More handpicked essays just for you.
Principle of ethical leadership
Principle of ethical leadership
Describe ethical theories and their applications
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Introduction This essay will provide a theoretical understanding of the four ethical frameworks: Consequentialism, Non- Consequentialism, Virtue Ethics and Care Ethics. When applied to a situation these frameworks help teachers to resolve and justify their decision making. The objective is to apply the four frameworks to the scenario Helping Molly, to establish the most ethical course of action. Finally, a recommended course of action will be justification. The overarching ethical issue present within the Helping Molly scenario is the community sponsorship and the alignment with school beliefs and initiatives. Consequentialism Consequentialism is an ethical perspective that primarily focuses upon the consequences resulting from an action and aims to eliminate the negative consequences. Within this framework there are three sub-categories: Egoism, Altruism and Utilitarianism. Egoism Egoism considers the best outcome for the decision maker. From an egoist perspective the most favourable outcome for the teacher to do is minimise the stress and conflict of possible outcomes in his/her life. It is therefore in the teachers’ best interest to not upset the principle, to align a similar view to her and not accept the offer of further promotion of funding. Altruism Altruism perspective looks at the outcomes best for everyone excluding the decision maker. From this perspective it is important that the negative outcomes are minimised for the school, its students and Molly. From this perspective, the best outcome for the students and Molly is to give them a chance to develop their musical skills. The outcome best for the school is to be able to justify the sponsorship for Molly by reaping the benefits as a whole ... ... middle of paper ... ... for the teacher is a productive learning environment where student needs are being catered for. Works Cited Burgh, G., Field, T., Freakley, M. (2006) Ethics and the Community of Inquiry: Education for the Deliberative Democracy. Thomson Social Science Press: South Melbourne. Sammel, A. (2010). Lecture Three. Focusing on Virtue and Care Ethics. Griffith University: Gold Coast. Smith, M.K. (2004). The ethics of care and education. The encyclopaedia of informal education, Retrieved from www.infed.org/thinkers/noddings.html Queensland Government Education Queensland. (1998). Health and Physical Education. Retrieved July 14, 2010 from http://education.qld.gov.au/curriculu m/area/hpe/index.html United Nations. (2010). The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Retrieved July 9, 2010, from http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml
Consequentialism is a term used by the philosophers to simplify what is right and what is wrong. Consequentialist ethical theory suggests that right and wrong are the consequences of our actions. It is only the consequences that determine whether our actions are right or wrong. Standard consequentialism is a form of consequentialism that is discussed the most. It states that “the morally right action for an agent to perform is the one that has the best consequences or that results in the most good.” It means that an action is morally correct if it has little to no negative consequences, or the one that has the most positive results.
Consequentialism is the view that, according to FoE, the morality of actions, policies, motives, or rules depends on their producing the best actual or expected results. In other words, do as much good as you can. Act utilitarianism, a sub-group of consequentialism, claims that well-being is the only thing that is intrinsically valuable, and that an action is morally required just because it does more to improve overall well-being than any other action you could have done in the circumstances. Basically, Act utilitarianism agrees completely with consequentialism, but ensure that those actual or expected results end up improving well-being. Consequentialism, as a whole, while extremely similar to other moral theories, such as hedonism and the desire theory, are, in fact, slightly different. Hedonism claims that a life is good to the extent that it is filled with pleasure and free from pain, and consequentialists, while not disagreeing with hedonism, would say that the pleasure and freedom from pain depends entirely on the actual or expected results. The desire theory claims that something is good for you if, and only if, it satisfies your desires and because it satisfies your desires, while consequentialists would say that those desires should improve overall well-being, and not to be selfish about it.
When we discuss morality we know that it is a code of values that seem to guide our choices and actions. Choices and actions play a significant role in determining the purpose and course of a person’s life. In the case of “Jim and the Indians”, Jim faces a terrible dilemma to which any solution is morbid. On one hand, Jim can choose to ignore the captain’s suggestion and let the whole group of Indians be executed. Alternatively, he may decide upon sacrificing one Indian for the sake of saving the rest. Both options involve taking of person’s life. Regarding what should Jim do in this circumstance, there are two approaches according for Jim’s dilemma that should be examined. By looking into the Deontological moral theory and the moral theory of Consequentialism we can see what determines an action that is morally required.
In other words, ethical egoism states that there are objective moral facts and an action is morally good if and only if it promotes my personal happiness and it is morally wrong if and only if that action hinders my personal happiness. Apart from Ethical Egoism there is another topic to be known clearly, it is called Psychological Egoism. Psychological Egoism It is the claim that each person, in fact, pursues his/her own happiness.
