Utilitarianism ethics is the not the best approach to environmental ethics discuss
�Utilitarianism ethics is the not the best approach to environmental ethics� discuss (35) Environmental ethics covers a number of areas, it includes preservation of endangered species, conserving natural habitats, the effects of deforestation and the effects of pollution and is concerned with human attitudes towards and our impact upon the biological world. It considers whether it enhances or diminishes the well-being and diversity of other life on earth. Overall there are three key approaches linked to environmental ethics; deep ecology which is an approach concerned with the intrinsic value of the natural world it sees all life form of value and believes human life is just one part of the biosphere but instead all life has intrinsic value, eco-holism which places the emphasis not on individual human rights but it lends intrinsic value and inherent worth to species or eco-systems or the environment as a whole entity, as it sees it as intrinsically valuable therefore valuable in itself and shallow ecology which is an approach that states the environment is a means to human survival therefore it needs to be conserved in order for humans to flourish, animals are seen as having only instrumental value as their value lies in the usefulness they are to humans. When discussing utilitarianism as an approach in terms of environmental ethics, we must consider the
Explain different ethical approaches to issues of war and peace.
Explain different ethical approaches to issues of war and peace. [25] The justification for a war is often cited as it is one of Holy causes, this can be seen in the texts of the Old Testament, “Suddenly, the walls of Jericho collapsed, and the Israelites charged straight into the city from every side and captured it. They completely destroyed everything in it – men and women, young and old, cattle, sheep, donkeys – everything.” Joshua 6:20-21. The basic concepts of a Holy War being that God is always on the right side, fighting against the Devil, this permits anything and creates no limitations as all actions by the side for “good” are doing God’s work. The Crusades in the Holy Land were religiously sanctioned by the Roman Catholic Church as it fought for the regain of Christian control over Jerusalem from Islamic forces and took place between 1095 and 1291. Whilst the reasons for these wars were Holy there were many internal conflicts between the Christian nations, which conflicts the purpose of the Crusades being for God’s will as these countries and thus making it difficult to distinguish whether wars serve God or political and economic reasons. In a more recent example of Holy War, the terrorist actions of 9/11 and the July 7th bombings in London were justified by Jihad, the Islamic version of Holy War. No matter what the atrocity caused whether it be
Outline the Six Fundamental Principles of Joseph Fletchers Situation Ethics
Outline the Six Fundamental Principles of Joseph Fletcher’s Situation Ethics (30 Marks) Joseph Fletcher (1905-1991) is the father of Situation Ethics. He explains his theory in his book ‘Situation Ethics: The New Morality’ which was published in 1966. He said that we should always use the principle of agape when faced with a moral dilemma as this will lead us to the most moral decision. He said we should always apply this principle in everyday life and treat no two situations as identical. Situation Ethics is therefore both a relativistic and consequentialist theory. It is seen as a radical Christian approach to ethics as it goes against the legalistic approach that Christians had followed before, the theory also ‘suggests’ that Jesus was a situationist as many stories in the bible tell us of how he made decisions based on each individual situation and was not lead by the rules set out in the Old Testament; ‘The Ten Commandments’. Joseph Fletcher believed that there are three approaches to ethics. These include: The legalistic approach, which means that a set of laws or rules should be followed through which we make every moral decision. The Antinomian approach, meaning that there are no laws, rules or principles that must be followed when making a decision and the situation itself will provide the answer. And The Situational Approach which was founded by
Describe the main features of Joseph Fletchers theory of Situation ethics.
Describe the main features of Joseph Fletcher’s theory of Situation ethics. Joseph Fletcher devised the theory of situation ethics which is based upon the invariable Christian duty of “love thy neighbour as thyself” therefore every response to act must be based around the law of love, as love is the only thing which is intrinsically good. Fletcher also maintained that there are three ways of making moral decisions: legalistic ethics which is a set of prefabricated moral rules and regulations; antinomian ethics which bases moral decisions on spontaneity, basically against law, and then there’s Situation ethics which bases decisions on traditions of society and love. Joseph Fletcher, the mastermind behind this theory began his beliefs on situation ethics after teaching Christian ethics at school which influenced him to come up with situation ethics which is why it is so heavily Christian based. Although Fletcher depicted there was three main ways to make moral decisions (legalistic, antinomian and situation) he concluded that situation is the best out of the three. This is because it lets you have some freedom but also helps you to make the ‘correct’ decision, which is what gives the most love as love is the only thing which is intrinsically good. It also gives freedom as nothing is inherently good or evil and it gives an acceptable reason for your actions instead
Briefly outline Plato's definition of justice and morality and compare it to Thrasymachus and conventional ideas of this concept.
Briefly outline Plato's definition of justice and morality and compare it to Thrasymachus and conventional ideas of this concept. Plato's definition of justice in society is when everyone is doing their own tasks, mind own business to witch they are naturally suited to, when injustice is person's trying to do others job. He is explaining how exactly society is structured and how people could now what their best place and job in society is in his "magnificent myth". Basic idea is that people born with bronze, silver or gold in their soul and each of them defines wether this person is a producer, auxiliary or ruler. Therefore doing your own job right and being in the right class of the society is a justice for Plato. Similar definition for justice and morality is for individuals. Plato assume that our soul has 3 parts (reason, spirit and desire) in witch reason is in control of two others. All 3 parts should work together without interfering with each other and if they all do their own "job" well person will be just, moral and with balanced soul. So, if the reason should be in control it is not justice if one of the other parts of soul tries to do reason's job and starts controlling person's life. For Plato justice obviously is a good thing, when in Trasymachus theory justice is for the naive people who are controlled by the stronger,
What are the strengths of Kants moral theory?
