Utilitarian ethical theories are based on one’s ability to expect the concerns of an deed. Utilitarianism’s creed is that the result of any action takes importance over any type of means, this means that Utilitarianisms objective is to help as many individuals as possible even if it were to negatively disturb people along the way so as long as it helped the general populace. Basically, it’s the ends that matter not necessarily the means.…
Utilitarianism is a theory in normative ethics holding that the proper course of action is the one that maximizes overall happiness. Utilitarianism can be characterized as a quantitative and reductionist approach to ethics. It can be contrasted with deontological ethics which does not regard the consequences of an act as a determinant of its moral worth.…
Deontology: A nonconsequentialist ethical theory that claims an act is to be evaluated in terms ofits accordance with a specified set of rules. (Mosser, 2013)Virtue Ethics: An ethical theory that focuses on the character of the agent in evaluating moral behavior, in contrast to utilitarianism or deontology; often associated with Aristotle. (Mosser, 2013)Utilitarianism: A consequentialist ethical theory that evaluates moral claims in terms of their outcomes and to the extent these outcomes generate the greatest benefit for the greatest number. (Mosser, 2013)I was at the grocery store checking out in the self checkout lane, and I noticed that A single mom and her 3 kids were having to take out items because she had reached her limit, I noticed…
References: Quintelier, K. J. P., & Fessler, D. M. T. (2012). Varying versions of moral relativism: the philosophy and psychology of normative relativism. Biology & Philosophy, 27(1), 95+. Retrieved from http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA331807457&v=2.1&u=oran95108&it=r&p=AONE&sw=w…
In the article, “Strengths and Weaknesses of Utilitarianism”, Louis P. Pojman explained the grounds on which utilitarianism has been attacked and showed some possible response to its defenders which imply his positive attitude towards utilitarianism [1] . In order to argue that thesis, Pojman’s one important premise is the response to the no-rest objection. He believed that the agent should aim at maximizing his or her own happiness as well as other people’s happiness and is best not to worry much about the need of those not in our primary circle.[1] .…
While describing the utilitarianism is concerned with arriving at the most good for all. “According to this theory an individual's rights may be infringed upon in order to benefit a greater population.” (2011) In terms of ethics of a utilitarian trying to make positive change for a larger group. Morally a utilitarian would guide themselves in decision based on the group the belonged to or are associated with.…
Ethical relativism is a concept in which most simple minded individuals adhere to. According to definition in the chapter, ethical relativism is the normative theory that what is right is what the culture or individual says is right. Shaw argues that it is not very plausible to say that ethical relativism is determined by what a person thinks is right and wrong. He gives reason that it “collapses the distinction between thinking something is right and it’s actually being right.” Ethical relativism may be justified occasionally. William H. Shaw examines ethical relativism by providing comprehensive examples on why relativism is a weak method in gaining morals.…
The ethical teachings and values of utilitarianism and Christian ethics are similar in some aspects, yet however are diverse in others. Utilitarianism is a generally teleological ethical system, where the outcome is said to justify the act. The act is considered ‘good’ if it brings about the greatest good for the greatest number. Christian Ethics, however, can be quite different. Many aspects of its ethics are deontological, for example, the Decalogue and Natural Law. There are other differences and indeed some similarities which will be considered throughout this essay.…
From the vantage point of the history of ethical theory, there can be little doubt…
Relativism is the idea that one's beliefs and values are understood in terms of one's society, culture, or even one's own individual values. You may disagree with someone and believe your view is superior, relative to you as an individual; more often, relativism is described in terms of the values of the community in which one lives. The view of ethical relativism regards values as determined by one's own ethical standards, often those provided by one's own culture and background. Rather than insisting that there are moral absolutes, moral claims must be interpreted in terms of how they reflect a person's viewpoint; moral claims are then said to be "right in a given culture" or "wrong for a given society." Perhaps one person lives in a culture where having a sexual relationship outside of marriage is regarded as one of the worst things a person can do; in this culture a person engaging in extramarital sex may be punished or even forced to leave. But another culture might have a considerably different…
Relativism gives us a greater understanding of other cultures as it explains the discrepancies in moral codes. Herodotus, a Greek historian recounted when the King of Persia offered both the Greeks and the Callatians money if they adapted to each other’s funeral practices (the Greeks burnt the bodies of their fathers, while the Callatians ate the bodies of their fathers). However both disagreed and would not swap for any amount. What was right for one tribe was wrong for the other. What is right or wrong depends upon the nature of the society; different cultures create different values. We all live with unique cultures and so have our own idea of ‘good’.…
Timeless questions asked in different ways. What are morals? And if any who decides what is right or wrong? The answers we get vary depending on who is asked or which theory we believe to be true. Whether the universal theory or the ethical relativism; The fundamental difference in these theories is defined in their names universal theory believe that morals are universal and ethical relativism reason that ethics is relative depending on the views of the people during that time period and the who you ask. We will be exploring what it means to be an ethical relativist, its principles, strengths and weakness, and if this theory is valid.…
In the novel, “Romeo and Juliet” by Shakespeare fate was the cause of almost all events of the book. Fate is defined as, “the development of events beyond a person's control, regarded as determined by a supernatural power”. Throughout the whole book the decisions that Romeo and Juliet make have obvious outcomes that seem to be invisible to the characters. The three main events that occur during the novel that helped Romeo’s and Juliet’s fate be determined are when the two found out which families they came from, when Romeo, Juliet, and the Friar thought that it was a great idea for the lovers to get married, and when Juliet decides to fake her death.…
Ethical relativism has two categories: subjectivism and conventionalism. Subjectivism is all about the individual, like it is everyone for themselves. This idea makes people like Hitler, Bundy, and members of the KKK (just to name a few) justified in their actions. With conventionalism it is all about the society or culture, but then it becomes a question of how many individuals it takes to make a society. If there are enough Hitler-like people then they can form their own culture with its own morals and anything goes again. Both of these views of ethical relativism seem to be going in circles allowing all behavior as acceptable.…
Relativism is a view that the truth is a matter of opinion. It isn’t defined by some sort of black and white, right and wrong, yes and no type response. These views are determined by what that person is accustomed to according to their culture. Whereas a “thumbs up” in America is considered a good thing, in other countries it is deemed rude and similar to our form or giving someone the finger. Belching after a meal is considered rude in America, however in Japan; you are rude not to belch after your meal is finished. It is actually complimentary to the cook. The other side of relativism is individual relativism. This is a view that believes that truth is a matter of individual opinion. Shannon agrees with Lindsay that capitol punishment is wrong, however, Shannon believes that it is wrong no matter what, but Lindsay believes it is only wrong unless that person committed murder. To each of them, their opinion is correct. This is individual relativism and seems to be much harder to prove in a discussion such as this.…