Ethical Systems Ethical Formalism. What Is Good

¶ … Ethical Systems Ethical formalism. What is good is that which conforms to the categorical imperative. This is the ethical system of Immanuel Kant, which is normative and deontological. It is a universal ethic that asserts every person is to be treated with equal dignity and respect rather than as an object or a means to an end.

A truly moral action is motivated by good will, not because the individual doing the good deed expects "payment, wants a return favor, or for any reason other than a good will," while immoral actions to achieve moral or ethical ends are not permitted (Pollock, 2006, p. 27). Ethical formalism could not support unjust laws that violated basic human rights because these "run counter to the categorical imperative that each person must be treated as an end rather than as a means, and to the universalism principle" (Pollock, p. 65).

This is the ethical view that comes close to my own because it is universal and respects the fact that all persons have equal rights and dignity, but also rejects the extremes of egotism or the belief that human beings are just self-interested atoms with no sense of social obligations. Utilitarianism. What is good is that which results in the greatest utility for the greatest number.

This ethical system is teleological and consequentialist in that it also considers the goal or the purpose of an action as justifying the means, and in this case the purpose is the general welfare of society and the good of the majority. One of its leading proponents was Jeremy Bentham, whose view of human nature was that individuals always sought to maximize pleasure and minimize pain.

Unlike ethical formalists, utilitarians are permitted to carry out evil acts such as assassinating a tyrant if it serves the greater good of humanity or society. Utilitarian ethics might support an unjust action by the state, such as the internment of Japanese-Americans during the Second World War, if the "total utility derived from internment outweighed the negative effect it had on the Japanese-Americans who lost their land and liberty," such as protecting the country from an invasion, sabotage and espionage (Pollock, p. 66). Religion.

What is good is that which conforms to God's will. A completely normative and deontological system of morality, which can be based on the Bible, religious authorities, individual conscience, or the Golden Rule of 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you'. God's law may be absolutist or situational, and in the latter case, necessary evils in order to achieve a greater good, which is similar to utilitarianism (Pollock, p. 33).

In the case of unjust and immoral laws, such as persecution of minorities, the "religious ethical framework would probably not provide moral support for the action because it runs contrary to some basic Christian principles," although in the past Christians have indeed persecuted Jews and other religious minorities (Pollock, p. 65) Natural law. What is good is that which is natural.

This is a normative and deontological ethical system that holds "there is a universal set of rights and wrongs that is similar to many religious beliefs," and indeed it can be religious if these are also interpreted as God's laws (Pollock, p. 35). John Locke, Thomas Hobbes and many of the Founders of the United States believed that the social contract with the state also guaranteed certain basic natural rights such as life, liberty and poverty.

Modern theorists might also add housing, health care and education to the list as well, such as the Economic Bill of Rights proposed by Franklin Roosevelt. Natural law supporters, from St. Augustine to Gandhi to Martin Luther King would argue that "an unjust law is no law at all," and indeed that the individual has a moral duty to disobey (Pollock, p. 66). Ethics of virtue. What is good is that which conforms to the Golden Mean.

Aristotle defined virtue in a teleological rather than a deontological way when he stated that the goal of life was to develop virtuous habits and excellence of character, which would also mean a life of happiness. Among these virtues, he listed honesty, courage, integrity, sobriety, generosity and wisdom. These were almost always found in the happy medium, such as courage being the mean between cowardice and recklessness or self-control located somewhere between hedonism and puritanism.

All normal persons who are not sociopaths acquire at least some of these traits and "we all are moral to the extent that we possess moral virtues, but some of us are more moral than others by having more virtues" (Pollock, p. 38). Ethics of care. What is good is that which meets the needs of those concerned. Sometimes described as feminist ethics, it is basically a teleological system that does not depend on universal norms, rules or rights, but guiding individuals to care about each other. This.