essay on ethical theories

Newest Articles

Epistemology: Understanding the Nature of Knowledge
Exploring Friedrich Nietzsche: An Introduction to the Major Modern Philosopher
Understanding Determinism, Fatalism, and Libertarianism
Argumentative Writing and Analysis
Metaphysics
Theory of Forms
Epistemology
Materialism
Moral relativism
Utilitarianism
Virtue ethics
Normative ethics
Applied ethics
Moral Psychology
Philosophy of art
Philosophy of language
Philosophy of beauty
Nature of Art
Philosophy of Film
Philosophy of Music
Deductive reasoning
Inductive reasoning
Justification
Perception and Knowledge
Beliefs and Truth
Modern philosophy
Romanticism
Analytic philosophy
Enlightenment philosophy
Existentialism
Enlightenment
Ancient philosophy
Classical Greek philosophy
Renaissance philosophy
Medieval philosophy
Pre-Socratic philosophy
Hellenistic philosophy
Presocratic philosophy
Rationalism
Scholasticism
Jewish philosophy
Early Islamic philosophy
Reasoning and Argumentation
Seeking Justice After a Tractor-Trailer Accident: Why You Need an Experienced Lawyer
Critical Thinking
Fallacies and logical errors
Skepticism and doubt
Creative Thinking
Lateral thinking
Thought experiments
Argumentation and Logic
Syllogisms and Deductive Reasoning
Fallacies and Rebuttals
Inductive Reasoning and Analogy
Reasoning and Problem-Solving
Critical Thinking and Decision Making
Creative Thinking and Problem Solving
Analytical Thinking and Reasoning
Philosophical Writing and Analysis
Interpreting Philosophical Texts
Writing Essays and Articles on Philosophy
Philosophical Research Methods
Qualitative Research Methods in Philosophy
Quantitative Research Methods in Philosophy
Research Design and Methodology
Ethics and Morality
Aesthetics and Beauty
Metaphysical terms
Ontological argument
Ethical terms
Aesthetic terms
Metaphysical theories
Kant's Categorical Imperative
Aristotle's Four Causes
Plato's Theory of Forms
Hegel's Dialectic
Ethical theories
Aesthetic theories
John Dewey's aesthetic theory
Immanuel Kant's aesthetic theory
Modern philosophical texts
Foucault's The Order of Things
Descartes' Meditations
Nietzsche's Beyond Good and Evil
Wittgenstein's Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
Ancient philosophical texts
Kant's Critique of Pure Reason
Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit
Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics
Plato's Republic
Ancient philosophers
Modern philosophers
Modern philosophical schools
German Idealism
British Empiricism
Ancient philosophical schools
The Skeptic school
The Cynic school
The Stoic school
The Epicurean school
The Socratic school
Philosophy of Language
Semantics and Pragmatics of Language Usage
Analytic-Synthetic Distinction
Meaning of Words and Phrases
Philosophy of Science
Scientific Realism and Rationalism
Induction and the Hypothetico-Deductive Model
Theory-Ladenness and Underdetermination
Philosophy of Mind
Mind-Body Dualism and Emergentism
Materialism and Physicalism
Identity Theory and Personal Identity
Philosophy of Religion
Religious Pluralism and Exclusivism
The Problem of Evil and Suffering
Religious Experience and Faith
Metaphysical Theories
Idealism and Realism
Determinism, Fatalism, and Libertarianism
Phenomenalism and Nominalism
Epistemological Theories
Intuitionism, Skepticism, and Agnosticism
Rationalism and Empiricism
Foundationalism and Coherentism
Aesthetic Theories
Formalist Aesthetics, Emotional Aesthetics, Experiential Aesthetics
Relational Aesthetics, Sociological Aesthetics, Historical Aesthetics
Naturalistic Aesthetics, Immanent Aesthetics, Transcendental Aesthetics
Ethical Theories
Virtue Ethics, Utilitarianism, Deontology
Subjectivism, Egoism, Hedonism
Social Contract Theory, Natural Law Theory, Care Ethics
Metaphysical Terms
Cause, Necessity, Possibility, Impossibility
Identity, Persistence, Time, Space
Substance, Attribute, Essence, Accident
Logic and Argumentation Terms
Analogy, Syllogism, Deduction, Induction
Inference, Validity, Soundness, Refutation
Premise, Conclusion, Entailment, Contradiction
Epistemological Terms
Perception and Knowledge Claims
Infallibility, Verifiability, Coherence Theory of Truth
Justification, Beliefs and Truths
Ethical Terms
Modern Texts
A Vindication of the Rights of Woman by Mary Wollstonecraft
Thus Spoke Zarathustra by Friedrich Nietzsche
The Critique of Pure Reason by Immanuel Kant
Medieval Texts
The Guide for the Perplexed by Moses Maimonides
The Summa Theologiae by Thomas Aquinas
The Incoherence of the Incoherence by Averroes
Ancient Texts
The Nicomachean Ethics by Aristotle
The Art of Rhetoric by Cicero
The Republic by Plato
Ethical Theories: Virtue Ethics, Utilitarianism, and Deontology
Philosophical Theories

Ethics is an important area of philosophy that deals with the principles of right and wrong. It can help us to understand our own values and determine how to act in various situations. Three of the most common ethical theories are virtue ethics, utilitarianism, and deontology. These theories each have their own approach to determining what is right and wrong and provide guidance for making ethical decisions. Virtue ethics focuses on building good character traits , such as integrity and compassion, as the basis for making ethical decisions.

Utilitarianism looks at the consequences of an action to determine if it is right or wrong. Deontology looks at the intentions behind an action and whether it follows a moral law. In this article, we will explore the three main ethical theories – virtue ethics, utilitarianism, and deontology – in more detail. We will look at their similarities and differences, how they are applied in practice, and how they can help us make more informed ethical decisions. The first theory is Virtue Ethics . This theory focuses on the character traits of an individual as the basis of moral decisions.

This means that an action should be judged not by its intention, but by its results. Finally, deontology is a non-consequentialist ethical theory which states that there are certain moral obligations that people have regardless of their consequences. According to this theory, an action is only considered morally right if it follows certain moral rules or duties. It is important to note that these ethical theories are not mutually exclusive. In many cases, it can be difficult to determine which theory is the most applicable to a given situation. For example, when deciding whether or not to donate money to a charity, a person may consider both utilitarianism and deontology.

Utilitarianism might suggest that donating the money will bring more happiness to the greatest number of people, while deontology could suggest that donating money is a moral obligation regardless of its consequences. To illustrate how these theories can be applied in different scenarios, consider a situation in which a person must decide whether or not to lie. Using virtue ethics, the decision should be based on whether or not lying goes against the individual’s moral character. Utilitarianism might suggest that lying would produce the greatest amount of pleasure or happiness for everyone involved. Finally, deontology might suggest that lying would go against a moral obligation or duty. It is important to remember that these ethical theories are not rigid rules which must be followed in every situation.

Virtue Ethics

It is important to understand these virtues and strive to embody them in order to make moral decisions. An individual's character is seen as the key factor in making ethical decisions. In addition, Virtue Ethics acknowledges that each person is unique, and that there is no one-size-fits-all answer when it comes to determining what is ethical. Virtue Ethics can be applied in various scenarios.

For example, when faced with a difficult decision, an individual can use their understanding of what makes up a good character to inform their choices. This could involve considering whether or not a course of action would lead to a more virtuous character, or if it would have a negative impact on their character. Virtue Ethics also emphasizes the importance of considering the consequences of one's actions, as well as the motivations behind them. Ultimately, Virtue Ethics encourages individuals to strive for moral excellence by developing their character and understanding of the virtues that make up good character.

It can be used to justify decisions that may be seen as counterintuitive or unpopular, as long as they bring about the greatest benefit for the greatest number of people. For example, utilitarianism may be used to justify certain government policies, such as raising taxes in order to fund social welfare programs or increasing safety regulations in order to reduce the risk of accidents or injuries. Similarly, it can be used to make decisions about how resources should be allocated, such as deciding which medical treatments should be funded or which areas of research should be prioritized. Utilitarianism can also be applied in everyday life.

This means that the morality of an action should be judged solely on whether it conforms to ethical codes and principles, not on the consequences it produces. This theory is important in making ethical decisions because it provides a clear set of moral principles that can be used to guide decision-making. By adhering to these principles, individuals can ensure that their decisions are in line with their moral values and responsibilities. For example, if one is considering whether or not to lie, a deontologist would evaluate the action based on whether it violates an ethical principle such as 'do not lie'.

Deontology can also be applied in various scenarios. For example, if an individual is considering whether to participate in a particular activity that could potentially harm another person, they would evaluate their decision based on whether it violated a moral principle such as 'do not hurt others'. Similarly, if an individual is considering whether or not to donate money to a charity, they would evaluate their decision based on whether it violated a moral principle such as 'do not neglect those in need'. Overall, deontology is an important ethical theory in making decisions because it provides a clear set of moral principles that can be used to guide decision-making.

