Normative ethics Essay

Ethics, as well enjoyn as moral philosophical system, is a beginning of philosophy that involves systematizing, defending, and recommending concepts of right and wrong conduct. 1 The term comes from the Greek word ethos, which pith char runer. Ethics is a complement to Aesthetics in the philosophy field of Axiology. In philosophy, ethics studies the moral behavior in humans, and how 1 should act. Ethics may be divided into four major aras of take on1Meta-ethics, to the highest degree the theoretical look uponing and reference of moral propositions and how their truth value (if any) may be determined Normative ethics, somewhat the practical office of determining a moral course of action Applied ethics, about how moral outcomes gutter be achieved in specific situations Descriptive ethics, to a fault dealn as comparative ethics, is the study of peoples beliefs about morality According to Tomas Paul and Linda Elder of the Foundation for Critical Thinking, nigh people conf use ethics with behaving in accordance with social conventions, spectral beliefs, and the law, and dont treat ethics as a stand-al unmatchable concept.2 Paul and Elder define ethics as a set of concepts and principles that guide us in determining what behavior helps or harms sentient creatures. 2 The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy states that the word ethics is commonly utilise interchangeably with morality and sometimes it is used more narrowly to mean the moral principles of a particular tradition, group, or individual. 3 Meta-ethics is a field at bottom ethics that seeks to understand the nature of normative ethics.The focus of meta-ethics is on how we understand, know about, and what we mean when we talk about what is right and what is wrong. Meta-ethics came to the fore with G. E. Moores Principia Ethica from 1903. In it he first wrote about what he called the naturalistic fallacy. Moore was seen to reject naturalism in ethics, in his Open Question Argument. This made thinkers look once more at second order questions about ethics. Earlier, the Scottish philosopher David Hume had put advancing a similar view on the difference between facts and values.Studies of how we know in ethics divide into cognitivism and non-cognitivism this is similar to the contrast between descriptivists and non-descriptivists. Non-cognitivism is the convey that when we judge something as right or wrong, this is neither true nor false. We may for example be only expressing our emotional feelings about these things. 4 Cognitivism can thus be seen as the claim that when we talk about right and wrong, we atomic number 18 talking about matters of fact. The ontology of ethics is about value-bearing things or properties, i. e. the kind of things or stuff referred to by ethical propositions.Non-descriptivists and non-cognitivists believe that ethics does not exigency a specific ontology, since ethical propositions do not refer. This is known as an anti-realist position. Rea lists on the some other hand must explain what kind of entities, properties or states be relevant for ethics, how they have value, and why they guide and motivate our actions. 5 sexual abstention ethics describes the character of a moral agent as a driving force for ethical behavior, and is used to describe the ethics of Socrates, Aristotle, and other early Greek philosophers.Socrates (469 BC 399 BC) was ace of the first Greek philosophers to win both scholars and the common citizen to turn their attention from the outside world to the delimit of humankind. In this view, knowledge having a bearing on human liveliness was placed highest, all other knowledge being secondary. Self-knowledge was considered necessary for achievement and inherently an essential good. A self-aware some one and only(a) give act completely within his capabilities to his pinnacle, while an ignorant somebody will keel and encounter difficulty.To Socrates, a person must become aware of any fact (an d its context) relevant to his existence, if he wishes to attain self-knowledge. He posited that people will naturally do what is good, if they know what is right. Evil or bad actions are the result of ignorance. If a criminal was sincerely yours aware of the intellectual and religious consequences of his actions, he would neither commit nor even consider committing those actions. Any person who knows what is truly right will automatically do it, according to Socrates. succession he correlated knowledge with virtue, he similarly equated virtue with delight. The truly wise man will know what is right, do what is good, and therefore be happy. 6 Aristotle (384 BC 322 BC) posited an ethical system that may be termed self-realizationism. In Aristotles view, when a person acts in accordance with his nature and realizes his full potential, he will do good and be content. At birth, a scotch is not a person, but a potential person. To become a real person, the childs inherent potentia l must be realized.Unhappiness and frustration are caused by the unrealized potential of a person, engageing to failed goals and a poor vitality. Aristotle said, Nature does nothing in vain. Therefore, it is absolute for persons to act in accordance with their nature and develop their latent talents in order to be content and complete. Happiness was held to be the ultimate goal. all(prenominal) other things, such as civic life or wealth, are merely means to the end. Self-realization, the awareness of ones nature and the study of ones talents, is the surest path to happiness. 