Consequentialist Theories
Consequentialism is a theory of regulating morals. It holds that a demonstration is just good or moral on the off chance that it brings about a decent conclusion. For example, “What do are actions tell us about what we want. “This is instead of the hypothesis or examination of good obligation, which demonstrates huge quality is in light of obligation; uprightness ethics, which holds that discriminating quality is in setting of a respectable character.
Consequentialism is an elusive assumption and has prompted a large number contentions about the specifics. All things considered, a man can "point" his activities with the goal of creating a particular result, yet the result is out of his hands, generally. It is safe
…show more content…
to say that we are to accept that each ethical activity must be trailed by a decent result with a specific end goal to be considered genuinely "moral"? For example, according to Wilkens states in the beginning of the book about “three people walking by a car and sees a twenty dollar bill laying on the car seat,” each one had their own moral reason not to reach in and take the money that laid on the seat. According to Wilkens, the second person rejected the temptation out of a conviction that God makes certain rule that people are to follow and one of those rules is we shouldn’t take things that don’t belong to us.
Another example, is it morally and ethically wrong to have an abortion? Some people fill that it is their body and it is their choice to have an abortion. Although one of the Ten Commandments God tells us not to “commit murder.” When a woman takes it into her own hands and allows someone to commit murder; the woman as well as the person that is performing the operation is guilty. “In the event that profound quality is taking into account "a great result," then we must ask, "What is 'great'?" Which is better, to pick up joy or keep away from mischief? Also essential, filling a need or filling an inclination? The common perspective can give no reasonable answer. Some consequentialists acknowledge that the aim of the acting specialists may have something to do with the ethical quality of the protest. However, then we must figure out who has the power to judge. I believe that the only one who has power is …show more content…
God. The Bible talks about consequentialism, yet not by name, and not in the way that common logic considers.
The Bible says individuals should act ethically; that is, they ought to take after God's law and the controlling of His Spirit in their souls. What's more, the Bible additionally shows a certain end impact of ethical quality. People cans see this in the following books of the Bible. From Joshua, Jeremiah, Psalms, and Job.
For example in Joshua 1:8 “This book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth; but thou shalt meditate therein day and night, that thou mayest observe to do according (KJV).” God tells us that people should not depart from his law. When people depart from the word of God then we are not doing as God wants us to do this leads to judgement of others. In Jeremiah 29:11 “For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, saith the LORD, thoughts of peace, and not of evil, to give you an expected end.”
In Psalm119:116 “Great peace have they which love thy law: and nothing shall offend them (KJV).”Profound quality has an outcome, and it ought to illuminate our choice to perform good acts. In any case, the outcomes are not some shapeless, mysterious, wild chance. God made ethical quality for a reason: I believe that if God did not make these moral laws that we would be no better than an animal. Everything that God has written in the Bible teaches us how to act so that we are ethically and morally correct. In Job 17:9 “The righteous also shall hold on his way,
and he that hath clean hands shall be stronger and stronger.”
Alexander Hill’s Just Business: Christian Ethics for the Marketplace, explains how it is a Christian’s duty to do the right thing. Hill uses Christian values and morals as a way to explain the behaviors and actions that should be taken into consideration for every situation, whether it is personal or business. Hill states that we must “act in a manner consistent with God’s character; if not we act unethically” (p. xiii) The entire book is broken into three parts, concepts, false exits, and topics. Hill describes that there are three characteristics that should be made during a Christian’s decision making
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.
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.
Famous author Dr. Seuss states that a “person is a person no matter how small.”
Analyzing the following case: "In order to avoid pregnancy, Sue, a single 23-year-old Thomson believes that the abortion issue cannot be decided strictly by determining whether or not the fetus has a right to life. She argues that even if we grant that the fetus is a moral person (has the right to life), it is not always the case that abortion is morally impermissible (S. Morris ThomsonHO). She understands that even if a fetus has a right to life, that does not necessarily outweigh the mother's right to do with her body as she sees fit. Therefore, the fetus' right to life is not absolute. Thomson uses the example that in order to save the mother's life due to a cardiac condition, she will die if she carries the baby to term.