The purpose of this article was to explain three major ethical theories – virtue ethics , utilitarianism , and deontology – and how they can be applied in various scenarios. It is important to remember that these theories are not rigid rules which must be followed in every situation but can help individuals make more informed decisions. Each theory provides a unique perspective on ethical decision-making, and understanding their differences and similarities can help people navigate complex ethical issues.

Exploring the Philosophy of Beauty

An Overview of Friedrich Nietzsche's Thus Spoke Zarathustra
Philosophy of Language: Exploring the Ways We Communicate
Exploring Subjectivism, Egoism, and Hedonism
Exploring Identity, Persistence, Time, and Space
Exploring the Socratic School: An Overview
Lateral Thinking: An Overview
Exploring Plato's Republic
Exploring the Ethical Theory of Utilitarianism
Materialism and Physicalism: Exploring the Philosophical Concepts
The Problem of Evil and Suffering: A Philosophical Exploration
Exploring the Ideas of Enlightenment Philosophy
Understanding Fallacies and Rebuttals
Exploring the Rationalism of Renaissance Philosophy
Exploring British Empiricism
Understanding Normative Ethics
Exploring 'The Summa Theologiae' by Thomas Aquinas
Understanding Inference: A Comprehensive Overview
Exploring Mary Wollstonecraft's A Vindication of the Rights of Woman
Understanding Social Contract Theory, Natural Law Theory, and Care Ethics
Exploring the Life and Work of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel

Exploring Religious Pluralism and Exclusivism

Epicurus - An Introduction to His Philosophy
Understanding Virtue Ethics, Utilitarianism and Deontology
Virtue Ethics: What it is and How it Works
Exploring Wittgenstein's Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
Understanding Fallacies and Logical Errors
Medieval Philosophy: An Overview
Understanding Deontology: Ethics and Principles
Exploring Humanism: A Comprehensive Overview
Early Islamic Philosophy
Understanding Inductive Reasoning
Exploring the Life and Legacy of Cicero: An Introduction
Exploring Noumenon: A Philosophical and Metaphysical Overview
Exploring Idealism: The History and Concepts of a Modern Philosophy
Deontology: Understanding Ethics and Morality
Exploring the Philosophy of Art
Exploring the Skeptic School of Ancient Philosophy
Exploring Nietzsche's Beyond Good and Evil
Exploring Creative Thinking and Problem Solving
Substance, Attribute, Essence, and Accident: A Philosophical and Metaphysical Overview
Classical Greek Philosophy: A Comprehensive Overview
Exploring Ontology: A Comprehensive Overview
A Comprehensive Overview of Presocratic Philosophy
Exploring the Theory of Forms: A Comprehensive Overview
Socrates: An In-Depth Exploration of the Ancient Philosopher
The Art of Rhetoric by Cicero: A Comprehensive Overview
Analytic Philosophy: A Primer
Understanding Existentialism: A Brief Introduction
Exploring Immanuel Kant's Aesthetic Theory
Exploring Beliefs and Truth: A Philosophical Guide

Altruism: Exploring the Power of Selflessness

Exploring the Life and Works of David Hume
Renaissance Philosophy: An Overview
Exploring Virtue Ethics: The Philosophical Theory
Exploring Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics
Exploring Plato's Theory of Forms
Exploring Quantitative Research Methods in Philosophy
Aristotle: A Comprehensive Overview
Exploring Romanticism: A Comprehensive Overview
Exploring Pragmatism: A Modern Philosophical School

New Articles

Altruism: Exploring the Power of Selflessness

Which cookies do you want to accept?

Ethical Theories

Definition of ethical theories.

Imagine you’re playing a complex new board game, and you need to know the rules to play it well and fairly. Ethical theories are like those rules, but for life itself. Here’s the first simple definition: Ethical theories are ideas that help us decide which actions are good and bad by leading us to ethical choices that bring positive outcomes for everyone. These theories go deeper than just following rules; they help us see the bigger picture and understand why certain actions are better than others.

The second definition is: Imagine you’re on a hike, and you come to a place where the trail splits in different directions. To find the best path, you need a map or a compass; ethical theories are like that compass for life. They show us the way to make decisions, even when it’s hard, and help us think not just about what’s good for us, but what’s best for everyone involved. Grasping these ideas can turn us into kind and wise individuals.

Types of Ethical Theories

Consequentialism : This approach says that the conclusion of the story is what matters most. We judge our actions based on their end results. If the outcome is happy or brings benefits to the most people, those actions are seen as good.
Deontology : Deontology acts like a life manual, emphasizing rules and duties. When you play by these rules, your actions are considered good even if things don’t turn out as planned.
Virtue Ethics : This type focuses on who you are as a person rather than just what you do. It teaches that having good virtues, which are positive characteristics, will naturally lead to good actions.

Examples of Ethical Theories

Utilitarianism : This represents Consequentialism because it looks at the outcome of actions. A utilitarian decision, like when a government decides to spend money on vaccines to save many lives instead of funding a few large sports stadiums, is judged good because it creates the greatest happiness for the largest number of people.
Kantian Ethics : Part of Deontology, this view suggests that we should act in ways we would want everyone to act. For example, if a store accidentally gives you too much change, Kantian ethics says you should give the extra money back because that’s what you would want others to do in your shoes.
Aristotelian Ethics : An example of Virtue Ethics, Aristotelian ethics teaches that good habits lead to a good character. By practicing honesty, like always telling the truth even when it’s difficult, you develop integrity, which then influences all your actions positively.

Why is it Important?

Understanding ethical theories is like having a toolkit for life’s toughest spots. They provide a foundation that helps us judge our actions and live in a way that’s considerate of others and ourselves. Ethical theories help us make sense of our experiences and navigate the world with fairness. By applying these principles in our day-to-day lives, we contribute to a community where kindness and thoughtfulness thrive. When we use ethical reasoning, we not just solve personal dilemmas; we also address larger issues in society, contributing to the greater good.

The roots of ethical theories are ancient, stretching back to the times when philosophers like Socrates, Plato , and Aristotle pondered over what constitutes a meaningful and good life. They sparked the curiosity that led to the development of ethics, a study that has continued to evolve for thousands of years, influencing every new generation to seek the best way to live and treat others.

Controversies

There’s much debate over which ethical theory is the right one. For example, some people argue that focusing only on outcomes could lead us to justify bad actions for a good result. Others believe that rigidly following rules can sometimes result in unfair outcomes when special circumstances are not taken into account. These ongoing discussions remind us that our understanding of ethics is always growing and changing.

Introduction of moral codes

Problems of divine origin
Nonhuman behaviour
Kinship and reciprocity
Anthropology and ethics
The Middle East
Ancient Greece
The Epicureans
Ethics in the New Testament
St. Augustine
St. Thomas Aquinas and the Scholastics
Machiavelli
The first Protestants
Early intuitionists: Cudworth, More, and Clarke
Shaftesbury and the moral sense school
Butler on self-interest and conscience
The climax of moral sense theory: Hutcheson and Hume
The intuitionist response: Price and Reid
Moore and the naturalistic fallacy
Modern intuitionism
Existentialism
Universal prescriptivism
Moral realism
Kantian constructivism: a middle ground?
Irrealist views: projectivism and expressivism
Ethics and reasons for action
The debate over consequentialism
Varieties of consequentialism
Objections to consequentialism
An ethics of prima facie duties
Rawls’s theory of justice
Rights theories
Natural law ethics
Virtue ethics
Feminist ethics
Ethical egoism
Environmental ethics
War and peace
Abortion, euthanasia, and the value of human life

What is ethics?

How is ethics different from morality, why does ethics matter, is ethics a social science.

What did Aristotle do?

Aristotle (384-322 BC), Ancient Greek philosopher and scientist. One of the most influential philosophers in the history of Western thought, Aristotle established the foundations for the modern scientific method of enquiry. Statue

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

Humanities LibreTexts - What is Ethics?
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy - Ethics and Contrastivism
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy - Empathy and Sympathy in Ethics
VIVA Open Publishing - Ethics and Society - Ethical Behavior and Moral Values in Everyday Life
Philosophy Basics - Ethics
American Medical Association - Journal of Ethics - Triage and Ethics
Psychology Today - Ethics and Morality
Government of Canada - Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat - What is ethics?
Cornell Law School - Legal Information Institute - Ethics
ethics and morality - Student Encyclopedia (Ages 11 and up)
Table Of Contents

The term ethics may refer to the philosophical study of the concepts of moral right and wrong and moral good and bad, to any philosophical theory of what is morally right and wrong or morally good and bad, and to any system or code of moral rules, principles, or values. The last may be associated with particular religions , cultures, professions, or virtually any other group that is at least partly characterized by its moral outlook.

Traditionally, ethics referred to the philosophical study of morality, the latter being a more or less systematic set of beliefs, usually held in common by a group, about how people should live. Ethics also referred to particular philosophical theories of morality. Later the term was applied to particular (and narrower) moral codes or value systems. Ethics and morality are now used almost interchangeably in many contexts, but the name of the philosophical study remains ethics .

