The Distinctive Features of Natural Law and Situation Ethics
The theories of natural law and situation ethics are far from
concrete, and the impact of the contemporary ‘new natural law,’ led by
the American philosopher Germain Grisez, appears to be a great one.
Yet despite modern modifications, the two concepts are essentially
deep-routed within human thinking. However, they were formulated at
opposite ends of the second millennium: St. Thomas Aquinas’ 13th
century Summa Theologica developed Aristotle and Cicero’s ideas of
‘natural law’, and the explicit conclusions of ‘situation ethics’ were
created by Joseph Fletcher in the early 1960s. Both deal with the
human need to astutely with every day dilemmas. Natural law takes the
view that the absolute principle of love should be a consideration of
every decision made, whilst situation ethics discredits any absolute
idea other than that of human happiness.
First Aristotle (384-322 BCE) and then Cicero (106-43 BCE) introduced
the idea of a natural law “which everywhere is equally valid”
(Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics). Aristotle believed that “that which
is natural is unchangeable, and has the same power everywhere.” Within
these statements one notices the effect of the Ancient Stoics, who
spoke of the idea of ‘Logos,’ from which the word ‘logic’ is derived.
Logos was seen as a law of rationality that governed the world, and
its influence can be seen within St Paul’s letter to the Romans, in
which he spoke of a law “written in the hearts” of Gentiles. Cicero’s
De Republica went further, talking of “reason in agreement with
nature” that was “unchanging and everlasting” and was “not outsid...
... middle of paper ...
... taken works towards the end result of love; they should “relativize
the absolute”; they should see that God is love, and thus follow the
ethics with positivism; and they should put people first: personalism.
These ‘backbone’ principles lead onto six main ones. First, that “only
one thing is intrinsically good; namely love,” secondly that “The
ruling norm of Christian decision is love,” thirdly that “Love and
Justice are the same,” fourthly that “love wills the neighbour’s
good,” fifthly that “Only the end justifies the means,” and sixth,
“Love’s decisions are made situationally, not prescriptively.” These
principles break away from traditional Christian beliefs as they see
all actions as neither intrinsically ‘good’ nor intrinsically ‘bad.’
The moral correctness or any act “depends on whether love is fully
served.”
The vignette described a woman who comes in for a session in an agitated state. The psychologist has worked with her for a few weeks and she was not overtly suicidal or homicidal. On this visit, the psychologist decided to refer her to an inpatient due to her becoming unreliable and taking 17mg of Xanax in 30 hours instead of 2.5mg prior to her appointment.The decision making process for this vignette is very important because of the dilemma involved. The ethical decisions-making process I am going to engage in will be the Canadian Code of Ethics for Psychologist and the decision- making process that accompanies it.
The justification of death in a Utilitarian or Aristotelian scenario rely on omissions from the norm or however seems fit the individual. the gray space between the rules of either theory allows for interpretations (misguided or educated guesses) and keeping facts only between the parties involved. Although Utilitarianism is a way to control the masses and allow for best possible performance out of the people following it, Aristotle’s Virtue Theory allows for the emotional understanding of a situation, as well as an individualized decision per scenario, without disrupting the norm.
Everyday individuals are faced with difficult situations, and in some cases these situations bring into question a person’s moral code. These dilemmas make people think about what the right thing to do is and what the wrong thing to do is. Any person can follow the four basic frameworks of ethics to figure out what needs to be done. Those frameworks being ethical egoism, utilitarianism, deontology, and virtue ethics. But first I will put you in a tricky situation and shed some light on the different routes an individual could take according to those four ethical frameworks. Then I will give my opinion on what I would do in the situation and I will state some objections a critic might have on my opinion.
A natural law theorist says that actions are right because they are natural and wrong because they
The word “Ethics” has its root in the Greek word ‘ethos’, which means character, spirit and attitude of a group of people or culture. Ethics is defined in the Concise Oxford Dictionary as: a system of moral principles, by which human actions may be judged good or bad or right or wrong, and the rules of conduct recognized in respect of a particular class of human actions.
