Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Importance of acquiring knowledge
The importance of knowledge
How does ethics affect knowledge
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Importance of acquiring knowledge
There are no specific ways humans are able to gain knowledge for we as humans develop knowledge through our time of life. Ethics may or may not play a role in limiting the strategies used in the arts and natural sciences to produce the knowledge necessary. In the naturals sciences, we need perception most of all to be able to communicate information. Art is the same, for our perception of a painting is important to process our own information and have different interpretations of it. As an example, the knowledge gained from occurrences such as Adolf Hitler becoming dictator and causing the Holocaust made a positive and negative impact in the world. It could have influenced other dictators to do the same with their people or it could have influenced other countries to prevent such a cause from occurring. Thus, the issue of should we accept ethics for the purpose of producing useful knowledge is arose.
The use of ethical standards is a necessity in order to cultivate morals in a society. We perceive the world around us through our senses. Natural science in this case is more based on research and observations. However, it can be arguable that morals of society are the biggest factor of a person’s influence of learned knowledge. We as humans are taught not to steal from others, kill others, or lie. Morals will ultimately lead to someone’s success and the stability of a society. Immanuel Kant was a German Philosopher who believed that certain types of actions were absolutely prohibited, even in cases where the action would bring about more happiness than the alternative. His Kantian Theory suggested that right and wrong is not determined by consequences but from determining if they fulfill universal duties (CSU). As an example, i...
... middle of paper ...
...m is something that should be hidden away both in art and the artist's classroom. Although this may seem at first like a mere annoyance, such people frequently attempt to stop others from viewing or learning from the human form, thereby infringing on their rights to create and consume art as they wish.” As an example, Michelangelo’s sculpture “David” is one of the most famous sculpture exposed in a galleria. While displaying forms of nudity in the artistic world may be argued unethical, art involves emotion and is a form of expression so therefore, the artist has their own interpretations or views for their own work and use their art as a way to communicate with others by sending messages to the viewers. Art as a form of knowledge lets humans be exposed to the visual gaining of knowledge. It can also challenge the mind by the interpretations and it’s actual meaning.
A disturbing thought about man’s ethical barometer is that most of the theories, categories and principles emanate from the point of man’s reason. There is a cause to shudder at the thought of man as the absolute authority of what is right and wrong; what is ethical and what is not. Born into a sinful nature, man will ultimately make decisions that will lead to a moral philosophy that is shaky at best. Even philosophers with the best of intentions fall short to God’s model for the order, organization, and meting out of ethical actions. Because of man’s finite vision of what should be done to improve the present situation, mankind will always be found lacking in making the best ethical decisions; not being able to see the long term outcome and the impact those decisions and actions would have on others in the world.
While maintaining a open look of this moral law, Lewis presents two objections one would present to the moral law: “The moral law is just herd instinct” and “Morality is just social convention. The moral law is not a herd instinct due to man’s choice to suppress stronger instincts in fa...
There are two basic kinds of ethical judgments. The first have to do with duty and obligation. For example: "Thou shalt not kill, lie, or steal." "You just keep your promises." These judgments often uphold minimal standards of onduct and (partly for that reason) assert or imply a moral ‘ought.’ The second kind of judgment focuses on human excellence and the nature of the good life. These judgments employ as their most general terms "happiness," "excellence," and perhaps "flourishing" (in addition to "the good life"). For example: "Happiness requires activity and not mere passive consumption." "The good life includes pleasure, friendship, intellectual development and physical health." I take these to be the two general types of ethical judgment, and all particular ethical judgments to be examples of these. The main contention of this paper is that we must carefully distinguish these two types of judgments, and not try to understand the one as a special case of the other.
Ethical judgements limit the methods available in the production of knowledge in both the arts and the natural sciences. Discuss.
Normative ethics have received much praise and criticism from well-respected philosophers for many years. Structured by Immanuel Kant, arguably one of the greatest minds in history, Kantian ethics have changed the way people look at what truly makes an action “right.” Kant believed that developing a moral system that was consistent and based entirely on reason was achievable. He urged ethics that are knowable without reference to sense experience, or as he calls “a priori” claims, because they are universal and binding. Kant argued that it is impossible to ground ethics on religion. Instead, he turned to a vague sense of natural law and states that rules exist to rational beings, whether on this universe or any other, simply because they are rational beings.
Every human being carries with them a moral code of some kind. For some people it is a way of life, and they consult with their code before making any moral decision. However, for many their personal moral code is either undefined or unclear. Perhaps these people have a code of their own that they abide to, yet fail to recognize that it exists. What I hope to uncover with this paper is my moral theory, and how I apply it in my everyday life. What one does and what one wants to do are often not compatible. Doing what one wants to do would usually bring immediate happiness, but it may not benefit one in the long run. On the other hand, doing what one should do may cause immediate unhappiness, even if it is good for oneself. The whole purpose of morality is to do the right thing just for the sake of it. On my first paper, I did not know what moral theories where; now that I know I can say that these moral theories go in accordance with my moral code. These theories are utilitarianism, natural law theory, and kantianism.