Part A - What are the strengths of Kant’s moral theory? (25) Kant’s theory is an absolute based on a priori which means a fixed set of beliefs known without the need for human experience. This was compacted into three categorical imperatives. As he was alive during an age of enlightenment religion was being questioned and therefore Kant’s moral theory was more accepted. A strength of Kant’s theory is that it is an absolute set of morals. The theory is a priori because he believed humans can use reason in order to differentiate between right and wrong. Kant constructed an equation in which he believed it defined a moral action. This was “duty + goodwill = moral action. This can be viewed as a strength in Kant’s theory because it means moral actions can’t be subjective; they are either right or wrong because “it is incoherent to believe justice can mean one thing in a country and something different in another”. Furthermore he stated there were two realms; the phenomenal and noumenal. These separate the rational and irrational thinkers. Angels occupy the noumenal realm because they are unchanging with no emotional entanglements to prevent them performing their duties. For example if a building were burning down a human may priories the lives of friends and family over the lives of the others due to emotional attachment even though Kant would say their duty
To what extent is utilitarianism a useful method of making decisions about abortion?
To what extent is utilitarianism a useful method of making decisions about abortion? Utilitarianism is a consequentialist theory that, as suggested, looks at the consequences of the satiation and what the outcome is most likely to be. Therefore, this theory does not uphold the idea that no matter what the situation all life is sacred; it focuses on maximizing happiness for the individual. Some may argue that utilitarianism is useful because the woman is given the choice. This promotes women’s rights as, ultimately, the woman is who will carry the child and primarily care for the child, if not fully care for the child, in the first years of its life. After childbirth, which for some women is an incredibly daunting prospect, many omen suffer from depression and bodily complications. Therefore, some would argue that utilitarianism is a good approach because the woman can make the conscious and rational decisions to either undergo pregnancy or not. Some women may also feel that they are not prepared to be a mother and that it is not fair for them to bring a child into an unhealthy environment where she is struggling. This then means that the theory can be used to prevent an unprepared mother form being forced to have a child, therefore, creating happiness. However, some would disagree with utilitarianism because it allows for a quick fix solution to short term happiness.
Abortion and Personhood. Explain how the concept of personhood applies to abortion.
Ben O’Sullivan Explain how the concept of personhood implies to abortion: Personhood can be defined as the quality or condition of being an individual person. Personhood is a topic that debated intensely in philosophy and law, and is closely related to legal concepts of citizenship, liberty and equality. According to law, only a natural person or legal personality has rights, protections, privileges, responsibilities, and legal liability. As well as this, the controversial topic of abortion is considered closely linked with personhood. Abortion is the termination of pregnancy by the removal or expulsion from the uterus of a fetus due to viability. An abortion can happen without an external cause, in which case it is usually called a miscarriage, or it can be carried out with intention. The term abortion most commonly refers to the induced abortion of a human pregnancy. When discussing this argument, it is crucial that when we think about abortion, we need to know what we mean when we discuss 'human life.' A human life may be seen as a member of the biological human species, containing a human genetic code. Or, it may be viewed, as a being that possesses certain human characteristics in addition to the human genetic code, or a being that is a 'moral person'. Therefore, it is one that has rights, and probably duties as well. A number of
'Some religious ethics are too rigid for moral decision making. Discuss
(b) ‘Some religious ethics are too rigid for moral decision making.’ Discuss Divine command theory can be seen as too rigid for moral decision as morals depend on God’s wills. An act is morally right if it has been commanded by God and morally wrong if God has forbidden it. Right and wrong are therefore solely decided by God’s will or commands. Moral standards hence decisions became an objective matter because it is based on God. It only right if God the law-giver, the supreme moral governor commands it and wrong if it is not. It is rigid because it is not merely a matter of custom or personal feelings but relates to what God requires and commands. Norman Geisler put forward the five principle features of Christian Ethics – Based on God’s will “be holy because I am holy (lev.11:45), “ be perfect as your heavenly father is perfect”(Mtt 5:48); absolute as commands are from God, they are binding on everyone, everywhere and always; Based on God’s revelation , his will revealed in both nature, scriptures, and the bible; Prescriptive; and deontological, where no matter what the consequences are, things are right and wrong regardless. One must make the right decision by following God’s will always. This promoted unreflective mass conformism rather than responsible and intelligent individual decisions. However, the rigidness of the divine command theory can be
To what extent do we have an individual moral responsibility to the environment
To what extent do we have an individual moral responsibility to the environment Environmental ethics focuses on the responsibility humans have on the world and whether they have to value it or not. Many believe that we have a moral responsibility towards the environment because we have to preserve and protect it. However, other take an anthropocentric view, as they belie e that humanity is central and has greater importance over the environment. Early Christian views show that humans have no responsibility towards the environment as humans are given a dominion over it. This means that God has given humans authority over the earth, animals and plants. This is shown within the Bible as human have a special relationship with God and they are made to look like him. In Genesis 1:28, it is said ‘let them have dominion over the fish of the dear and the birds of the air and over the live-stock, over all the earth and over all the creatures that move along the ground.’ This shows that humans have dominion over all creatures on the earth and have no responsibility towards them. Therefore, this anthropocentric Christian view shows that we don’t have moral responsibility towards the environment. However, others interpretation of the creation story provide a different meaning of the word ‘dominion’. As some believe that when God created the world and stated ‘be fruitful and