Ethics matters because (1) it is part of how many groups define themselves and thus part of the identity of their individual members, (2) other-regarding values in most ethical systems both reflect and foster close human relationships and mutual respect and trust, and (3) it could be “rational” for a self-interested person to be moral, because his or her self-interest is arguably best served in the long run by reciprocating the moral behaviour of others.

No. Understood as equivalent to morality, ethics could be studied as a social-psychological or historical phenomenon, but in that case it would be an object of social-scientific study, not a social science in itself. Understood as the philosophical study of moral concepts, ethics is a branch of philosophy , not of social science.

Recent News

ethics , the discipline concerned with what is morally good and bad and morally right and wrong. The term is also applied to any system or theory of moral values or principles.

(Read Britannica’s biography of this author, Peter Singer.)

How should we live? Shall we aim at happiness or at knowledge, virtue , or the creation of beautiful objects? If we choose happiness, will it be our own or the happiness of all? And what of the more particular questions that face us: is it right to be dishonest in a good cause? Can we justify living in opulence while elsewhere in the world people are starving? Is going to war justified in cases where it is likely that innocent people will be killed? Is it wrong to clone a human being or to destroy human embryos in medical research? What are our obligations, if any, to the generations of humans who will come after us and to the nonhuman animals with whom we share the planet?

Ethics deals with such questions at all levels. Its subject consists of the fundamental issues of practical decision making , and its major concerns include the nature of ultimate value and the standards by which human actions can be judged right or wrong .

The terms ethics and morality are closely related. It is now common to refer to ethical judgments or to ethical principles where it once would have been more accurate to speak of moral judgments or moral principles. These applications are an extension of the meaning of ethics. In earlier usage, the term referred not to morality itself but to the field of study, or branch of inquiry, that has morality as its subject matter. In this sense, ethics is equivalent to moral philosophy.

Although ethics has always been viewed as a branch of philosophy , its all-embracing practical nature links it with many other areas of study, including anthropology , biology , economics , history , politics , sociology , and theology . Yet, ethics remains distinct from such disciplines because it is not a matter of factual knowledge in the way that the sciences and other branches of inquiry are. Rather, it has to do with determining the nature of normative theories and applying these sets of principles to practical moral problems.

This article, then, will deal with ethics as a field of philosophy, especially as it has developed in the West. For coverage of religious conceptions of ethics and the ethical systems associated with world religions, see Buddhism ; Christianity ; Confucianism ; Hinduism ; Jainism ; Judaism ; Sikhism .

The origins of ethics

Mythical accounts.

When did ethics begin and how did it originate? If one has in mind ethics proper—i.e., the systematic study of what is morally right and wrong—it is clear that ethics could have come into existence only when human beings started to reflect on the best way to live. This reflective stage emerged long after human societies had developed some kind of morality, usually in the form of customary standards of right and wrong conduct . The process of reflection tended to arise from such customs, even if in the end it may have found them wanting. Accordingly, ethics began with the introduction of the first moral codes .

Virtually every human society has some form of myth to explain the origin of morality. In the Louvre in Paris there is a black Babylonian column with a relief showing the sun god Shamash presenting the code of laws to Hammurabi (died c. 1750 bce ), known as the Code of Hammurabi . The Hebrew Bible ( Old Testament ) account of God’s giving the Ten Commandments to Moses (flourished 14th–13th century bce ) on Mount Sinai might be considered another example. In the dialogue Protagoras by Plato (428/427–348/347 bce ), there is an avowedly mythical account of how Zeus took pity on the hapless humans, who were physically no match for the other beasts. To make up for these deficiencies, Zeus gave humans a moral sense and the capacity for law and justice , so that they could live in larger communities and cooperate with one another.

That morality should be invested with all the mystery and power of divine origin is not surprising. Nothing else could provide such strong reasons for accepting the moral law. By attributing a divine origin to morality, the priesthood became its interpreter and guardian and thereby secured for itself a power that it would not readily relinquish. This link between morality and religion has been so firmly forged that it is still sometimes asserted that there can be no morality without religion. According to this view, ethics is not an independent field of study but rather a branch of theology ( see moral theology ).

There is some difficulty, already known to Plato, with the view that morality was created by a divine power. In his dialogue Euthyphro , Plato considered the suggestion that it is divine approval that makes an action good . Plato pointed out that, if this were the case, one could not say that the gods approve of such actions because they are good. Why then do they approve of them? Is their approval entirely arbitrary? Plato considered this impossible and so held that there must be some standards of right or wrong that are independent of the likes and dislikes of the gods. Modern philosophers have generally accepted Plato’s argument, because the alternative implies that if, for example, the gods had happened to approve of torturing children and to disapprove of helping one’s neighbours, then torture would have been good and neighbourliness bad.

Table of Contents
Random Entry
Chronological
Editorial Information
About the SEP
Editorial Board
How to Cite the SEP
Special Characters
Advanced Tools
Support the SEP
PDFs for SEP Friends
Make a Donation
SEPIA for Libraries
Entry Contents

Bibliography

Academic tools.

Friends PDF Preview
Author and Citation Info
Back to Top

Moral Theory

There is much disagreement about what, exactly, constitutes a moral theory. Some of that disagreement centers on the issue of demarcating the moral from other areas of practical normativity, such as the ethical and the aesthetic. Some disagreement centers on the issue of what a moral theory’s aims and functions are. In this entry, both questions will be addressed. However, this entry is about moral theories as theories , and is not a survey of specific theories, though specific theories will be used as examples.

1.1 Common-sense Morality

1.2 contrasts between morality and other normative domains, 2.1 the tasks of moral theory, 2.2 theory construction, 3. criteria, 4. decision procedures and practical deliberation, other internet resources, related entries, 1. morality.

When philosophers engage in moral theorizing, what is it that they are doing? Very broadly, they are attempting to provide a systematic account of morality. Thus, the object of moral theorizing is morality, and, further, morality as a normative system.

At the most minimal, morality is a set of norms and principles that govern our actions with respect to each other and which are taken to have a special kind of weight or authority (Strawson 1961). More fundamentally, we can also think of morality as consisting of moral reasons, either grounded in some more basic value, or, the other way around, grounding value (Raz 1999).

It is common, also, to hold that moral norms are universal in the sense that they apply to and bind everyone in similar circumstances. The principles expressing these norms are also thought to be general , rather than specific, in that they are formulable “without the use of what would be intuitively recognized as proper names, or rigged definite descriptions” (Rawls 1979, 131). They are also commonly held to be impartial , in holding everyone to count equally.

… Common-sense is… an exercise of the judgment unaided by any Art or system of rules : such an exercise as we must necessarily employ in numberless cases of daily occurrence ; in which, having no established principles to guide us … we must needs act on the best extemporaneous conjectures we can form. He who is eminently skillful in doing this, is said to possess a superior degree of Common-Sense. (Richard Whatley, Elements of Logic , 1851, xi–xii)

“Common-Sense Morality”, as the term is used here, refers to our pre-theoretic set of moral judgments or intuitions or principles. [ 1 ] When we engage in theory construction (see below) it is these common-sense intuitions that provide a touchstone to theory evaluation. Henry Sidgwick believed that the principles of Common-Sense Morality were important in helping us understand the “first” principle or principles of morality. [ 2 ] Indeed, some theory construction explicitly appeals to puzzles in common-sense morality that need resolution – and hence, need to be addressed theoretically.

Features of commons sense morality are determined by our normal reactions to cases which in turn suggest certain normative principles or insights. For example, one feature of common-sense morality that is often remarked upon is the self/other asymmetry in morality, which manifests itself in a variety of ways in our intuitive reactions. For example, many intuitively differentiate morality from prudence in holding that morality concerns our interactions with others, whereas prudence is concerned with the well-being of the individual, from that individual’s point of view.

Also, according to our common-sense intuitions we are allowed to pursue our own important projects even if such pursuit is not “optimific” from the impartial point of view (Slote 1985). It is also considered permissible, and even admirable, for an agent to sacrifice her own good for the sake of another even though that is not optimific. However, it is impermissible, and outrageous, for an agent to similarly sacrifice the well-being of another under the same circumstances. Samuel Scheffler argued for a view in which consequentialism is altered to include agent-centered prerogatives, that is, prerogatives to not act so as to maximize the good (Scheffler 1982).

Our reactions to certain cases also seem to indicate a common-sense commitment to the moral significance of the distinction between intention and foresight, doing versus allowing, as well as the view that distance between agent and patient is morally relevant (Kamm 2007).

Philosophers writing in empirical moral psychology have been working to identify other features of common-sense morality, such as how prior moral evaluations influence how we attribute moral responsibility for actions (Alicke et. al. 2011; Knobe 2003).

