Can There Be Ethics Without Re
Religion has played a main role in society in establishing moral laws. All through out human history, as it is recorded in historical documents, religious institutions have been in charge of morality. In fact, the concepts of right and wrong are part of the beliefs system itself. The followers of a specific religion follow the moral system established by the religion. In Hinduism, for example, "Karma" is an important element of the belief system. Karma can be regarded as and ethical method that inclines individuals to behave and act with benevolence. In western terminology, Karma can be classified as a method of morality. In Christianity, the Ten Commandments are the laws by God given to his people. These laws tell what is expected of them. They not only required the worshiping and the devotion to God, but also establish certain actions as bad, that if committed the harmony with God is broken. The individual then is given the ability to distinguish or choose between good and bad. The actions are then praised or punished in accordance to the righteousness of the action. Religion has always been in charge in establishing the moral values of society; it is not a phenomenon of an epoch. Going back to the earliest evidence of civili
Kant's ethical theory is practical and can be taken by any individual as the foundation of his or her moral system. However, by looking at intentions only injustice is probable to occur. What if an individual is to commit an action that results in very bad consequences and he claims that bad result is an accident; he did not intent to harm others but it happened? By using Kant ethical system the individual that committed such an act would be excused. Such a system for morals would be difficult to enforce. Not every individual acts from a good will, and the intentions of each act are hard to measure. The only person that knows the true intentions of an act is the person itself. Another ethical system as a respond to the question was developed during the 1800's by John Stuart Mill, who proposed the theory of Utilitarianism. J. S. Mill takes a totally opposite stand from Kant, he claims that what makes an action right are the consequences of the action and not the motives. Since, according to Mill, the ultimate goal of every human beings is happiness, also refers to a pleasure, then the actions that provides the greater amount of happiness for the greatest amount of people is the action that should be done. He states, "actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness" (Mill 87). If an act cause pain to others then that action is morally wrong. Mill makes clear that when he talks about pleasure he is not referring only to sensual pleasures. In fact, he devises pleasure in categories of low and higher pleasures. Higher pleasure are those of "the intellect, of the feelings and imagination, and of the moral sentiments a much higher value as pleasure than to those of mere sensation" (Mill 88). Deontology is an ethical system in which the morality of an act is established by the motive of the action. In this ideology, the motive of doing one's duty is the determining factor in the categorization of the moral value of an action. One of this ethical system was suggested by Immanuel Kant (Germany 1724-1804) th
Some common words found in the essay are:
According Kant, Ten Commandments, Utilitarianism Mill, Enlightenment Period, , Metaphysics Morals, God Yes, Motives Obey, Kant Germany, ethical system, Stuart Mill, moral values, action morally, motive action, makes action, moral value action, values society, according kant, ethical systems, action consequences, moral system, moral values society,
Approximate Word count = 1418
Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
