions will be different.