Even though there are several schools of Naturalistic ethic, they all have one major quality in common – recognition of Nature as the main guiding force of our lives. Naturalists try to understand Nature and how Nature and humanity are linked together. Adherents of Naturalism try to convince people to shift their attitude toward the need to follow the laws of nature as a principle of moral conduct. There are three major schools of Naturalism. The first school strives for “returning back to nature” in order to enjoy a simple life and find out the truth by communion with nature, which is considered to be the teacher for all people. The second school recognizes that the Nature has inner soul. For example, stoics believed that Nature possesses rational (comprehensible by human mind) and positive divine power and all events in people’s lives are predetermined by it. Thus, people should give in to their fates and react in a positive and rational way toward unforeseen circumstances because everything happens for a reason and for the best. The third school advocates evolutionary theory as the basis for ethical conduct. Followers of this theory argue that people should learn their behavior from the evolutionary model of natural world. Darwin’s law of survival of the fittest was applied to social context. The ethical conduct is considered to be right when people or government do not interfere to help weak “species” survive. As a result, the most developed, smart and enterprising people will prevail and as social evolution progresses, they will form a superior society.
Of the three main ethical systems discussed in class that I chose was, ethics of virtue. Ethics of virtue is an ethical theory that emphasizes an individual’s character (morals/virtues), rather than following a set of rules. If people focused on being good people then maybe the right actions will follow. Virtue is a skill that cannot be taught, it’s a way of living that can only really be learned through experience. Aristotle stated that, “a virtuous person can be seen as someone who has ideal character traits”. It requires a person to seek the ultimate good according to their moral virtues. I use this ethical system all the time because of how I was raised and it defines the type of person I am. The outcome and motive is
According to Morrison and Furlong, normative ethics discovers what is right and wrong and guides decision making for all situations in many areas including health care. A normative ethical theory that this research will discuss is virtue ethics in the American health care system. The purpose of this research is to develop potential for excellence and to find the highest good for humans by doing what is right short-term, long-term, and to compete globally (Morrison & Furlong, 2013). Giving certain situations each theory can provide tools to assist in decision-making but virtue ethics concentrates on excellence and perfection.
According to philosophers, there are four types of law that guide morality and behavior for humans. Eternal, divine, natural and civil laws all contribute to the quality of life for mankind, but these laws often get confused with each other. This paper will examine two instances of a clash between the civil laws of government and divine laws of religious conviction.
The subjectivity of the word best makes it almost impossible to define, therefore in this essay I will address how teleological ethical systems can be considered ‘best’, from a variety of different viewpoints. A teleological ethical system is a consequentialist way of moral decision making, the key principles of a teleological system oppose those of a deontological system, a instead a teleological system does not look at actions as been wrong in themselves, and instead considers the consequences of these actions before deciding whether or not the act is morally permissible or not. Famous ethical theorists such as Jeremy Bentham and Macintyre; who’s well known theories virtue ethics and act utilitarianism, although individually different take
One of the most pervasive problems in theoretical ethics has been the attempt to reconcile the good for the individual with the good for all. It is a problem which appears in contemporary discussions (like those initiated by Alasdair MacIntyre in After Virtue) as a debate between emotivism and rationalism, and in more traditional debates between relativism and absolutism. I believe that a vital cause of this difficulty arises from a failure to ground ethics in metaphysics. It is crucial, it seems to me, to begin with "the way the world is" before we begin to speculate about the way it ought to be. And, the most significant "way the world is" for ethics is that it is individuals in community. This paper attempts to develop an ethical theory based solidly on Whitehead’s metaphysics, and to address precisely the problem of the relation between the good for the individual and the common good, in such a way as to be sympathetic to both.
The book makes a comparison between the logic of care and the logic of choice. The logic of care is the central topic of the book. While the other, the logic of choice, makes its point of contrast. The logic of choice is considered as something good in the Western philos...
The word ethics is derived from the Greek word “ethos” which means an ethical person is one who has a character. Ethics is a norm that translates ideals and values into everyday practice. Ethics is not a manual with answers on how to act. It is only a search for the right kind of morality. It is also the standards that define what right conduct is and what is wrong conduct. Ethics is concerned with distinguishing between good and evil in the world, between right and wrong human actions and between virtuous and non-virtuous characteristics of people. Ethics is also a branch of philosophy that involves questions about morality. Thus, ethics is about making choices which signifies how people act in order to make the right choice and predict good
The first section was an introduction to the concept of ethics and morals. Morals and ethics were defined and the difference between them was established.
The relationship between law and morality has been argued over by legal theorists for centuries. The debate is constantly be readdressed with new cases raising important moral and legal questions. This essay will explain the nature of law and morality and how they are linked.