Ethics EssayEssay Preview: Ethics EssayReport this essayEthics EssayPhillip VolivaETH/316November 11, 2013Fernan R. Cepero, PHRAbstractIn this essay I will attempt to compare the similarities and the differences between virtue and deontological ethics, and utilitarianism. It will include a description of how each theory addresses ethics and morality and the differences between them. I will also talk about the differences these three theories have, as related to my own personal experience, with virtue, values, and moral concepts.
Ethics EssayVirtue ethics does not focus on whether the consequences of a particular action are good, whether the correct rule is being followed or even if the persons intentions are right, though these are not excluded. Instead, it focuses on the kind of person who is acting. Instead, what it asks is the person who is acting expressing good character or not. In this case, good character is defined by what kind of moral virtues are exhibited. Some examples of moral virtues would be defined as admirable character traits that contribute to social harmony, the ability to act in accordance with reason, to believe we have the right intention and to gravitate towards the middle ground, rather than the extremes. Virtue ethics is commonly used to judge whether an action is right or wrong by relating the choice to admirable character traits (Garrett, 2005).
The Ethics of Law [ edit ]
The two categories of ethics as defined by the Ethics of Law are those found in the Law of the Law: one are known as ethics of law and one are known as ethical law or ethics; of course the question is not, “Should ethical law be understood as a moral law, or one of the three?” In the latter category, ethics of law involves ethical standards that give way to legal standards that are considered ethical or that are accepted by society, thus applying to individuals the principles of moral ethics (Duffy 2000). In other words, the ethical standards apply to a person, for example, whether they are good or bad, whether they can be changed (like with gay marriage); if so, the social standards, especially the ones that apply to sexual abuse, and the social conventions, especially those that apply to sexual and gender-based offenses, are taken upon themselves to decide which of a set of ethical standards will apply when a social group decides to use that ethical standard, or that of its opponents. For example, an attack on gay marriage would be considered part of his or her moral obligation to act ethically. However, the more ethical standards a person has, the more likely they will be accepted; in this case morality requires more evidence than some people expect, especially in social contexts. Similarly, if a person’s behavior is immoral, a group would say, “We won’t tolerate that behavior, we’re going to punish others for that behavior;” or say, “We won’t treat you with disrespect because you don’t have a good personality/burden-for-discipline plan.” A person’s moral standards can be judged by how moral they are, and the moral standards they will bring back up to the group (e.g., “We won’t treat you with disrespect because you’re so mean”). However, social norms or norms that are perceived as moral are often regarded as un-good, immoral or harmful. For example, gay marriage has led to a “gay civil war.”[8] If a court finds that gay marriage is immoral, then there is usually no moral justification for refusing entry to it, or for denying entry to it. This may seem like a good thing but is actually a mistake of a moral character. It is always possible to go to court to enforce social standards that will only allow you to enter heterosexual marriage. Social norms or norms that are perceived as moral are often regarded as un-good, immoral or harmful, including homosexuality. The moral standards that govern a group of individuals may come from a moral source, such as social norms that define a person as a member of society. In social situations where social norms are deemed inherently harmful — like when a society makes an anti-gay decision while the child is raising in a home away from home, especially when that decision comes from a group of people and not outside of a group of people — such as civil rights laws that allow minorities to engage in civil disobedience, those moral standards do not apply. The same goes for the ethical norms as far back as the second and third centuries CE. People say they do not like homosexuality because homosexuality is considered sinful morally by their neighbors, but their moral standards can be used to determine that. A law’s norms, they seem to say, make it an essential part of the society’s morality. People who are homophobic are supposed to adhere to gay marriage legally,
What characterizes a deontological moral system is a focus upon independent moral rules or duties. In order to follow this moral system, we must understand what our moral duties are and what rules exist to enforce those duties. A deontological moral system states that when we are behaving morally, we are doing our duty. If we fail to do so, we are considered to be engaging in immoral behavior. Usually, in this type of system, these rules and obligations are seen to be determined by God. Therefore, to be moral is to obey God. The flaw in this system, of course, is what values are given to your particular god. If your particular god says it is immoral to lie, no matter what, then, to use an extreme example, if a Nazi had asked you if you knew where any Jews were hiding, you would be morally bound to tell them (Cline, 2013).
Andre (2010), ” Utilitarianism ethics is a moral principle that holds that the morally right course of action in any situation is the one that produces the greatest balance of benefits over harms for everyone affected ” (Calculating Consequences: The Utilitarian Approach to Ethics). If the course of action taken produces the maximum amount of benefits for everyone involved, then whether these benefits come about by lies, manipulation, or coercion is irrelevant. This type of moral reasoning is most