Ethical and moral standards form the basis on which an action is considered right or wrong in a particular society. Philosophers such as John Stuart Mill, Immanuel Kant, Aristotle, Sartre, and Singer developed different theories explaining the concept of morality and ethics (Tseng & Wang, 2021). Philosophical theories such as the deontology of ethics and utilitarianism are used to define molarity by assessing the motives and outcomes of an action.
John Mill developed the utilitarian theory to express his views on moral ethics. It is considered a unique proposition as it assesses if an action is right or wrong by analyzing its outcomes. According to its argument, a moral act should always aim to improve life by guaranteeing happiness and pleasure while minimizing unhappiness and pain (Tamunosiki, 2018). Mill only considered the results of individual acts, and as long as they result in happiness, the person’s motives are irrelevant.
John’s perspective is enrooted in the idea of ensuring justice. He states, “the ground of confidence in any concrete deductive science is not the a priori reasoning itself, but the accordance between its results and those of observation a posteriori” (Tamunosiki, 2018, p. 68). Here, John has linked the outcomes of a person’s action with justice. The theorists explain that justice should render a decision that supports the action’s results and impacts others. Therefore, if one does something that has immediate positive and long-term effects, then justice should find them to be good. For instance, it is right to kill a person, harvest his body parts, and use them to save twenty other lives.
Other theorists that have sought to define morality include Peter Singer. He describes an action by looking at its consequences and not if one followed the rules of action. This perspective is almost similar to that of John Mill. In Aristotle’s theory of ethics, he argues that the morality of an individual relies on his character. Aristotle believes humans should always strive to develop virtuous behavior and understand the importance of reason for eudaimonia. Immanuel Kant developed the deontological approach.
This model was based on evaluating moral ethics from the basis of one performing his societal duties diligently. Kant claims a person’s doings are good if they consider an imperative global formula and follows moral judgment (Tseng & Wang, 2021). Therefore, the righteousness of a person’s doings is determined by a universal view with no binding nature. According to the deontological approach, an action is morally right if its motives are related to an individual’s obligation to care for others and the community. For example, as per this theory, killing a man to save twenty others could be unethical and morally unsound.
Considering the philosophical theories of morality and ethics discussed, the most convincing is the deontological approach. John Mill argues that an action is good if it promotes good for the highest number of people. This concept has eliminated the biases in the justice system introduced by cultural standards and taboos. However, the utilitarian view disobeys the principles upon which justice is established. In the case scenario of killing one person to save many others, morality is broken because, in the measure of justice, all humans are equal, and no one’s life matters more than the others. Additionally, if a judgment is passed based on the theory, it could be impartial as the ruling could not be per the law but on how many people were pleased.
Locke and Rawls are considered to be modern political philosophers. They have played roles in redefining the social contract theory. Locke presents a modern liberal democracy that emphasizes the importance of constitutionalism. He fights for the concept of equity and fairness in the American government. He states, there cannot be supposed any subordination among us” (Jareño-Alarcón, 2018, p. 200). Therefore, no one should be subjected to unfair treatment based on who they are, their state, economic status, race, gender, or race (Jareño-Alarcón, 2018). Rawls also presents an argument for social justice in modern politics. His theory views fairness from a hypothetical situation limited by the veil of ignorance. Individuals and social institutions are obligated to handle people in their original position. One in which they do not know their status, race, gender, economics, or any other conception of life (Jareño-Alarcón, 2018). The principles of a just society are therefore chosen from the initial inherently fair conditions.
Generally, ethical and moral standards vary per society and circumstances. These concepts have been evaluated and explained using theories such as the deontology of ethics and utilitarianism. Each approach assesses the righteousness of action from different perspectives. The deontology of ethics, for instance, describes the morality of actions based on one’s motives. Utilitarianism, on the other hand, examines the outcome of the behaviors. Modern philosophers such as Rawls and Locke have also developed new arguments that seek to redefine the social understanding of equality by focusing on political justice.
References
Jareño-Alarcón, J. (2018). Inclusive toleration: Locke vs. Rawls. In Proceedings of the XXIII World Congress of Philosophy, 69, 199-203. Web.
Tamunosiki, V. O. (2018). John Stuart Mill’s utilitarianism: A critique. International Journal of Peace and Conflict Studies, 5(1), 65-76.
Tseng, P. E., & Wang, Y. H. (2021). Deontological or utilitarian? An eternal ethical dilemma in Outbreak. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(16), 2-23. Web.