On considering the consequentialist theory we need to evaluate the consequences of the situation and action is needed to be taken which seems to be apt. To some extent we Conseqentialist theory works to argue but Deontologist theory works even more better in this situation
• Once more, the ordinary science’ proves itself as the master of classification, inventing and defining the various categories of Egoism. Per example, psychological egoism, which defines doctrine that an individual is always motivated by self-interest, then rational egoism which unquestionably advocates acting in self-interest. Ethical egoism as diametrically opposite of ethical altruism which obliges a moral agent to assist the other first, even if sacrifices own interest. Also, ethical egoism differs from both rational and psychological egoism in ‘defending’ doctrine which considers all actions with contributive beneficial effects for an acting individual
Introduction This paper examines the concept of charity from the ethical perspective and its impact on an individual and society as a whole. The practice of charity means the voluntary giving of help to those in need as a humanitarian act. Charity is a vast concept; it can be understood as a form of practice or virtue. Thus, this paper will try to understand the religious, emotional, social and economical circumstances, which lead to charity, its importance and methods by which we can support it. Further, we will try to analyse whether charity fits the concept of Deontology or Consequencealism.
Egoism is a teleological theory of ethics that sets the ultimate criterion of morality in some nonmoral value (i.e. happiness or welfare) that results from acts (Pojman 276). It is contrasted with altruism, which is the view that one's actions ought to further the interests or good of other people, ideally to the exclusion of one's own interests (Pojman 272). This essay will explain the relation between psychological egoism and ethical egoism. It will examine how someone who believes in psychological egoism explains the apparent instances of altruism. And it will discuss some arguments in favor of universal ethical egoism, and exam Pojman's critque of arguments for and against universal ethical egoism.
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
Consequentialism is described as the theory that states actions are morally right based only on the consequences. Many of my actions are based in terms of consequences. Before, I used to take whatever actions that made my happy, but now, I think more about the results of my actions. More specifically, I think about the negative results. This has made into a bit of pessimist. Whenever I hear ideas, I am quick to think about the negative consequences first before the positive. This usually means that I am not keen on taking risks if the amount of negative consequences outnumber the good. I remember when I was first planning to come to George Fox University. When the idea first hit me, I was quick to think negative consequence of how expensive it was to come to the mainland for college. I wasn’t thinking how the university could benefit my future. Eventually, I figured the positive consequences of coming to George Fox outweighed the bad. On the bright side, at least in my view, being a pessimist has allowed to think farther ahead when it comes to planning. Every action has consequences, and my consequentialism has taught me the importance of thinking before taking action. If I take any actions, it will be the ones that have the fewest negative consequences for me and the people around
Let us discuss consequentialism first. Consequencialism focuses on consequences as the most important factor in the decision making process (Donaldson 3). For consequentialists, the motives of an act are not as important as what comes out of it. Utilitarianism is one of the branches of consequentialism. Utilitarianism believes in the greatest good for the number (Donaldson 3).
Consequentialism is the moral view that for any given consequences was determined by that person’s actions, while Utilitarianism is the action that best benefits the majority. In the MCU, Marvel Cinematic Universe, we have someone who clearly represents both, that someone is Tony Stark or better known as Iron Man. In the first movie of the timeline, Iron Man, Tony Stark was originally a weapons dealer using cutting edge technology and his skills to create mass weapons and selling them off to vendors, mainly the United States Armed Forces. This was mainly egoistical as he did this mainly for the money and didn’t seem to care so long as he made money off of it, but this changed on a trip to Afghanistan where he was revealing a new weapon,
Teleological ethics or consequentialism is referred to as a results oriented ethics. Teleological ethics describes an ethical perspective that contents the rightness or wrongness of actions and is based solely on the goodness or badness of their consequences. It focuses on the purpose of each action and whether there is an intention or meaning for the action. It deals with the consequences of an action. It also involves examining past experiences in order to figure out the results of present actions. It determines whether the behavior is right or wrong based on the consequences of the behavior. That is, the behavior is ethical if it results in a desirable consequence to the behavior. There are four types of teleological ethics which includes ethical egoism, ethical elitism, ethical parochialism and ethical
Virtue Ethics Virtue ethics is a theory used to make moral decisions. It does not rely on religion, society or culture; it only depends on the individuals themselves. The main philosopher of Virtue Ethics is Aristotle. The. His theory was originally introduced in ancient Greek.
Consequential views of ethics based on actions results or outcome of the certain actions. On the other hand the deontological view based on how to get result or outcome of certain actions. In one line difference, consequential focused on ends and deontological focused on means.