Ethics can be defined as "the conscious reflection on our moral beliefs with the aim of improving, extending or refining those beliefs in some way." (Dodds, Lecture 2) Kantian moral theory and Utilitarianism are two theories that attempt to answer the ethical nature of human beings. This paper will attempt to explain how and why Kantian moral theory and Utilitarianism differ as well as discuss why I believe Kant's theory provides a more plausible account of ethics.
Kant’s moral philosophy is built around the formal principles of ethics rather than substantive human goods. He begins by outlining the principles of reasoning that can be equally expected of all rational persons regardless of their individual desires or partial interests. It creates an ideal universal community of rational individuals who can collectively agree on the moral principles for guiding equality and autonomy. This is what forms the basis for contemporary human rig...
Ethics is a branch of philosophy that deals with the moral principles and values that govern our behavior as human beings. It is important in the human experience that we are able to grasp the idea of our own ethical code in order to become the most sensible human beings. But in that process, can ethics be taught to us? Or later in a person’s life, can he or she teach ethics the way they learned it? It is a unique and challenging concept because it is difficult to attempt to answer that question objectively because everybody has his or her own sense of morality. And at the same time, another person could have a completely different set of morals. Depending on the state of the person’s life and how they have morally developed vary from one human
Possession of knowledge in natural sciences caries infinite amount of ethical responsibility, primarily due to the effect it has on a large scale. The possession of knowledge in natural sciences can either save or end lives. A perfect example of this is Alexander Fleming and his discovery of penicillin. Had he not shared his accidental discovery of the antibiotic, millions would have died. Alexander Fleming had an ethical responsibility to share his knowledge as not doing so would have appeared to be immoral. In this situation, sharing his knowledge brought the greatest amount of happiness to the largest quantity of people. However the opposite can be said with some cases in natural sciences. The most famous being the Manhattan project. The scientists working on that project had an ethical responsibility not to share their possessed...
All human societies and communities have basic ethical principles that constitute certain moral codes. People formulated these principles and rules many centuries ago; they are fundamentals that structure human behavior and as such are included in all major religious and ethical systems. One of these basic rules is “do not steal”, something children are taught from their very early age. In our rapidly developing and dramatically changing contemporary world, ethical issues and problems are becoming ever more important and urgent. Maintaining basic ethical principles in a variety of settings and conditions requires more than accepting major moral values; it calls for courage, commitment, character, and strong and flexible reasoning and judgment. Ethical principles have been developed by different philosophical teachings and theories that analyze and structure worldview principles including, as one of their basic parts, ethical issues. In their everyday life, people often use words “good” or “bad” defining by them what they understand as ethical, or moral behavior or that which is immoral or unethical. They normally make no discrimination between ethics and morality, although the former “seems to pertain to the individual character of a person or persons, whereas morality seems to point to the relationships between human beings” (Thiroux Jacques P.20). The simple definitions of “good” and “bad”, however, turn out to be complicated and even controversial when we try to formulate consistently the principles that underpin them or define standards for judging and evaluating these norms.
The essay title suggests that shared knowledge can influence and affect personal knowledge. Within this framework of this discussion, I would like to define shared knowledge as facts and values that are taught and can be instilled in one’s mind subconsciously. As for personal knowledge, it is knowledge that “I know” including direct sensory or emotional experience or new discoveries based on one’s experience. The essay question implied that shared knowledge can shape personal knowledge, and also suggests that personal knowledge can shape shared knowledge. This essay will explore the bidirectional relationship and limitations of shared knowledge and personal knowledge on Ethics and Human Sciences.
“The end justifies the means” is the famous quote of Machiavelli (Viroli, 1998) which puts the emphasis of morality on the finale results rather than the actions undertaken to achieve them. Is this claim true in the field of the natural sciences? Whether atomic bombings, as a mean used to end World War II, justifies the death of civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki? What is moral limitation in the acquisition of knowledge in the natural sciences? How is art constrained by moral judgment? Is it applicable to various works of art? Oscar Wilde claimed that “There is no such thing as a moral or an immoral book. Books are well written, or badly written. That is all.” (Wilde, 1945). Does it mean that writers should have complete freedom? Or should ethical considerations limit what they say and how they say it?
Production of knowledge is generally seen in a positive light. However, when ethics and morality become involved in the process of production, judgements will undoubtedly be made that may seem to limit the availability of that knowledge. Ethical judgements are made by the combination of a knower, his or her standard of value, and the situation itself. In the field of the arts and natural sciences, ethics plays a crucial role in the extent one may possibly be allowed to go when discovering new knowledge. Reason and emotion are important ways of knowing that help guide knowers in making certain moral decisions.
Both the arts and the sciences have completely different methods to create knowledge, thus the effects ethical judgments have on the arts and the science are different. Ethics limits the production of knowledge in both the arts and natural sciences, however, in the arts ethical judgments do not limit the methods available in the production of knowledge, rather it limits the propagation of knowledge. On the other hand, ethical judgements do limit the methods available in the production of knowledge in the natural sciences, because ethical judgments are self regulated in the natural sciences by reason because of the role of ethics in the methods.