What many ethicists agree upon is that common-sense is a bit of a mess. It is fairly easy to set up inconsistencies and tensions between common-sense commitments. The famous Trolley Problem thought experiments illustrate how situations which are structurally similar can elicit very different intuitions about what the morally right course of action would be (Foot 1975). We intuitively believe that it is worse to kill someone than to simply let the person die. And, indeed, we believe it is wrong to kill one person to save five others in the following scenario:

David is a great transplant surgeon. Five of his patients need new parts—one needs a heart, the others need, respectively, liver, stomach, spleen, and spinal cord—but all are of the same, relatively rare, blood-type. By chance, David learns of a healthy specimen with that very blood-type. David can take the healthy specimen's parts, killing him, and install them in his patients, saving them. Or he can refrain from taking the healthy specimen's parts, letting his patients die. (Thomson 1976, 206)

And yet, in the following scenario we intuitively view it entirely permissible, and possibly even obligatory, to kill one to save five:

Edward is the driver of a trolley, whose brakes have just failed. On the track ahead of him are five people; the banks are so steep that they will not be able to get off the track in time. The track has a spur leading off to the right, and Edward can turn the trolley onto it. Unfortunately there is one person on the right-hand track. Edward can turn the trolley, killing the one; or he can refrain from turning the trolley, killing the five. (Thomson 1976, 206).

Theorizing is supposed to help resolve those tensions in a principled way. Theory construction attempts to provide guidance in how to resolve such tensions and how to understand them.

1.2.1 Morality and Ethics

Ethics is generally understood to be the study of “living well as a human being”. This is the topic of works such as Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics , in which the aim of human beings is to exemplify human excellence of character. The sense in which we understand it here is that ethics is broader than morality, and includes considerations of personal development of oneself and loved ones. This personal development is important to a life well lived, intuitively, since our very identities are centered on projects that we find important. Bernard Williams and others refer to these projects as “ground projects”. These are the sources of many of our reasons for acting. For Williams, if an agent seeks to adopt moral considerations, or be guided by them, then important ethical considerations are neglected, such as personal integrity and authenticity (Williams 1977; Wolf 1982). However, Williams has a very narrow view of what he famously termed “the morality system” (Williams 1985).

Williams lists a variety of objectionable features of the morality system, including the inescapability of moral obligations, the overridingness of moral obligation, impartiality , and the fact that in the morality system there is a push towards generalization .

There has been considerable discussion of each of these features of the morality system, and since Williams, a great deal of work on the part of standard moral theorists on how each theory addresses the considerations he raised. Williams’ critique of the morality system was part of a general criticism of moral theory in the 1980s on the grounds of its uselessness, harmfulness, and even its impossibility (Clarke 1987). This anti-theory trend was prompted by the same dissatisfaction with consequentialism and deontology that led to the resurgence of Virtue Ethics.

A major criticism of this view is that it has a very narrow view of what counts as a moral theory. Thus, some of these approaches simply rejected some features of William’s characterization of the morality system, such as impartiality. Others, however, Williams’ included, attacked the very project of moral theory. This is the ‘anti-theory’ attack on moral theorizing. For example, Annette Baier argued that morality cannot be captured in a system of rules, and this was a very popular theme amongst early virtue ethicists. On this view, moral theory which systematizes and states the moral principles that ought to guide actions is simply impossible: “Norms in the form of virtues may be essentially imprecise in some crucial ways, may be mutually referential, but not hierarchically orderable, may be essentially self-referential” (Baier 220).

Robert Louden even argued that the best construal of virtue ethics is not as an ethical theory, but as anti-theory that should not be evaluated as attempting to theorize morality at all. (Louden 1990). According to Louden, moral theories are formulated to a variety of reasons, including to provide solutions to problems, formulas for action, universal principles, etc. Louden notes that this characterization is very narrow and many would object to it, but he views anti-theory not so much as a position against any kind of moral theorizing, but simply the kind that he viewed as predominant prior to the advent of Virtue Ethics. This is a much less severe version of anti-theory as it, for example, doesn’t seem to regard weightiness or importance of moral reasons as a problem.

Some of the problems that Williams and other anti-theorists have posed for morality, based on the above characteristics, are:

Morality is too demanding and pervasive: that is, the view that moral reasons are weighty indicates that we should be giving them priority over other sorts of reasons. Further, they leach into all aspects of our lives, leaving very little morally neutral.

Morality is alienating. There are a variety of ways in which morality can be alienating. As Adrian Piper notes, morality might alienate the agent from herself or might alienate the agent from others – impartiality and universality might lead to this, for example (Piper 1987; Stocker 1976). Another way we can understand alienation is that the agent is alienated from the true justifications of her own actions – this is one way to hold that theories which opt for indirection can lead to alienation (see section 4 below).

Morality, because it is impartial, makes no room for special obligations. That is, if the right action is the one that is impartial between persons, then it does not favor the near and dear. On this picture it is difficult to account for the moral requirements that parents have towards their own children, and friends have towards each other. These requirements are, by their nature, not impartial.

Morality is committed to providing guides for action that can be captured in a set of rules or general principles. That is, morality is codifiable and the rules of morality are general.

Morality requires too much. The basic worry is that the morality system is voracious and is creeping into all aspects of our lives, to the detriment of other important values. The worry expressed by 4 takes a variety of forms. For example, some take issue with a presupposition of 4, arguing that there are no moral principles at all if we think of these principles as guiding action . Some argue that there are no moral principles that are complete, because morality is not something that is codifiable . And, even if morality was codifiable, the ‘principles’ would be extremely specific , and not qualify as principles at all.

Since Williams’ work, philosophers have tried to respond to the alienation worry by, for example, providing accounts of the ways in which a person’s reasons can guide without forming an explicit part of practical deliberation. Peter Railton, for example, argues in favor of a form of objective consequentialism, Sophisticated Consequentialism , in which the rightness of an action is a function of its actual consequences (Railton 1984). On Railton’s view, one can be a good consequentialist without being alienated from loved ones. Though not attempting to defend moral theory per se , other writers have also provided accounts of how agents can act on the basis of reasons – and thus perform morally worthy actions, even though these reasons are not explicitly articulated in their practical deliberations (Arpaly 2002; Markovits 2014). Deontologists have argued that autonomous action needn’t involve explicit invocation of, for example, the Categorical Imperative (Herman 1985). Generally, what characterizes these moves is the idea that the justifying reasons are present in some form in the agent’s psychology – they are recoverable from the agent’s psychology – but need not be explicitly articulated or invoked by the agent in acting rightly.

One way to elaborate on this strategy is to argue that the morally good agent is one who responds to the right sorts of reasons, even though the agent can’t articulate the nature of the response (Arpaly 2002). This strategy makes no appeal to codifiable principles, and is compatible with a wide variety of approaches to developing a moral theory. It relies heavily on the concept, of course, of “reason” and “moral reason,” which many writers on moral issues take to be fundamental or basic in any case.

There has also been debate concerning the proper scope of morality, and how moral theories can address problems relating to impartiality. Kant and the classical utilitarians believed that moral reasons are impartial, what others have termed agent-neutral. Indeed, this is one point of criticism that virtue ethics has made of these two theories. One might argue that moral reasons are impartial, but that there are other reasons that successfully compete with them – reasons relating to the near and dear, for example, or one’s own ground projects. Or, one could hold that morality includes special reasons, arising from special obligations, that also morally justify our actions.

The first strategy has been pursued by Bernard Williams and other “anti-theorists”. Again, Williams argues that morality is a special system that we would be better off without (Williams 1985). In the morality system we see a special sense of “obligation” – moral obligation – which possesses certain features. For example, moral obligation is inescapable according to the morality system. A theory such as Kant’s, for example, holds that we must act in accordance with the Categorical Imperative. It is not optional. This is because morality is represented as having authority over us in ways that even demand sacrifice of our personal projects, of the very things that make our lives go well for us. This seems especially clear for Utilitarianism, which holds that we must maximize the good, and falling short of maximization is wrong . A Kantian will try to avoid this problem by appealing to obligations that are less demanding, the imperfect ones. But, as Williams points out, these are still obligations , and as such can only be overridden by other obligations. Thus, the theories also tend to present morality as pervasive in that morality creeps into every aspect of our lives, making no room for neutral decisions. For example, even decisions about what shoes to wear to work becomes a moral one:

Once the journey into more general obligations has started, we may begin to get into trouble – not just philosophical trouble, but the conscience trouble – with finding room for morally indifferent actions. I have already mentioned the possible moral conclusion that one may take some particular course of action. That means that there is nothing else I am obliged to do. But if we have accepted general and indeterminate obligations to further various moral objectives…they will be waiting to provide work for idle hands… (Williams 1985, 181)

He goes on to write that in order to get out of this problem, “…I shall need one of those fraudulent items, a duty to myself” (Williams 1985, 182). Kantian Ethics does supply this. Many find this counterintuitive, since the self/other asymmetry seems to capture the prudence/morality distinction, but Kantians such as Tom Hill, jr. have made strong cases for at least some moral duties to the self. In any case, for writers such as Williams, so much the worse for morality .