7Aristotle asserted that man had three natures veggie (physical/metabolism), animal (emotional/appetite) and rational ( rational/conceptual). Physical nature can be assuaged done exercise and care, emotional nature through indulgence of instinct and urges, and mental through human reason and developed potential. Rational development was considered the intimately important, as essential to philosophical self-awareness and as uniquely human. Moderation was encouraged, with the extremes seen as degraded and immoral. For example, courage is the moderate virtue between the extremes of cowardice and recklessness. humanity should not simply live, but live well with conduct g overned by moderate virtue. This is regarded as difficult, as virtue denotes doing the right thing, to the right person, at the right time, to the proper extent, in the correct fashion, for the right reason. 8 edit StoicismThe Stoic philosopher Epictetus posited that the sterling(prenominal) good was contentment and serenity. Peace of mind, or Apatheia, was of the highest value self-mastery over ones desires and emotions leads to spiritual peace. The unconquerable will is central to this philosophy.The individuals will should be independent and inviolate. Allowing a person to disturb the mental equilibrium is in essence offering yourself in slavery. If a person is free to anger you at will, you have no control over your internal world, and therefore no freedom. Freedom from material attachments is also necessary. If a thing breaks, the person should not be upset, but realize it was a thing that could break. Similarly, if someone should die, those close to them should hold to their serenity because the loved one was made of flesh and blood destined to death.Stoic philosophy says to presume things that cannot be changed, resigning oneself to existence and enduring in a rational fashion. demolition is not idolizeed. People do not lose their life, but or else return, for they are returning to God (who initially gave what the person is as a person). Epictetus said difficult problems in life should not be avoided, but rather embraced. They are spiritual exercises needed for the health of the spirit, scarce as physical exercise is required for the health of the body.He also stated that sex and sexual desire are to be avoided as the greatest threat to the integrity and equilibrium of a mans mind. Abstinence is highly desirable. Epictetus said remaining abstinent in the appear of temptation was a victory for which a man could be proud. 9 edit HedonismMain word Hedonism Hedonism posits that the principal ethic is maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain. There are several(prenominal) schools of Hedonist thought ranging from those advocating the indulgence of even momentary desires to those teaching a pursuit of spiritual bliss.In their consideration of consequences, they range from those advocating self-gratification irrespective of the pain and expense to others, to those stating that the closely ethical pursuit maximizes pleasure and happiness for the most people. 10 edit Cyrenaic hedonismFounded by Aristippus of Cyrene, Cyrenaics supported immediate gratification or pleasure. Eat, draw and be merry, for tomorrow we die. Even fleeting desires should be indulged, for fear the hazard should be forever lost. There was little to no concern with the future, the deliver dom inating in the pursuit for immediate pleasure.Cyrenaic hedonism encouraged the pursuit of usage and indulgence without hesitation, believing pleasure to be the only good. 10 edit stackedismMain article Epicureanism Epicurean ethics is a hedonist form of virtue ethics. Epicurus presented a prolong argument that pleasure, correctly understood, will coincide with virtue. 11 He spurned the extremism of the Cyrenaics, believing some pleasures and indulgences to be detrimental to human beings. Epicureans observed that indiscriminating indulgence sometimes resulted in negative consequences.Some experiences were therefore jilted out of hand, and some unpleasant experiences endured in the present to ensure a better life in the future. To Epicurus the summum bonum, or greatest good, was prudence, exercised through relief and caution. Excessive indulgence can be destructive to pleasure and can even lead to pain. For example, eating one food too a good deal will cause a person to lose t aste for it. take too much food at once will lead to discomfort and ill-health. Pain and fear were to be avoided.Living was essentially good, barring pain and illness. Death was not to be feared. Fear was considered the source of most unhappiness. Conquering the fear of death would naturally lead to a happier life. Epicurus well-grounded if there was an afterlife and immortality, the fear of death was irrational. If there was no life after death, then the person would not be alive to suffer, fear or worry he would be non-existent in death. It is irrational to get to over circumstances that do not exist, such as ones state in death in the absence of an afterlife. 12