What sphinx of cement and aluminum bashed open their skulls and ate up their brains and imagination? Ashcans and unobtainable dollars! Children screaming under the stairways!
Get Full Essay Get access to this section to get all help you need with your essay and educational issues. The deontological ethics focuses on actions made according to duty and the categorical imperative — which shows how acts are intrinsically good or bad.
The situation ethics state that no act is intrinsically good or bad, and that actions should b made according to love. Deontological ethics is concerned with actions, not consequences. To act with good intention but have a bad outcome is still moral.
Similarly if the intention is bad, then it is wrong in all circumstances and situations, even if it turns out for the best.
If benefiting from the act is the motivation for the action, it negates any morality from a good deed. To be good and act morally is to do ones duty — duty being to obey moral law. If moral law dictates you ought to do something, it implies that it can be done, as it is not our duty to do the impossible.
Therefore there is no excuse not to obey natural moral law. This is what is known as the summum bonum. As it is impossible to achieve it in this life, he said it was reasonable to assume that there would be a next life with God, where there is an opportunity for reaching the supreme good.
In his opinion, morality leads to God. He also believed that morality is prescriptive. The categorical imperative helps us to know which actions are obligatory and which are forbidden.
The example Kant gave was lying. In certain circumstances it could work to our advantage but at a cost to somebody else. If lying became an accepted practise, nobody would trust anyone else, and society would become intolerable.
|THE FALSE ALLURE OF GROUP SELECTION | metin2sell.com||Bentham's book An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation was printed in but not published until It is possible that Bentham was spurred on to publish after he saw the success of Paley's The Principles of Moral and Political Philosophy.|
There should never be use of an individual for the sake of many. Everybody should have the same moral protection. Fletcher believed that there are three types of ethical theories; legalistic ethics, antinomian ethics and situation ethics.
Deontology would be considered legalistic as it uses moral law as a set of prefabricated rules — much like in Christian traditions, which focus on natural moral law and the commandments from the bible. To explain this he used an example of murder once murder has been prohibited — one has to clarify the meaning in relation to killing in self defence, abortion, killing in war, euthanasia and so on.
A legalist would have to accommodate them. Fletcher rejected this as it can create confusion — there would be too many rules to learn.
Antinomian ethics is the direct opposite of legalistic ethics. All decisions are made spontaneously as if every situation was unique. They are exactly, anarchic -i.
Fletcher was equally critical of antinomianism as there is on structure to it. The third approach to ethics is situational ethics. This approach seems to be a compromise between legalistic and antinomian views as a situationist follows the rules of society, but will set them aside if love seems better served by doing so.
Fletcher divided situation ethics into 10 main concepts: The working principles help us to better understand situation ethics.
Pragmatism means a practical or success posture.
The planned course of action must work towards the end, which is ultimately love. It is relativist, so even though there are no set rules to obey, neither is it a free for all.
All decisions are made relative to Christian love. The personalist principle shows that the situationist will do whatever it takes to best benefit humans in any given situation. With these presuppositions acknowledged, Fletcher goes on to explain the main theory.
If an action promotes the most loving result then it is a good action.Throughout your academic career, you'll be asked to write papers in which you compare and contrast two things: two texts, two theories, two historical figures, two scientific processes, and so on. Environmental ethics is the discipline in philosophy that studies the moral relationship of human beings to, and also the value and moral status of, the environment and its non-human contents.
Psychology is the science of behavior and mind, including conscious and unconscious phenomena, as well as feeling and metin2sell.com is an academic discipline of immense scope and diverse interests that, when taken together, seek an understanding of the emergent properties of brains, and all the variety of epiphenomena they manifest.
As a social science it aims to understand individuals and groups. The Online Writing Lab (OWL) at Purdue University houses writing resources and instructional material, and we provide these as a free service of the Writing Lab at Purdue. When I was an undergraduate, I believed that the prevalence of positivism in the social sciences – the idea of studying social phenomena in an “objective” or “value-free” manner – .
Compare and Contrast two ethical theories. Words | 9 Pages. In this essay I have chosen to compare two opposing theories, Immanuel Kant 's absolutist deontological ethics and Joseph Fletchers relativist situation ethics.