Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Importance of decisiveness
The influence of society on the behavior of the individual
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Importance of decisiveness
Society’s overall prosperity is dependent upon a mutual agreement to cohesively coexist to maintain order and attain the most good for the majority of the populous. These mutual agreements, unspoken, learned manners and behaviors develop throughout the maturing age of and individual and is practiced though their life span. It is a necessity for people to learn these social behaviors, and learn “good judgment” not only for that person’s benefit but to ensure the welfare of all. This is especially true for those in positions of power; whose judgment or discretion holds an essential part of their duty. In John Dewey’s Experience and Education and Jean Jacques Rousseau’s Emile the importance of developing a person of “sound judgment” is evident as it is sought to be a decisive factor not only to a person’s life but the surrounding citizens they encounter. I will further explain each work’s perspective on this essential component. Additionally, I will explain the importance of building characters of good judgment in 21st century America. The failure to raise capable citizens of good judgment is not only detrimental for the self but, as mentioned before, to preserve a working society. …show more content…
Jean Jacques Rousseau’s idea or definition of judgment is not directly stated but rather implied and explained in context. He provides distinctions between judgment and other terminology like, sensations, inclinations, opinions, ideas and prejudice. When Rousseau refers to judgment he frequently pairs it with reason and almost uses these terms almost interchangeably. The difference he does make between reason and judgment is that he admits, he is “far from thinking that children have no kind of reasoning” (Rousseau, 131) and strongly states “ I should as soon expect a child of ten to be five feet in height as to be possessed of judgment” (Rousseau,
Jean Jacques Rousseau in On Education writes about how to properly raise and educate a child. Rousseau's opinion is based on his own upbringing and lack of formal education at a young age. Rousseau depicts humanity as naturally good and becomes evil because humans tamper with nature, their greatest deficiency, but also possess the ability to transform into self-reliant individuals. Because of the context of the time, it can be seen that Rousseau was influenced by the idea of self-preservation, individual freedom, and the Enlightenment, which concerned the operation of reason, and the idea of human progress. Rousseau was unaware of psychology and the study of human development. This paper will argue that Rousseau theorizes that humanity is naturally good by birth, but can become evil through tampering and interfering with nature.
In the article, “Dumb Kids Class” author Mark Bowden inserts his practical knowledge on judgment. Bowden develops this by his personal experience in Catholic school. Bowden’s purpose is to inform the readers how society misinterpret the true meaning of judgement in order to. SEN 4 Bowden’s uses a pessimistic, yet an optimistic with,
Rest, J., Narvaez, D., Thoma, S., & Bebeau, M. (1999). DIT2: Devising and testing a revised instrument of moral judgment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(4), 644-659.
Virtue ethics is a moral theory that was first developed by Aristotle. It suggests that humans are able to train their characters to acquire and exhibit particular virtues. As the individual has trained themselves to develop these virtues, in any given situation they are able to know the right thing to do. If everybody in society is able to do the same and develop these virtues, then a perfect community has been reached. In this essay, I shall argue that Aristotelian virtue ethics is an unsuccessful moral theory. Firstly, I shall analyse Aristotelian virtue ethics. I shall then consider various objections to Aristotle’s theory and evaluate his position by examining possible responses to these criticisms. I shall then conclude, showing why Aristotelian virtue ethics is an unpractical and thus an unsuccessful moral theory in reality.
Some of the key ideas that Hartman discussed about in this article were revolved around the concept of teaching and defining what a good character is. Hartman started off his article by talking about generosity, honesty, courage and respect. Hartman also talked about how business ethics courses can help improve students’ character by helping them think about their values (Hartman 69). Hartman also discussed about how many people are “sincere but they are not courageous” (Hartman 73). Moreover, Hartman’s goal was to help encourage students “to consider their strengths and limitations, their opportunities, and what they can and cannot learn to enjoy” (Hartman 72) and “help students understand the importance of that choice and not make it thoughtlessly” (Hartman 79). Hartman answered if good character is teachable throughout his article. As Hartman stated, “We can begin to teach our students the necessary self-knowledge and self-control by encouraging them to reflect on their assumptions about what will make them happy.” (Hartman 71). Hartman illustrated that an “important function is to provide help for students to understand the language of right and wrong, of virtues and vices” (Hartman 75). Hartman believes that a “good character is therefore a matter not only of doing the right thing but also having the right desires and emotions” (Hartman
Philosophy can best be described as an abstract, scholarly discourse. According to the Greek, philosophia refers to ‘love of knowledge’. This is an aspect that has involved a great number of clever minds in the world’s history. They have sought to deal with issues surrounding the character of veracity and significantly exploring the endeavors to respond to these issues. This paper seeks to compare and contrast the philosophy of Aristotle with that of Confucius. This is with a clear concentration on the absolute functions of these philosophies and how they take care of the particular responsibility of a person and the broader society and the resultant effects on societies (Barnes, 1995).
