Utilitarianism is unjust
More research for AO2 Harwood's objection number eleven against utilitarianism says that utilitarianism is too secretive, undemocratic, and elitist. There is no mathematical equation to determine how many utils are generated; it seems severely subjective. While one person may say action A generates more utils, another may believe that action B generates more utils. Who is supposed to differentiate between the two actions and decide which action actually generates more utility. This seems similar to the interpersonal comparisons of utility in which each person believes different ideas. A moral system should be able to be deciphered by the average person, but utilitarianism can not be deciphered by anyone, because it is so subjective. How are citizens supposed to follow this moral system if they cannot determine which action is actually the moral action? There are many situations in which it is difficult to tell which action generates the most utility, or maybe the future is unpredictable, and one action looks the best now, but actually, in the future the other action would have been better. Harwood's objection that utilitarianism is too secretive is correct, utilitarianism is so difficult to determine, that it is not a useable morality. Although Sterling Harwood presents several valid arguments to refute utilitarianism, one of his arguments is extremely ineffective. Harwood
Explain the strengths and weaknesses of Utilitarianism
Explain the strengths and weaknesses of Utilitarianism Utilitarianism is a teleological, secular theory which is a form of hedonism. It is a product of the enlightenment and is rooted in man's deep desire to be happy. Although Bentham did not coin the term 'greatest good for the greatest number' (the most well known phrase associated with utilitarianism), he is usually credited with the development of the theory. He claimed that God is governed by two masters; pleasure and pain. He also devised the hedonic calculus, consisting of seven criteria, as a means of objectively quantifying pleasure over pain. James Rachels called this theory 'a survivor'. It appeals to anybody who is a decision-maker. He said until you are in a position of leadership, you can never understand how your decision affects others. The fact that the principle of utility can be applied universally, to any situation also works in favour of this ethical theory. It is also relatively straightforward, constantly weighing up happiness and consequences. The Principle encourages a democratic approach in decision-making which is also seen as an advantage. The majority's interest is always considered and a dangerous minority is not allowed to dominate. However, everyone's happiness is taken into consideration and for this reason it is observed that nobody's happiness is more important than anyone else's.
In your opinion, what should ethical debate really centre on?
In your opinion, what should ethical debate really centre on? An ethical debate should focus on many different aspects of ethics. There are many types of ethics such as, Normative ethics, Meta-ethics and descriptive ethics. Ethics is concerned about what is right, about justice and how people should live. It studies the choices that people make and values and reasoning that lies behind them. All three types of ethics, normative, descriptive and meta ethics have different morals and belief; this essay will debate on them. A normative ethic, (this can also be called evaluative and substantive) is the term that is used to describe moral behaviour is different ways. They can go by the rule in which is the way a person lives their life. A normative ethic might help to make a moral judgment. There are many types of normative ethics which show a person how they should live there life, e.g. Utilitarianism, Kantian, religious, situation, virtue ethics and natural law. An example of a normative ethics is: 'It is always wrong to steal. ' 'You should not eat at MacDonald's. ' Both these statements are not facts. They are the opinions of a person. There is no right or wrong to there statements. The statements are both immoral and amoral, either God forbids it or he hasn't got anything to do with it. Normative ethics tells us what we ought to do, e.g. everyone should be honest.
Kant and the categorical imperative
KANT & THE CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE: MODEL ESSAY 1 (a) "Duty should be done, simply because it is duty." Explain how Kant analysed this concept. (33 marks) (b) "Categorical Imperatives allow no room for compassion in the treatment of women wanting abortions." Discuss. (17 marks) (Part A): Kant tried to develop a theory of ethics which relied on reason rather than emotion. While he was not anti-religious, he wanted an ethical system which was not clouded by religion, emotion or personal interpretation. He placed emphasis on motives behind an action rather than, like the Utilitarians, the consequences of an action. He believed that consequences were no guide to whether an action was moral or not. His theory is known as deontological, or duty-based, where ends can never justify the means. He believed that there were general rules which must be adhered to in every circumstance. He called these absolute rules of what is good or bad 'Categorical imperatives'. These rules were rationally determinable. Individuals must never be reduced to the level that they are a convenience for the happiness of someone else. So in the case of euthanasia, a person's inconvenience in having to look after a terminally ill relative is no good reason for that relative's life being ended early. He believed in self-rule and not in people being used as a means to an end. People must be seen as
Ethics needs rules. Discuss.
Ethics needs rules. Discuss. There are two main branches to normative ethics, these being Relative and absolute ethics, both of which conflict with one another. For centuries scholars have battled with one another on whether ethics does need rules. Absolutists believe that there are universal rules that can be applied to every situation whereas relativists such as Fletcher believe that circumstances should be accounted for. Moral relativism is the belief that morality does not relate to any absolute standard of right or wrong, but that 'good' and 'bad' are dependant on culture and circumstance. There are many advantages to this belief, cultural diversity is an advantage as not every culture is going to be mirrored across the world, therefore many views are likely to conflict ( age of sexual consent differs) but moral relativism takes them into account. The majority of theories were established before the technological revolution that occurred in the 20th century and many absolute theories can now be seen as faulty or extreme due to the lack of flexibility, for example, one absolute rule is do not kill, therefore is abortion morally wrong? Other relativist theories are situation ethics and utilitarianism. These are different to antinomianism because they offer guiding principles: situation ethic's guiding principle is to obtain agape love. Again these relativist theories
Discuss some of the issues raised in Meta-Ethics. How convincing is the view that, when talking of morality, we are talking about facts?