Other writers, also concerned about the problems that Williams has raised argue, instead, that morality does make room for our partial concerns and projects, such as the norms governing our relationships, and our meaningful projects. Virtue ethicists, for example, are often comfortable pointing out that morality is not thoroughly impartial because there are virtues of partiality. Being a good mother involves having a preference for the well-being of one’s own children. The mother who really is impartial would be a very bad mother, lacking in the appropriate virtues.

Another option is to hold that there are partial norms, but those partial norms are themselves justified on impartial grounds. This can be spelled out in a variety of different ways. Consider Marcia Baron’s defense of impartiality, where she notes that critics of impartiality are mistaken because they confuse levels of justification: “Critics suppose that impartialists insisting on impartiality at the level of rules or principles are committed to insisting on impartiality at the level of deciding what to do in one’s day-to-day activities” (Baron 1991). This is a mistake because impartialists can justify partial norms by appealing to impartial rules or principles. She is correct about this. Even Jeremy Bentham believed, for example, that the principle of utility ought not be applied in every case, though he mainly appealed to efficiency costs of using the principle all the time. But one can appeal to other considerations. Frank Jackson uses an analogy with predators to argue that partial norms are strategies for maximizing the good, they offer the best chance of actually doing so given our limitations (Jackson 1991). Similarly, a Kantian such as Tom Hill, jr., as Baron notes, can argue that impartiality is part of an ideal, and ought not govern our day-to-day lives (Hill 1987). Does this alienate people from others? The typical mother shows the right amount of preference for her child, let’s say, but doesn’t herself think that this is justified on the basis of promoting the good, for example. A friend visits another in the hospital and also does not view the partiality as justified by any further principles. But this is no more alienating than someone being able to make good arguments and criticize bad ones without a knowledge of inference rules. Maybe it is better to have an awareness of the underlying justification, but for some theories even that is debatable. For an objective theorist (see below) it may be that knowing the underlying justification can interfere with doing the right thing, in which case it is better not to know. For some theorists, however, such as neo-Aristotelian virtue ethicists, a person is not truly virtuous without such knowledge and understanding, though Rosalind Hursthouse (1999) does not make this a requirement of right action.

Recently consequentialists have been approaching this issue through the theory of value itself, arguing that there are agent-relative forms of value. This approach is able to explain the intuitions that support partial moral norms while retaining the general structure of consequentialism (Sen 2000). Douglas Portmore, for example, argues for a form of consequentialism that he terms “commonsense consequentialism” as it is able to accommodate many of our everyday moral intuitions (Portmore 2011). He does so by arguing that (1) the deontic status of an act, whether it is right or wrong, is determined by what reasons the agent has for performing it – if an agent has a decisive reason to perform the act in question, then it is morally required. Combined with (2) a teleological view of practical reasons in which our reasons for performing an action are a function of what we have reason to prefer or desire we are led to a form of act-consequentialism but one which is open to accepting that we have reason to prefer or desire the well-being of the near and dear over others.

Though much of this is controversial, there is general agreement that moral reasons are weighty , are not egoistic – that is, to be contrasted with prudential reasons, and are concerned with issues of value [duty, fittingness].

1.2.2. Morality and Aesthetics

Moral modes of evaluation are distinct from the aesthetic in terms of their content, but also in terms of their authority. So, for example, works of art are evaluated as “beautiful” or “ugly”, and those evaluations are not generally considered as universal or as objective as moral evaluations. These distinctions between moral evaluation and aesthetic evaluation have been challenged, and are the subject of some interesting debates in metaethics on the nature of both moral and aesthetic norms and the truth-conditions of moral and aesthetic claims. But, considered intuitively, aesthetics seems at least less objective than morality.

A number of writers have noted that we need to be cognizant of the distinction between moral norms and the norms specific to other normative areas in order to avoid fallacies of evaluation, and much discussion has centered on a problem in aesthetics termed the “Moralistic Fallacy” (D’Arms and Jacobson 2000).

One challenge that the anti-theorists have raised for morality was to note that in a person’s life there will be certain norm clashes – including clashes between types of norms such as the moral and the aesthetic. It is giving too much prominence to the moral that judges a person’s life as going well relative to the fulfillment or respect of those norms. Can’t a human life go well, even when that life sacrifices morality for aesthetics?

This sort of debate has a long history in moral theory. For example, it arose as a form of criticism of G. E. Moore’s Ideal Utilitarianism, which treated beauty as an intrinsic good, and rendering trade-offs between behaving well towards others and creating beauty at least in principle justified morally (Moore 1903). But the anti-theorists do not pursue this method of accommodating the aesthetic, instead arguing that it is a separate normative realm which has its own weight and significance in human flourishing.

2. Theory and Theoretical Virtues

There is agreement that theories play some kind of systematizing role, and that one function is to examine important concepts relevant to morality and moral practice and the connections, if any, between them. For example, one very common view in the middle of the 20 th century, attributed to John Rawls, was to view moral theory as primarily interested in understanding the ‘right’ and the ‘good’ and connections between the two (Rawls). Priority claims are often a central feature in the systematizing role of moral theory. Related to this is the issue of explanatory, or theoretical, depth . That is, the deeper the explanation goes, the better.

Theories also strive for simplicity , coherence , and accuracy . The fewer epicycles the theory has to postulate the better, the parts of the theory should fit well together. For example, the theory should not contain inconsistent principles, or have inconsistent implications. The theory should cover the phenomena in question. In the case of moral theories, the phenomena in question are thought to be our considered moral intuitions or judgements. Another coherence condition involves the theory cohering with a person’s set of considered judgments, as well.

One last feature that needs stressing, particularly for moral theories, is applicability . One criticism of some normative ethical theories is that they are not applicable. For example, Virtue Ethics has been criticized for not providing an account of what our moral obligations are – appealing to what the virtuous person would do in the circumstances would seem to set a very high bar or doesn’t answer the relevant question about how we should structure laws guiding people on what their social obligations are. Similarly, objective consequentialists, who understand “right action” in terms of actual consequences have been criticized for rendering what counts as a right action in a given circumstance unknowable, and thus useless as a guide to action. Both approaches provide responses to this worry, but this supports the claim that a desideratum of a moral theory is that it be applicable.

One task (though this is somewhat controversial) of a moral theory is to give an account of right actions. Often, this will involve an explication of what counts as good – some theories then get spelled out in terms of how they approach the good, by maximizing it, producing enough of it, honoring it, etc. In addition, some theories explicate the right in terms of acting in accordance with one’s duties, or acting as a virtuous person would act. In these cases the notions of ‘duty’ and ‘virtue’ become important to the overall analysis, and one function of moral theory is to explore the systematic connections between duty or virtue and the right and the good.

Moral theories also have both substantive and formal aims. Moral theories try to provide criteria for judging actions. It might be that the criterion is simple, such as right actions maximize the good, or it may be complex, such as the right action is the one that gives adequate weight to each competing duty. Sometimes, in recognition that there is not always “the” right action, the theory simply provides an account of wrongness, or permissibility and impermissibility, which allows that a range of actions might count as “right”.

In addition to simply providing criteria for right or virtuous action, or for being a virtuous person, a given moral theory, for example, will attempt to explain why something, like an action or character trait, has a particular moral quality, such as rightness or virtuousness. Some theories view rightness as grounded in or explained by value . Some view rightness as a matter of reasons that are prior to value. In each case, to provide an explanation of the property of ‘rightness’ or ‘virtuousness’ will be to provide an account of what the grounding value is, or an account of reasons for action.

In addition, moral theories may also provide decision-procedures to employ in determining how to act rightly or virtuously, conditions on being good or virtuous, or conditions on morally appropriate practical deliberation. Thus, the theory provides substance to evaluation and reasons. However, moral theories, in virtue of providing an explanatory framework, help us see connections between criteria and decision-procedures, as well as provide other forms of systemization. Thus, moral theories will be themselves evaluated according to their theoretical virtues: simplicity, explanatory power, elegance, etc. To evaluate moral theories as theories , each needs to be evaluated in terms of how well it succeeds in achieving these theoretical goals.

There are many more specialized elements to moral theories as well. For example, a moral theory often concerns itself with features of moral psychology relevant to action and character, such as motives, intentions, emotions, and reasons responsiveness. A moral theory that incorporates consideration of consequences into the determination of moral quality, will also be concerned with issues surrounding the proper aggregation of those consequences, and the scope of the consequences to be considered.

There’s been a long history of comparing moral theories to other sorts of theories, such as scientific ones. For example, in meta-ethics one issue has to do with the nature of moral “evidence” on analogy with scientific evidence. On what Ronald Dworkin terms the “natural model” the truths of morality are discovered, just as the truths of science are (Dworkin 1977, 160). It is our considered intuitions that provide the clues to discover these moral truths, just as what is observable to us provides the evidence to discover scientific truths. He compared this model with the “constructive model” in which the intuitions themselves are features of the theory being constructed and are not analogous to observations of the external world.