Jean-Jacques Rousseau was a philosopher that helped develop concepts such as general will, and improved on the early norms on child-raising. Born in Geneva, he was a “citizen” of the city. “Citizens” were the two hundred members of the Grand Council of Geneva, which made most of the political decisions in state. Jean-Jacques Rousseau was an important part of the Enlightenment. He led an interesting life, as told by his three memoirs, had a solid philosophy, did not believe in reason, and left a lasting legacy that still affects us today.
In order to become a well rounded individual you must be aware of the moral problems in society and be able to evaluate them. Respectively, this class has allowed me to do so, through readings and videos, providing my own insight on many moral issues. This class has shown me there are many different interpretations to right and wrong, and hard evidence must be agued to be persuasive. Throughout the course of this class we looked into multiple philosophers such as Kant, Aristotle, and Sandel, a professor at Harvard.
prudence, justice, fortitude, and temperance are vital facets in the decision-making process. Prudence affects moral judgment, sensitivity, and intention. It is concerned with the knowledge and practical wisdom. Justice, on the other hand, refers to the permanent attitude to perform what is fair. Another virtue; temperance refers to the desire to pursue what is just while avoiding dangerous undertakings. The fortitude virtue then controls the passions of humans like despair, fear, anger, audacity, and hope. All these elements affect both individual and organizational factors of ethical decision-making (Cabello-Medina,
One of the interesting things about Rousseau was that he had different views than previous philosophers, such as Hume and Locke, on the state of nature. In Rousseau’s point of view, humans in the state of nature would be most like a noble savage. What this means is that Rousseau believed that in the state of nature humans are naturally good, and are lead by basic appetites or sentiments. This would also be a prehistoric place where humans would not have discovered rationality or morality. This mainly applies because Rousseau believes that these prehistoric humans made, as later discussed, decisions based on sentiment and not on reason, thus since morality requires the ability to choose between right and wrong it would be impossible to be moral.
Many people feel that educated decisions are the best ones, that the more you study, the more you know. Blink, written by Malcolm Gladwell, challenges that notion. He wishes to alter the belief of the average person, and writes with the “desire to push the world in a certain direction, to alter other people’s idea of the kind of society that they should strive after.” Most people in today’s society would much rather trust the decision that comes with a plethora of meticulous research, analysis, and studying to back it up. Malcolm Gladwell’s purpose is to convince us of just the opposite: that sometimes, even against more rational judgement, our split-second decisions are the best. He argues that when people put their instincts to use responsibly,
asked him for his gun. I’d gone back with the intention of using it. I’d
John Stuart Mill, Patrick Devlin, H.L.A Hart, and Ronald Dworkin each provide varying views on what constitutes morality and what the role of society/the law should be in protecting morality. The discussion of these four philosophers provides insight into this debate, as each philosopher provides a different perspective. For example, Mill being a utilitarian gives him a unique view. I will discuss Mill, Devlin, Hart, and Dworkin and compare their views in order to gain a better understanding of what constitutes morality and how far should society and the law be permitted to interact with morality.
Ethics is the study of “moral principles that govern a person’s behaviour of the conducting of an activity.” In this essay I shall study three moral principles, morality as law, inner conviction and personal growth from Donal Harrington’s “What is Morality” (1996), and examine the effectiveness of each approach to ethics. Furthermore, I will evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the three moral principles to come to a conclusion of which approach is most suitable in the contemporary society. Each approach to ethics offers a valid view, however morality as personal growth can be viewed to offer a long term to solution to corrupt morals, but I shall argue that this approach would struggle to prevail without the other approaches to ethics supporting it.
Born into a world of contradictory and opposing forces of control, authority, and traditional obligations, a young person does not have the means to make judgments but is swept along on the tide of what others say must be done. If one's heart or conscience cries out for a different course, lack of experience and of developed judgment can be fatal. Role models are required who can model the skills of weighing the pros and cons, of balancing the heart and the head, of inquiring and seeking out knowledge before a final decision is made. Friar Lawrence spoke this lesson, but cryptically, through the metaphors of poison/medicine and haste/patience, yet he did not model the exercise of inquiring, balancing, and weighing before acting. It suddenly occurred to me that the wisdom that Friar Lawrence advocates but does not exactly inspire, is exactly the sort of wisdom that we were exercising in the classroom as we...