AS Religious Studies Paper 2760 Foundation for the Study of Religion Part 2: Meta-Ethics Model Answer a). Discuss some of the issues raised in Meta-Ethics. (17 marks) b). How convincing is the view that, when talking of morality, we are talking about facts? (33 marks) (Total 50 marks) Notes: --> Remember, in an exam, you have 30 minutes to choose, plan, and write any essay. --> At AS Level, exam questions are twofold [i.e., there will be an (a) section and a (b) section]. --> Do not forget to answer both sections of a question! --> Usually, the marks appear beside each section of a question. --> In each question, section (a) holds 17 marks, and section (b) holds 33 marks. A total of 50 marks per question. --> Write your responses to questions appropriately - its no good having a detailed (a) section and a brief (b)! --> This model essay is structured so that it is realistic in its time expectations. --> If you have revised thoroughly, and know your stuff, you should be writing this sort of exam essay. --> Remember, do not waffle. An examiner will not assess 65% waffle and 35% real content in an exam essay! --> Keep your essay responses thorough, yet concise - again, you have very little time to respond to questions! --> Finally, it remains for me to wish you very good luck, happy last minute revision, and a most successful first exam! a. Discuss some of the
Virtue Ethics is of little use when applied to environmental issues
Virtue Ethics is of little use when applied to environmental issues The issues that are raised when discussing the protection of the environment, usually focuses on human activity, and the destruction of habitats such as the rainforest or marine environments. Therefore, the cause for concern is how humans ought to act towards the environment in which they live in. Virtue Ethics as opposed to normative ethics is an agent-centred theory which focuses on developing and cultivating ones virtues in order to reach happiness. There seems to be no direct link to issues concerning the environment; however if you ask yourself whether a virtuous person would damage the environment, there does appear to be a strong argument how virtue ethics is of use when applied to environmental issues. Aristotle argued the theory of virtues, using a teleological twist. He explains how we all aspire to become virtuous people in which a eudaimonia is the supreme good. This approach moves away from the ideas of normative theories such utilitarianism or natural law where responsibility to the environment is based upon duties or upon consequences. It instead suggests that in order to make ourselves more virtuous and to achieve the ideal of eudaimonia, we must objectively develop a virtuous understanding of our place in the environment. This is just one way in which virtue ethics is effective when applied
Critically evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of Kantian Ethics.
Critically evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of Kantian Ethics. Kantian ethics originates in the ethical writings of Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), which remain the most influential attempt to justify universal ethical principles that respect the dignity and equality of human beings without assuming theological claims or a metaphysical conception of the good. Kant's systematic, critical philosophy centres on an account of reasoning about action, which he uses to justify principles of duty and virtue and an account of the relationship between morality and hope. Both Kant's ethics and contemporary Kantian ethics have been widely criticized for preoccupation with rules and duties, and for lack of concern with virtues, happiness or personal relationships. However, these criticisms may apply more to recent Kantian ethics than to Kant's own ethics. Kant's main writing on ethics and politics can be found in, The Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals 1785; throughout these writings he insists that we cannot obtain ethical conclusions from metaphysical or theological knowledge of the good or from a claim that human happiness is the sole good. We lack the basis for a teleological account of ethical reasoning, which therefore cannot be simply a matter of mean to an end reasoning towards a fixed and knowable good. Kant's alternative account proposes simply that reasons for action
Is there a tension between ethics and aesthetics in design? BA Design Yr2
Is there a tension between ethics and aesthetics in design? BA Design Yr2 Goldsmiths College Adam Coward Ethics are a fundamental element of any functioning society, essentially providing the codes of conduct that must be followed by a majority to ensure social survival. These, often unspoken rules, give us a sense of right and wrong but are not common to all cultures and are often subject to temporal change. This is evident if we examine the historical change in attitudes towards a subject such as suicide. For example, the ancient Greeks and Romans considered suicide as an honourable and heroic act, whereas in early Christianity it was pronounced a 'mortal sin'. In fact, in England suicide was considered a criminal act until as recent as 1961, perhaps due to the social importance of maintaining the family unit up to this point in time. This would suggest that ethics are not pre determined by our nature but rather are rationally constituted by a specific culture for its continued existence, depending on the conditions by which that society is to survive. Ethics can also be defined as moral ideals belonging to a culture and also those belonging to the individual. There is often much overlay concerning the two instances but it is important to recognise that every individual will inevitably put his or her unique spin on the dominantly recognised set of ethical values. So
Teenagers today lack moral values and self-discipline. Do you agree?"
Name: Marissa Sim (23) Class: S2/08 Teacher: Mrs. Louisa Yue Personal Exposition - Draft 2 "Teenagers today lack moral values and self-discipline. Do you agree?" Moral values and graciousness, in the past, were prominent in most teenagers. Majority of the youths then learnt respect, courtesy, consideration, decency, propriety, honesty and righteousness from a young age, and had enough self-discipline to hold to these values. However, these moral values and self-discipline are slowly diminishing over the years, as most of the younger generation are gradually disregarding these ethics. The listed values have slowly faded away, as they mean little to these adolescents, as moral values and self-discipline are on the verge of disappearing. This lack of self-discipline and self-control is becoming more and more apparent over time. However, this situation is not to be taken lightly as the younger generation is the future of our nation. Even the simplest of morals like, respect, care and consideration are slowly fading away over the years. A simple display of respect like offering the elderly a seat on the bus is being replaced by scenarios of students competing with them for seats. Instead of showing the principles of care and concern, several youngsters even engage in decadent behaviour by taking pleasure in inflicting torture upon less able people. As fewer people lack the