I think consequentialism is plausible, but I cannot really be too sure about whether it is the truth or not. After all, it is simply a moral theory. However, I reali...
Many arguments in the abortion debate assume that the morality of abortion depends upon the moral status of the foetus. While I regard the moral status of the foetus as important, it is not the central issue that determines the moral justifiability of abortion. The foetus may be awarded a level of moral status, nevertheless, such status does not result in the prescription of a set moral judgement. As with many morally significant issues, there are competing interests and a variety of possible outcomes that need to be considered when making a moral judgement on abortion. While we need to determine the moral status of the foetus in order to establish the type of entity we are dealing with, it does not, however, exist in a moral vacuum. There are other key issues requiring attention, such as the moral status and interests of the pregnant woman who may desire an abortion, and importantly, the likely consequences of aborting or not aborting a particular foetus. Furthermore, I assert that moral status should be awarded as a matter of degree, based upon the capacities of sentience and self-consciousness an entity possesses. In a bid to reach a coherent conclusion on the issue, the moral status of both foetus and woman, along with the likely results of aborting a particular foetus, must be considered together. Given the multiple facets requiring consideration, I assert that utilitarianism (Mill 1863) offers a coherent framework for weighing and comparing the inputs across a variety of situations, which can determine whether it is ever morally justifiable to have an abortion.
Abortion is the process of terminating a pregnancy by removing the embryo or fetus before birth. Since abortion became legal in the United States in 1973 after the Roe v. Wade trials, there has been many disputes and debates on whether or not the practice of abortion is ethical or not. While many people believe that a woman should have the right to her own body and be able to terminate her pregnancy if she desires to do so, others argue that it is murder. There are many arguments for and against abortion. My points in this paper for the PROs of abortions are #1, Abortions Procedures and #2, women’s rights. I will talk about how abortion being legal offers a safe abortion procedure, and how and why it is a woman 's right to choose what is best
Twenty-one percent of all U.S. pregnancies end in abortion (“Induced ABortion in the United States). Abortion is murdering defenseless babies who would‘ve otherwise had a happy life with a couple that is unable to have their own child. Is killing an innocent person ever moral?
Abortion may be one of the most controversial topics in America today. Abortion is defined as “the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus” (cite dictionary). There are really only two sides on people’s opinion on abortion; pro-life which means abortion should be outlawed and pro-choice which means a woman should be able to decide whether she wants to keep her baby. Thousands of protests and riots have begun due to the fact pro-life activists believe abortion should become illegal. Both sides bring valid points to support their decision that could sway any person’s thoughts. The Roe v. Wade law has allowed abortion to be legal in the U.S since 1973 (Chittom & Newton, 2015). The law “gives women total control over first trimester abortions and grants state legislative control over second and third trimester abortions” (Chittom & Newton, 2015). Ever since the law was put in place, millions of people have tried to overturn it and still
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
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.
He argues that an issue is deemed moral if it has the greatest pleasure to the involved individual. That is, an issue is considered morally right if it promotes happiness but considered morally inappropriate if it produces a reverse of happiness (Baird & Stuart, 38). Consequentialists defend both positions with claims that abortions have different impacts on the mother’s life.
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).
Consequently we ask the question where does the idea of the Bible effecting Christian ethical decision making stop having unlimited interpretation. Interpretation can keep on being made of the biblical texts in so many different ways. A Christian living in today’s modern society who is practicing with the Bible as the role of how they base their ethical decisions has many things to consider. Mainly direct and indirect interpretation is to be had of the old and new testaments. Bringing the Bible stories and parables into context helps modern Christians to understand and live out ethically correct lives by applying it to the situation they are in.