Yet, even if we decide that morality lacks the same type of phenomena to be accounted for as science, morality clearly figures into our normative judgments and reactions. One might view these – our intuitions about moral cases, for example – to provide the basic data that needs to be accounted for by a theory on either model.

One way to “account for” our considered intuitions would be to debunk them. There is a long tradition of this in moral philosophy as well. When scholars provided genealogies of morality that explained our considered intuitions in terms of social or evolutionary forces that are not sensitive the truth, for example, they were debunking morality by undercutting the authority of our intuitions to provide insight into it (Nietzsche 1887 [1998], Joyce 2001, Street 2006). In this entry, however, we consider the ways in which moral theorists have constructed their accounts by taking the intuitions seriously as something to be systematized, explained, and as something that can be applied to generate the correct moral decisions or outcomes.

Along these lines, one method used in theory construction would involve the use of reflective equilibrium and inference to the best explanation. For example, one might notice an apparent inconsistency in moral judgements regarding two structurally similar cases and then try to figure out what principle or set of principles would achieve consistency between them. In this case, the theorist is trying to figure out what best explains both of those intuitions. But one also might, after thinking about principles one already accepts, or finds plausible, reject one of those intuitions on the basis of it not cohering with the rest of one’s considered views. But full theory construction will go beyond this because of the fully theoretical virtues discussed earlier. We want a systematic account that coheres well not only with itself, but with other things that we believe on the basis of good evidence.

Consider the following:

Malory has promised to take Chris grocery shopping. Unfortunately, as Malory is leaving the apartment, Sam calls with an urgent request: please come over to my house right now, my pipes have broken and I need help! Torn, Malory decides to help Sam, and thus breaks a promise to Chris.

Has Malory done the right thing? The virtuous thing? Malory has broken a promise, which is pro tanto wrong, but Sam is in an emergency and needs help right away. Even if it is clear that what Malory did was right in the circumstances, it is an interesting question as to why it is right. What can we appeal to in making these sorts of judgments? This brings to light the issue of how one morally justifies one’s actions. This is the task of understanding what the justifying reasons are for our actions. What makes an action the thing to do in the circumstances? This is the criterion of rightness (or wrongness). We will focus on the criterion of rightness, though the criterion issue comes up with other modes of moral evaluation, such as judging an action to be virtuous, or judging it to be good in some respect, even if not right. Indeed, some writers have argued that ‘morally right’ should be jettisoned from modern secular ethics, as it presupposes a conceptual framework left over from religiously based accounts which assume there is a God (Anscombe 1958). We will leave these worries aside for now, however, and focus on standard accounts of criteria.

The following are some toy examples that exhibit differing structural features for moral theories and set out different criteria:

Consequentialism . The right action is the action that produces good amongst the options open to the agent at the time of action (Singer). The most well-known version of this theory is Classical Utilitarianism, which holds that the right action promotes pleasure (Mill). Kantian Deontology . The morally worthy action is in accordance with the Categorical Imperative, which requires an agent refrain from acting in a way that fails to respect the rational nature of other persons (Kant). Rossian Deontology . The right action is the action that best accords with the fulfillment and/or non-violation of one’s prima facie duties (Ross). Contractualism . An action is morally wrong if it is an act that would be forbidden by principles that rational persons could not reasonably reject (Scanlon). Virtue Ethics . The right action is the action that a virtuous person would characteristically perform in the circumstances (Hursthouse 1999).

These principles set out the criterion or standard for evaluation of actions. They do not necessarily tell us how to perform right actions, and are not, in themselves, decision-procedures, though they can easily be turned into decision procedures, such as: you ought to try to perform the action that maximizes the good amongst the options available to you at the time of action. This might not be, and in ordinary circumstance probably isn’t, a very good decision-procedure, and would itself need to be evaluated according to the criterion set out by the theory.

These theories can be divided, roughly, into the deontological, consequentialist, and virtue ethical categories. There has been a lively debate about how, exactly, to delineate these categories. Some have held that deontological theories were just those theories that were not consequentialist. A popular conception of consequentialist theories is that they are reductionist in a particular way – that is, in virtue of reducing deontic features of actions (e.g. rightness, obligatoriness) to facts about an agent’s options and the consequences of those options (Smith 2009). If that is the case, then it seems that deontological approaches are just the ones that are not reductive in this manner. However, this fails to capture the distinctive features of many forms of virtue ethics, which are neither consequentialist nor necessarily concerned with what we ought to do , our duties as opposed to what sorts of persons we should be.

One way to distinguish consequentialist from deontological theories is in terms of how each approaches value. Philip Pettit has suggested that while consequentialist theories required promotion of value, deontological theories recommend that value be honored or respected. On each of these views, value is an important component of the theory, and theories will be partially delineated according to their theory of value. A utilitarian such as Jeremey Bentham believes that hedonism is the correct theory of value, whereas someone such as G. E. Moore, a utilitarian but a pluralist regarding value, believes that hedonism is much too narrow an account. A Kantian, on the other hand, views value as grounded in rational nature, in a will conforming to the Categorical Imperative.

Because of the systematizing function of moral theory discussed earlier, the simplest account is to be preferred and thus there is a move away from endorsing value pluralism. Of course, as intuitive pressure is put on each of the simpler alternatives, a pluralistic account of criteria for rightness and wrongness has the advantage of according best with moral intuitions.

Reasons-first philosophers will delineate the theories somewhat differently. For example, one might understand goodness as a matter of what we have reason to desire, in which case what we have reason to desire is prior to goodness rather than the other way around. Value is still an important component of the theories, it is simply that the value is grounded in reasons.

Another distinction between normative theories is that between subjective and objective versions of a type of theory. This distinction cuts across other categories. For example, there are subjective forms of all the major moral theories, and objective versions of many. An objective standard of right holds that the agent must actually meet the standard – and meeting the standard is something ‘objective’, not dependent on the agent’s psychological states – in order to count as right or virtuous. Subjective standards come in two broad forms:

Psychology sensitive : are the justifying reasons part of the agent’s deliberative processes? Or, more weakly, are they “recoverable” from the agent’s psychology [perhaps, for example, the agent has a commitment to the values that provide the reasons].
Evidence sensitive : the right action isn’t the one that actually meets the standard, but instead, is the action that the agent could foresee would meet that standard. [there are many different ways to spell this out, depending on the degree of evidence that is relevant: in terms of what the agent actually foresees, what is foreseeable by the agent given what the agent knows, is foreseeable by someone in possession of a reasonable amount of evidence, etc.]

Of course, these two can overlap. For theorists who are evaluational internalists , evidence-sensitivity doesn’t seem like a plausible way of spelling out the standard, except, perhaps, indirectly. The distinction frequently comes up in Consequentialism, where the Objective standard is taken to be something like: the right action is the action that actually promotes the good and the Subjective standard is something like: the right action is the action that promotes the good by the agent’s own lights (psychology sensitive) or the right action is the action that promotes the foreseeable good, given evidence available at the time of action (evidence sensitive standard). It is certainly possible for other moral standards to be objective. For example, the right action is the action that the virtuous person would perform, even though the agent does not realize it is what the virtuous agent would do in the circumstances, and even if the person with the best available evidence couldn’t realize it is what the virtuous person would do in the circumstances.

We certainly utter locutions that support both subjective and objective uses of what we ‘ought’ to do, or what is ‘right’. Frank Jackson notes this when he writes:

…we have no alternative but to recognize a whole range of oughts – what she ought to do by the light of her beliefs at the time of action, …what she ought to do by the lights of one or another onlooker who has different information on the subject, and, what is more, what she ought to do by God’s lights…that is, by the lights of one who knows what will and would happen for each and every course of action. (Jackson 1991, 471).

For Jackson, the primary ought, the primary sense of ‘rightness’ for an action, is the one that is “most immediately relevant to action” since, otherwise, we have a problem of understanding how the action is the agent’s. Thus, the subjective ‘ought’ is primary in the sense that this is the one that ethical theory should be concerned with (Jackson 1991). Each type of theorist makes use of our ordinary language intuitions to make their case. But one desideratum of a theory is that it not simply reflect those intuitions, but also provides the tools to critically analyze them. Given that our language allows for both sorts of ‘ought,’ the interesting issue becomes which, if either, has primacy in terms of actually providing the standard by which other things are evaluated? Moral theory needn’t only be concerned with what the right action is from the agent’s point of view.

There are three possibilities:

neither has primacy
the subjective has primacy
the objective has primacy

First off we need to understand what we mean by “primacy”. Again, for Frank Jackson, the primary sense of ‘right’ or ‘ought’ is subjective, since what we care about is the ‘right’ that refers to an inward story, the story of our agency, so to speak. On this view, the objective and subjective senses may have no relationship to each other at all, and which counts as primary simply depends upon our interests. However, the issue that concerns us here is whether or not one sense can be accounted for in terms of the other. Option 1 holds that there is no explanatory connection. That is not as theoretically satisfying. Option 2 holds either there really is no meaningful objective sense, just the subjective sense, or the objective sense is understood in terms of the subjective.

