“What is moral philosophy and what would a satisfactory moral theory be like”? In, “The Elements of Moral Philosophy,” James Rachels states, “Moral Philosophy is the study of what morality is and what it requires of us” (p.1). Still today, the subject of ethics, morality, and the beliefs of what is right and wrong still perplex us, just as it baffled great thinkers since ancient times. Such as Aristotle and Socrates, whom were just some of the greatest philosophers in history. Regarding morality, Socrates said, “it’s about ‘how we ought to live’ and why” (p. 1). There is no such definition of what morality is, in response, noteworthy philosophers and scholars have come up with different moral theories. Some of which are: The Divine Command …show more content…
Such theories have attempted to explain what is right and what is wrong. Rachel states that each of these theories, presents a different idea of what it really means to live a moral life (p.1). Although these theories have opposing views, “the minimum conception is a core that every moral theory should accept” (p. 1). In the last chapter of his book, Rachel starts off by describing the beginning of the world as we know it. He describes it as it evolved, and also incorporates the theories as he continues. Rachels explains how human beings evolved as well as did our sense of rationality (p. 176). Consequently, we were able to reason and look into what choices we had in a situation and what was in our best interest (p. 176). From this thought, Rachel moves on to describe other ideas, such as how to treat people and that they should all be treated alike, with everyone’s interests in mind. He also describes virtues, justice, utilitarianism, and how non-human animals are sentient and worthy of moral consideration (p.183). According to Rachels, a satisfactory moral theory would be multiple-strategies utilitarianism. In which Rachel believes, “we should maximize …show more content…
These individuals will have the wisdom to follow through and do the right things when presented with a dilemma. Therefore, everyone would be benefited from such actions and have achieved happiness. In Rachel’s writing Aristotle say, “that the virtues are important because the virtuous person will fare better in life (p. 167). For example, if someone is needing help, a utilitarian would give the help, because by doing so it would maximize well-being (SEP). On the other hand, a deontologist would say that by helping that person in need, they would be following a moral rule of duty – “Do unto others as you would be done by” (SEP). In facing this moral dilemma, a virtuous person would put into practice the habit or virtue of benevolence. This virtue would be applied neither in excess nor in deficiency. They would be neither over kindly or indifferent to the needs of the person who is in need of assistance. Therefore, in essence,
The first ethical theory is Utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is the ethical theory that describes how the moral value or worth of an action is determined by how much benefit is gained from that action. It is measured by not only the amount of benefit gained but also
The life of a person may be measured in years, moments, and the number of laughs or cries but what if one were to measure a life on good deeds or on that person’s virtues? The theory and idea of ethics and virtue as conceptualized by the Greek philosopher Aristotle in Nicomachean Ethics and as it is expressed in the pages of The Fundamentals of Ethics by Russ Shafer-Landau is a complex and dubious notion. It is one that is easily related to characters in Khaled Hosseini’s The Kite Runner.
Ethical relativism is not just simply one concept. It can be divided into two categories cultural relativism and ethical subjectivism. Cultural relativism states that what a culture finds correct is what is correct, within its own realm. Ethical subjectivism are what people as individuals find correct, or the values a person stands for and what they support whereas culture relativism is has a certain standard of morality held within a culture or society. These both view people as being in charge of their own morality. However, there are some problems with the view ethical relativism itself. For instance marital rape, machismo in Hispanics culture and premarital sex. In this dissertation I will be discussing problems with ethical relativism, while using the examples above.
4. Moral philosophy is form of philosophy that specifically deals with morality and ethics. Moral philosophy is important because ethical questions are some of the most important questions we face, after all those questions lead us to make
Summary: In chapter 1 of Moral Politics talks about that politics is about your own world view. The political division between republican and democrat is based on morality. Morality is based on the type of family backgrounds you have or family model you have such as strict father and nurturing father. And these models explain what “common sense” you have in mind, which you may not even aware of. Chapter two talks about the personal worldview problem for american politics, it will bring the questions that either you're more conservative or liberal. Both sides have their own views. It talks about why do conservatives think that morality should be their agenda. Liberals also have a paradoxical position even they also hold a moral position on
Morals, values and ethics define who we are and what we believe. Culture, religion, and many other things affect our beliefs. One uses various types off ethics when surrounded by different groups. Knowing between right and wrong is a good foundation to practicing good ethics and morals. These things make morals, ethics, and values important in society.
