According to deontology, certain acts are right or wrong in themselves. Deontologists tend to concentrate on those acts that are wrong. So, according to such as Kant or Ross, promise breaking is wrong independently of its consequences. In everyday life, morality seems less a matter of producing some good consequences or even complying with certain rules and more a matter of being a certain sort of person.
A person with character marked by moral dispositions, such as kindness, sensitivity to the needs of others, respectfulness, fairness, courage, and seriousness of purpose. This is an approach which stems from Aristotle and other ancient moral thinkers is called virtue ethics. Kant’s theory of de ontological ethics is an interesting one. It judges morality by examining the nature of actions and the will of agents rather than goals achieved. Roughly, a de ontological theory looks at inputs rather than outcomes. This strain of moral reflection that argues that moral treatment is appropriate to humans because of their rationality has a long history.
Its most popular recent incarnation is associated with the moral thinking of the philosopher Immanuel Kant. His view is of a type called “de ontological” because it aims to show how there can be moral requirements that do not depend on whether the actions required produce good consequences. For Kant and those inspired by him, true morality is a matter of treating human beings in ways that are appropriate. The obvious trouble with the classical form of intuitionism is that it is unclear how moral obligations can be regarded as self-evident when they are not even accepted by everyone.
The Term Paper on Moral Law Matt Alienation Chekhov
Alienation: The Fall of Man through the Breaking of Moral Law Is it possible to attain or remain in a state of true happiness when you break a moral law? To many of us, road signs have been handed down through the generations and are posted clearly as the 10 Commandments delivered to us through Moses. These commandments are generally viewed as religious moral laws, but can they be viewed also as ...
They are obviously only self-evident to those who are good judges; this might seem to make the appeal to self-evidence misleading at best. It might also seem to make the claims of self-evidence no more than the expressions of a certain prejudice. Why should we believe someone who says that it is self-evident that we are obliged to do something? When someone challenges our ethical judgment about what is right, we often need to move to a different level of argument about the source of our ethical principles. Intuitionism asserts that an undefined flash of insight reaches ethical knowledge. While we can use reason to think through the moral problem, one cannot reason completely to a definition of what is right or wrong. One can only perceive that knowledge.
If you disagree with me on a moral issue, I can’t prove you are wrong, I can only ask you to think again. Ross was an intuitionist. In conclusion, Deontologists tend to concentrate on those acts that are wrong. Finally, virtue ethics takes virtue and vice to be at least as basic as moral duty and the goodness of situations. Intuitionism says that good is an indefinable notion.
I believe while studying these ideas and philosophies will help shed light on the dark areas of our lives. Even though some of the contradict what the bible say. It will help us in our walk with God. The Moral Life by Potman.