Let’s look at the objective locution again “He did the right thing, but he didn’t know it at the time (or he had no way of knowing it at the time)”. Perhaps all this means is “He did what someone with all the facts and correct set of values would have judged right by their own lights” – this would be extensionally the same as “He performed the action with the best actual consequences”. This is certainly a possible account of what objective right means which makes use of a subjective standard. But it violates the spirit of the subjective standard, since it ties rightness neither to the psychology of the agent, or the evidence that is actually available to the agent. For that reason, it seems more natural to opt for 3. An advantage of this option is that gives us a nice, unified account regarding the connection between the objective and the subjective. Subjective standards, then, are standards of praise and blame, which are themselves evaluable according to the objective standard. Over time, people are in a position to tell whether or not a standard actually works in a given type of context. Or, perhaps it turns out that there are several standards of blame that differ in terms of severity. For example, if someone acts negligently a sensible case can be made that the person is blameworthy but not as blameworthy as if they had acted intentionally.

As to the worry that the objective standard doesn’t provide action guidance, the objective theorist can hold that action guidance is provided by the subjective standards of praise/blameworthiness. Further, the standard itself can provide what we need for action guidance through normative review (Driver 2012). Normative review is a retrospective look at what does in fact meet the standard, and under what circumstances.

Now, consider a virtue ethical example. The right action is the action that is the actual action that a virtuous person would perform characteristically, in the circumstances, rather than the action that the agent believes is the one the virtuous person would perform. Then we evaluate an agent’s “v-rules” in terms of how close they meet the virtuous ideal.

Another function of moral theory is to provide a decision procedure for people to follow so as to best insure they perform right actions. Indeed, some writers, such as R. M. Hare hold action guidance to be the function of the moral principles of the theory (Hare 1965). This raises the question of what considerations are relevant to the content of such principles – for example, should the principles be formulated taking into account the epistemic limitations of most human beings? The requirement that moral principles be action guiding is what Holly Smith terms the “Useability Demand”: “…an acceptable moral principle must be useable for guiding moral decisions…” (Smith 2020, 11). Smith enumerates different forms satisfaction of this demand can take, and notes that how one spells out a principle in order to meet the demand will depend upon how the moral theorist views moral success. For example, whether or not success is achieved in virtue of simply making the right decision or if, in addition to making the right decision, the agent must also have successful follow-through on that decision.

There has been enormous debate on the issue of what is involved in following a rule or principle, and some skepticism that this is in fact what we are doing when we take ourselves to be following a rule. (Kripke 1982) Some virtue theorists believe that it is moral perception that actually does the guiding, and that a virtuous person is able to perceive what is morally relevant and act accordingly (McDowell 1979).

As discussed earlier in the section on criteria, however, this is also controversial in that some theorists believe that decision procedures themselves are not of fundamental significance. Again, objective consequentialist who believes that the fundamental task of theory is to establish a criterion for right argues that decision procedures will themselves be established and evaluated on the basis of how well they get us to actually achieving the right. Thus, the decision-procedures are derivative. Others, such as subjective consequentialists, will argue that the decision-procedures specify the criterion in the sense that following the decision-procedure itself is sufficient for meeting the criterion. For example, an objective consequentialist will hold that the right action maximizes the good, whereas the subjective consequentialist might hold that the right action is to try to maximize the good, whether or not one actually achieves it (Mason 2003 and 2019). Following the decision-procedure itself, then, is the criterion.

The distinction between criterion and decision-procedure has been acknowledged and discussed at least since Sidgwick, though it was also mentioned by earlier ethicists. This distinction allows ethical theories to avoid wildly implausible implications. For example, if the standard that the theory recommends is ‘promote the good’ it would be a mistake to think that ‘promote the good’ needs to be part of the agent’s deliberation. The consequentialist might say that, instead, it is an empirical issue as to what the theory is going to recommend as a decision-procedure, and that recommendation could vary from context to context. There will surely be circumstances in which it would be best to think in terms of meeting the standard itself, but again that is an empirical issue. Likewise, it is open to a Virtue Ethicist to hold that the right action is the one the virtuous agent would perform in the circumstances, but also hold that the agent’s deliberative processes need not make reference to the standard. Pretty much all theories will want to make some space between the standard and the decision-procedure in order to avoid a requirement that agent’s must think in terms of the correct standard, in order to act rightly, or even act with moral worth. There is a distinction to be made between doing the right thing, and doing the right thing for the right reasons . Doing the right thing for the right reasons makes the action a morally worthy one, as it exhibits a good quality of the will. It is possible for a theory to hold that the ‘good will’ is one that understands the underlying justification of an action, but that seems overly demanding. If consequentialism is the correct theory, then demanding that people must explicitly act intentionally to maximize the good would result in fewer morally worthy actions than seems plausible. The ‘for the right reasons’ must be understood as allowing for no explicit invocation of the true justifying standard.

This has led to the development of theories that advocate indirection. First, we need to distinguish two ways that indirection figures into moral philosophy.

Indirection in evaluation of right action.
Indirection in that the theory does not necessarily advocate the necessity of aiming for the right action.

To use Utilitarianism as an example again, Rule Utilitarianism is an example of the first sort of indirection (Hooker 2000), Sophisticated Consequentialism is an example of the second sort of indirection (Railton 1984). One might hold that some versions of Aristotelian Virtue ethics, such as Rosalind Hursthouse’s version, also are of the first type, since right action is understood in terms of virtue. One could imagine an indirect consequentialist view with a similar structure: the right action is the action that the virtuous person would perform, where virtue is understood as a trait conducive to the good, instead of by appeal to an Aristotelian notion of human flourishing.

The second sort relies on the standard/decision-procedure distinction. Railton argues that personal relationships are good for people, and explicitly trying to maximize the good is not a part of our relationship norms, so it is likely good that we develop dispositions to focus on and pay special attention to our loved ones. The account is open to the possibility that people who don’t believe in consequentialism have another way of deciding how to act that is correlated with promotion of the good. If the criteria a theory sets out need not be fulfilled by the agent guiding herself with the reasons set out by the criteria, then it is termed self-effacing . When a theory is self-effacing, it has the problem of alienating a person from the justification of her own actions. A middle ground, which is closer to Railton’s view, holds that the correct justification is a kind of “touchstone” to the morally good person – consulted periodically for self-regulation, but not taken explicitly into consideration in our ordinary, day-to-day lives. In this way, the theory would not be utterly self-effacing and the agent would still understand the moral basis for her own actions.

