Unethical Orders in the Military
Introduction
Ethical theories have been applied globally, and in different perspectives as mirrors for analyzing potential knowledge and ethical decision making. Classical theories of ethics provide the basis for defending, systematizing and recommending ideas, concepts and notions of moral behavior. Classical ethics falls under the normative class of ethics. Ethics can be divided into Meta, applied or normative ethics. Normative ethics concerns the practical meaning and determination of moral courses of action. Normative ethics concerns the moral appropriateness of a course of action (Arrigo, 2006). It presents classical theory as an overarching ethical principle that could be applied in solving moral ethical issues. In this case, classical ethics will be used in analyzing unethical orders in the military. This means that different perspectives of moral issues will be discussed through the introduction of relativism, emotive and ethical egoism.
Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism favors a course of action that facilitates happiness. It can be considered as a form of consequential processes. According to this principle of classical ethical theory, utilitarianism refers to the moral value of an action though the determination of the resultant outcomes of the action. However, considerations should be placed on actual consequences, intended consequences and foreseen consequence. A classical study of this principle can be seen in the orders the military gives out or obeys (Arrigo, 2006). Utilitarianism principles have characteristics of reductionist and quantitative approaches to ethical issues, and it can be seen as a form of naturalism. Utilitarianism can be distinguished from deontological principles because deontology does not regard consequences as a determinant to moral value. Utilitarianism can also be distinguished from virtue ethics because virtue ethics emphasis on habits and acts that lead to happiness.
A leading unethical order in the military, in my
Ethical theories have been applied globally, and in different perspectives as mirrors for analyzing potential knowledge and ethical decision making. Classical theories of ethics provide the basis for defending, systematizing and recommending ideas, concepts and notions of moral behavior. Classical ethics falls under the normative class of ethics. Ethics can be divided into Meta, applied or normative ethics. Normative ethics concerns the practical meaning and determination of moral courses of action. Normative ethics concerns the moral appropriateness of a course of action (Arrigo, 2006). It presents classical theory as an overarching ethical principle that could be applied in solving moral ethical issues. In this case, classical ethics will be used in analyzing unethical orders in the military. This means that different perspectives of moral issues will be discussed through the introduction of relativism, emotive and ethical egoism.
Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism favors a course of action that facilitates happiness. It can be considered as a form of consequential processes. According to this principle of classical ethical theory, utilitarianism refers to the moral value of an action though the determination of the resultant outcomes of the action. However, considerations should be placed on actual consequences, intended consequences and foreseen consequence. A classical study of this principle can be seen in the orders the military gives out or obeys (Arrigo, 2006). Utilitarianism principles have characteristics of reductionist and quantitative approaches to ethical issues, and it can be seen as a form of naturalism. Utilitarianism can be distinguished from deontological principles because deontology does not regard consequences as a determinant to moral value. Utilitarianism can also be distinguished from virtue ethics because virtue ethics emphasis on habits and acts that lead to happiness.
A leading unethical order in the military, in my
References: Arrigo, J. (2006). A Utilitarian Argument against Torture Interrogation Of Terrorists. Science And Ethics. Vol. 10, (3). Page 1-12. Hu, G. (2009). The Bombing Of Hiroshima And Nagasaki. Ethics In A Global Environment. Page 3-16. Miller, Y. (2010). Military Ethics. Legal Regulatory Compliance. Global Research on Military Issues. Page 3-7. Perry, D. (2006). Ethical Issues in Recent U.S Military Engagements. American Association Of University Of Women. Page 4-6. Powers, R. (2012). Military Orders-To Obey or Not To Obey? U.S Military. The New York Times. Page 1-2.