Sometimes a friend has views that either do not agree with our own, or appear to not even be consistent with each other. In the case of Sarah and Jamie, utilitarian ethical standpoints are brought into question. Utilitarianism is “the doctrine that the rightness of actions is to be judged by their consequences” (Shafer-Landau 78, 2015). It is a form of consequentialism that examines the consequences of actions, and if those actions produce happiness and pleasure (overall, not just for one person) and minimizes the amount of suffering, then that action is correct and morally right. Typically to determine this, one would perform the Happiness Calculus for actions A and B, and whichever one produced the greatest amount of pleasure is the action
Trolley Problem- week2 “Utilitarianism -A consequentialist ethical theory that holds that morally right actions, laws, or policies are those whose consequences contain the greatest positive value and least negative value compared to the consequences of available alternatives. (Thames, 2018.). " With this being said do we really believe its okay to sacrifice the greater good of a person, meaning to kill five and save one?
Utilitarian theory is when the ethical decisions of actions are dictated solely by the least amount of consequences or greater fulfillment. A better explanation would be “utilitarianism aims at a goal of greatest happiness (or the best consequence) and justifies any act that achieves that goal” (Shakil). When applied to the topic, the person wouldn’t leak information about a classified government surveillance program which violates constitutionally protected civil liberties because it would be considered ethical under utilitarian theory. This is because a person acting under utilitarian theory would look at the outcomes that could happen if the program continued or not. First and foremost, the continuation of the program would be based on the
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. This view of ethics focuses on what is right to do.
For Kant, his ethics are grounded on reason and pure reason alone. It is a matter of a priori vs a posteriori. A priori is knowing the truth of the judgement, regardless of empirical view. An example of a priori would be that a single
Morality and Utilitarian In according to the article there are many arguments about the gun control in the United States, it means that it based utilitarian thought. Steve Sanetti, he is the founder of the National Shooting Sport Foundations he has a utilitarian thought. As explain the article this founder is grounded in the concept to contribution to overall happiness. It means that the morality is based in the greatest act that should be done if the individuals are considered those action are good for them.
In this reflection paper I will cover chapters topics from chapters four to six of the book entitled "Ethics, Theory and Contemporary Issues" by Barbara Mackinnon and Andrew Fiala. Equally important, I will give my ideas about some ethical theories and I will explain them from my point of view. This essay will focus more in Egoism from chapter 4 and Utilitarianism from chapter five. These topics interest me the most and I consider them important. Each of this chapter will have a short summary, but at the same time and more broa; I will provide examples that prove if I agree or disagree with a certain theory.
Thank you for a very thoughtful discussion on your ethical view pertaining to homosexual marriage. I, too, selected Duty Ethics as part of my ethical theory (along with Rule Utilitarianism, Divine Nature Theory, and Revelational Christian Ethics) as I firmly believe that morality is unconditional in every situation. In fact, I agree with Immanuel Kant’s argument that moral dilemmas are resolved by applying the categorical imperative principle of doing what we must do in order to act morally. Kant further explains that we should act in the same way that we would prefer everyone else to act. With respect to homosexual marriage, I have also faced this dilemma with a coworker at a former place of employment.
First of all, in some situations, Kant 's concept of duty may be perceived as unnecessary and Aristotle 's percept of happiness can seem more logical. For example, if we obey the traffic rules in our daily lives, for Kant, we should continue to obey the rules even if streets are empty and there are no cops anywhere but for Aristotle, if we will not harm anyone, we can even run a red light because it aims our own goods by saving our time. On the other hand, the concept of duty does not aim our own goods. To be clear, Kant claims that categorical imperative is derived from human dignity which is related to choosing our own actions. People decide to do or to be something and they find themselves in categorical imperatives.
There are various theories in ethics, which are helpful to build the appropriate fundamental principles and applicable to professional and personal demeanor of a person in his life on a daily basis. There are mainly four theories which are crucial for right action and ethical behavior. These are: 1. “Golden means” ethics (Aristotle, 384 – 322 B.C.). According to this theory, the best solution is achieved through reason and logic and is a compromise or “golden mean” between extremes of excess and deficiency.
A moral decision can be defied as a choice made on a person’s ethics, manners, character, and what they believe is proper behavior. Moral decisions made by people are based upon values instilled in them as a child. These values can come from family, peers, culture, and society. The moral decisions that stem from ethics can come from two different theories: ethical egoism and utilitarianism. Having an utilitarianism view on moral decisions is the most ethical way when dealing with moral decisions with strangers.
The categorical imperative is an unconditional command, which, for Kant, told us what our duties were. This is a deontological theory, which means it points to the actions that are good in themselves and pursue the ultimate aim of reaching supreme good, while also telling us which actions are forbidden. This theory is based on duty. To act morally is to do one’s duty, and one’s duty is to obey the moral law. This theory distinguishes between duty and inclination and accepts that if something can’t be done, then there is no guilt.
The final ethical theory is Kant’s deontology. Immanuel Kant was a German philosopher who admire the stoics for their dedication to performing their duties and playing their part. He based his theory on duties, obligations, and rights. Its main focus is that everyone has an inherited right. It highlights the importance of respecting a person autonomy.
The main principle of utilitarianism is happiness. People who follow this theory strive to fulfill the “ultimate good”. The “ultimate good” is defined as ultimate pleasure with out any pain. It is said that the pleasure can be of any quantity and any quality, but pleasures that are weighted more important are put at a higher level than others that are below it. This ethical theory also states that if society would fully embrace utilitarianism then people would naturally realize their moral standing in the