In The Metaphysics of Morals, Section I focuses on the process of instilling the concept of virtue into those who have not yet developed their own sense of pure practical reason. The author insists that this should be done methodically and through a system of dialogue. Through a series of questions and answers between a pupil and his instructor. In Section I of The Metaphysics of Morals, Immanuel Kant states that moral catechism needs to precede any religious catechisms.
Concerning the philosopher, the principal factor which coordinates people's decisions towards good or bad actions is a soul. But this process is reciprocal because the soul, in its turn, is forming according to people's actions. The life with the feeling of satisfaction is connected with some level of pleasure; this pleasure, by Aristotle, is the activity determined by virtue. Virtue is a quality of a person's character; it highlights doing any action taking into account both rational
Moral philosophy is a branch of philosophy which focuses and investigates the ideas of right and wrong and good and evil behavior. Moral philosophers have researched and justified the logical consequences of moral or ethical beliefs.When we think of morals, we think of rules that tell us which actions are right and which are wrong. But, do human beings have the ability to judge for themselves, based on the facts of a situation, what is right and wrong, what they should do and not do? Well, according to Immanuel Kant, who is one of the most influential philosophers of all times, believes that human beings should not be making decisions based on the facts of a situation, but should act according to universal moral codes that apply in all situations regardless of the outcome. Kant refers to these universal moral codes as categorical imperatives and must be fully followed at all times across all circumstances.
Does moral absolutes exist? Yes, it does. For one to be able to gain moral absolute, one must learn from right and wrong. An individual needs to understand the difference between placing others feeling in front of their own to experience moral absolute. As we grow up our parents are punishing us. Whether it is a slap on the hand, a long lecture or a grounding moment we are being disciplined. Our parents do this in the hope that we will make better judgments when we grow older. Become extraordinary people as we age, and treat others the way we would like to be treated. As we get older, our parents tend to lose the ability to disciple us. At this point in our lives, God has taken over the disciplinary action. He is teaching us from right and
Immanuel Kant presented his most notable positions on moral philosophy in his book The Groundwork of Metaphysics of Morals. Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel subsequently presented a number of objections to Kant’s positions, mainly in his book The Phenomenology of Spirit. Hegel presents objections to Kant in two different ways, implicitly and explicitly. Hegel gives arguments against Kant’s moral theory as well as the general philosophical thought that produces the moral theory that Kant presents. But in order to understand Hegel’s critique of Kant, we must first understand the content of Kant’s moral philosophy and its formulation.
R. M. Hare is a Professor at Oxford University that specializes on the topic of Moral Philosophy. Among his studies as a philosopher, he proclaims that moral philosophy depend on the meaning of philosophy itself. For instance, if philosophers have tried to clearly certain concepts presented in life so does moral philosophy. In other word moral philosophy is where "the problems on which it tries to shed lights are practically issued about morality". So philosophers would question the idea of what is "fair", "right or wrong" and so on.
Our natural state within the universe when compared to the scale of history is extremely insignificant, and arises the fluid thought that our complete conscious existence relies on evolutionary accidents. It becomes clear with time that our knowledge of ourselves as a population of species compared to any other mammals is quite significant but yet completely detrimental to the health of our universe. We must be able as humans to grasp these concepts and particularly build a world better suited for future figures to give philosophical thoughts and aspects as the human race continues to develop. There is a shortcoming with our behavior, as Rachels describes, that if an action would help satisfy our own self-interest, than we see the most reason to perform such tasks. This leaves us prone to being selfish and to sometimes hold interests out of other people’s version of acceptable behavior. Rachels signifies that all people do not have to follow any one true combination of morals, ethics, or
In chapter one of James Rachels’s What is Morality, he argues that at the very minimum, morality is using reason to guide one 's decisions, while keeping in mind the interests of those who will be affected by one’s choice, without giving more weight to one individual over another. He supports this thesis by describing a couple of morally ambiguous situations regarding humanity and life.
Hutcheson and Shaftesbury believed that human nature contained all it needed to make moral decisions, along with inclinations to be moral. Moral sense is a kind of sense because, like external senses, it is common to all mankind. It is independent of our will and its deliverances are not conclusions mediated by premises. In particular it is not mediated by considerations of personal advantage or harm. It is on account of this feature that we are able to admire actions that took place in remote times and regions and even actions that are contrary to our own interests .