Alicke, Mark, David Rose and Dori Bloom, 2011, “Causation, Norm Violation, and Culpable Control,” Journal of Philosophy , 108(12): 670–696.
Annas, Julia, 2011, Intelligent Virtue , New York: Oxford University Press.
Arpaly, Nomy, 2002, Unprincipled Virtue , New York: Oxford University Press.
Baier, Annette, 1985, Postures of the Mind , Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Baron, Marcia, 1991, “Impartiality and Friendship,” Ethics , 101(4): 836–857.
–––, 1995, Kantian Ethics Almost Without Apology , Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Clarke, Stanley G, 1987, “Anti-Theory in Ethics,” American Philosophical Quarterly , 24(3): 237–244.
D’Arms, Justin and Daniel Jacobson, 2000 , “The Moralistic Fallacy: On the ‘Appropriateness’ of Emotions,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research , 61(1): 65–90.
Darwall, Stephen, 2006, The Second-Person Standpoint , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Dreier, Jamie, 1993, “Structures of Normative Theories,” The Monist , 76(1): 22–40.
Driver, Julia, 2012, “What the Objective Standard is Good For,” in Mark Timmons (ed.), Oxford Studies in Normative Ethics , New York: Oxford University Press, 28–44.
Dworkin, Ronald, 1977, Taking Rights Seriously , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Foot, Philippa, 1967, “Abortion and the Doctrine of Double Effect,” Oxford Review , 5: 5–15.
Graham, Peter, 2010, “In Defense of Objectivism About Moral Obligation,” Ethics , 121(1): 88–115.
Hare, R. M., 1965, Freedom and Reason , New York: Oxford University Press.
Herman, Barbara, 1985, “The Practice of Moral Judgment,” Journal of Philosophy , 82(8): 414–436.
Hill, jr., Thomas E., 1987, “The Importance of Autonomy,” in Eva Kittay and Diana Meyers (ed.) Women and Moral Theory , Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Allanheld, 129–138.
Hooker, Brad, 2000, Ideal Code, Real World , New York: Oxford University Press.
Hurka, Thomas, 2001, Virtue, Vice, and Value , New York: Oxford University Press.
Hursthouse, Rosalind, 1999, On Virtue Ethics , New York: Oxford University Press.
Jackson, Frank, 1991, “Decision-theoretic Consequentialism and the Nearest and Dearest Objection,” Ethics , 101(3): 461–482.
Jeske, Diane, 2008, Rationality and Moral Theory: How Intimacy Generates Reasons , New York: Routledge.
Joyce, Richard, 2001, The Myth of Morality , New York: Cambridge University Press.
Keas, Michael, 2018, “Systematizing the Theoretical Virtues,” Synthese , 195: 2761–2793.
Kagan, Shelley, 1989, The Limits of Morality , New York: Oxford University Press.
Kamm, Frances, 2007, Intricate Ethics: Rights, Responsibilities, and Permissible Harm , New York: Oxford University Press.
Kant, Immanuel, 1785 [2012], Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals , tr. by Mary Gregor and Jens Timmerman, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2012.
Knobe, Joshua, 2003, “Intentional Action in Folk Psychology: An Experimental Investigation,” Philosophical Psychology , 16(2): 309–325.
Kripke, Saul, 1982, Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Languages , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Louden, Robert, 1990, “Virtue Ethics and Anti-Theory,” Philosophia , 20(1–2): 93–114.
Markovits, Julia, 2014, Moral Reason , New York: Oxford University Press.
Mason, Elinor, 2003, “Consequentialism and the ‘Ought Implies Can’ Principle,” American Philosophical Quarterly , 40(4): 319–331.
–––, 2019, Ways to Be Blameworthy: Rightness, Wrongness, and Responsibility , New York: Oxford University Press.
McDowell, John, 1979, “Virtue and Reason,” The Monist , 62(3): 331–350.
Moody-Adams, Michelle, 2002, Fieldwork in Familiar Places: Morality, Culture, and Philosophy , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Moore, G. E., 1903 [1993], Principia Ethica , ed. Thomas Baldwin, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
Nagel, Thomas, 1979, “The Fragmentation of Value,” in Mortal Questions , New York: Cambridge University Press, 128–141.
Nietzsche, Friedrich, 1887 [1998], On the Genealogy of Morality , Maudemarie Clark and Alan J. Swensen (trans.), Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing.
Norcross, Alastair, 2020, Morality By Degrees , New York: Oxford University Press.
Olson, Jonas, 2004, “Buck-Passing and the Wrong Kind of Reasons,” Philosophical Quarterly , 54(215): 295–300.
Parfit, Derek, 1984, Reasons and Persons , Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Pettit, Phillip, 1997, “The Consequentialist Perspective,” in The Three Methods of Ethics , by Marcia Baron, Phillip Pettit, and Michael Slote, Oxford: Blackwell, 92–174.
Pettit, Phillip, and Michael Smith, 2000, “Global Consequentialism,” in Brad Hooker, et al. (eds.), Morality, Rules, and Consequences , Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh Press, 121–133.
Phillips, David, 2019, Rossian Ethics , New York: Oxford University Press.
Piper, Adrian, 1987, “Moral Theory and Moral Alienation,” Journal of Philosophy , 82(2): 102–118.
Portmore, Douglas, 2011, Commonsense Consequentialism , New York: Oxford University Press.
Rabinowicz, Wlodek and Toni Ronnow-Rasmussen, 2004, “The Strike of the Demon: on Fitting Pro-Attitudes and Value,” Ethics , 114(3): 391–423.
Railton, Peter, 1984, “Alienation, Consequentialism, and the Demands of Morality,” Philosophy and Public Affairs , 13(2): 134–171.
Rawls, John, 1971, A Theory of Justice , Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.
Scanlon, T. M., 1998, What We Owe to Each Other , Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.
–––, 2008, Moral Dimensions , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Scheffler, Samuel, 1982, The Rejection of Consequentialism , New York: Oxford University Press.
Schneewind, J. B., 1963, “First Principles and Common-sense Morality in Sidgwick’s Ethics,” Archiv fur Geschichte der Philosophie , 45(2): 137–156.
–––, 1990, “The Misfortunes of Virtue,” Ethics , 101(1): 42–63.
Schofield, Paul, 2021, Duty to Self: Moral, Political, and Legal Self-Relation , New York: Oxford University Press.
Sen, Amartya, 2000, “Consequential Evaluation and Practical Reason,” The Journal of Philosophy , 47(9): 477–502.
Sidgwick, Henry, 1874 [1907], The Methods of Ethics , London: Macmillan. [The seventh edition was published in 1907.]
Singer, Marcus, 1986, “Ethics and Common Sense,” Revue Internationale de Philosophie , 40(158): 221–258.
Slote, Michael, 1985, Common-Sense Morality and Consequentialism , New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
–––, 2007, The Ethics of Care and Empathy , New York: Routledge.
Smith, Holly, 2018, Making Morality Work , New York: Oxford University Press.
Smith, Michael, 2009, “Two Kinds of Consequentialism,” Philosophical Issues , 19(1): 257–272.
Stark, Cynthia, 1997, “Decision Procedures, Standards of Rightness and Impartiality,” Noûs , 31(4): 478–495.
Stocker, Michael, 1976, “The Schizophrenia of Modern Ethical Theories,” Journal of Philosophy , 73(14): 453–466.
Strawson, Peter, 1961, “Social Morality and Individual Ideal,” Philosophy , 36(136): 1–17.
Street, Sharon, 2006, “A Darwinian Dilemma for Realist Theories of Value,” Philosophical Studies , 127(1): 109–166.
Thomson, Judith Jarvis, 1976, “Killing, Letting Die, and the Trolley Problem,” The Monist , 59(2): 204–217.
Wiland, Eric J, “The Incoherence Objection in Moral Theory,” Acta Analytica , 25(3): 279–284.
Williams, Bernard, 1985, Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy , New York: Oxford University Press.
Wolf, Susan, 1982, “Moral Saints,” Journal of Philosophy , 79(8): 419–439.
–––, 2014, “Loving Attention: Lessons in Love from The Philadelphia Story ,” in Susan Wolf and Christopher Grau (eds.), Understanding Love: Philosophy, Film, and Fiction , Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 369–386.
Zagzebski, Linda Trinkhaus, 2017, Exemplarist Moral Theory , New York: Oxford University Press.

How to cite this entry . Preview the PDF version of this entry at the Friends of the SEP Society . Look up topics and thinkers related to this entry at the Internet Philosophy Ontology Project (InPhO). Enhanced bibliography for this entry at PhilPapers , with links to its database.

[Please contact the author with suggestions.]

consequentialism | ethics: deontological | ethics: virtue | morality, definition of | value theory

Accessibility

Support SEP

Mirror sites.

View this site from another server:

Info about mirror sites

Library of Congress Catalog Data: ISSN 1095-5054

school Campus Bookshelves
menu_book Bookshelves
perm_media Learning Objects
login Login
how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
hub Instructor Commons

Margin Size

Download Page (PDF)
Download Full Book (PDF)
Periodic Table
Physics Constants
Scientific Calculator
Reference & Cite
Tools expand_more
Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

7.6.1: Ethical Theories

Last updated
Save as PDF
Page ID 95642

\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)

\( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)

\( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)

\( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}} % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}} % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)

(NOTE: You must read only those linked materials that are preceded by the capitalized word READ .)

If Normative Ethical Relativism is flawed and cannot provide for a basis for moral society for humans on planet earth, then what is to provide that basis?

What would provide a basis for universal moral codes?

=======================================================

On Morality by Lowell Kleiman

If by "morality" we mean a code of conduct that is universally valid, then the basic issue in the study of ethics is, is there a universally valid code of conduct? Are there rules of behavior that prescribe how a person should conduct him or herself in all places and all times? For example, when anybody adds 2 + 2 the result should be 4. If any other answer is obtained, the person made a mistake. 2 + 2 does not equal 5, or 3 or anything other than 4. To say otherwise reveals an ignorance of addition, not an alternative but equally valid code of mathematics.

The rules of mathematics are universally valid. The same rule, for example, 12 + 19 = 31, tells us how to add, whether we are living on Long Island or Timbuktoo, in the late 20th century or the 4th century B. C. An Izbekustany peasant who counts 12 goats on this side of the pasture and 19 goats on that side of the pasture, concluding that there are 32 goats in the pasture, makes the same mathematical error as an instructor at Suffolk Community College who counts 12 students on this side of the room, 19 students on that side of the room, concluding that there are 32 students in the room. That the peasant and instructor live several thousand miles apart, are brought up in different cultures, are of different ethnic backgrounds, subscribe to different religious and political traditions, is irrelevant in determining the rights and wrongs of their behavior. The only relevant considerations are whether they are using the correct rule and whether they are applying that rule in the correct way. For example, if either instructor or peasant thinks that 12 + 19 = 32, then one of them does not know arithmetic, and the other does not know how to count.

The same is true of morality. Just as any proposed rule of addition that is not universally valid cannot be a rule of mathematics, so any proposed rule of conduct that is not universally valid cannot be a rule of morality. For example, cultures that have practiced incest, ritual human sacrifice, matricide, patricide, slavery or female sexual mutilation are immoral since their creeds are not universally valid. Clearly, mutilation, slavery or any of these other modes of conduct are not valid here, certainly not at Suffolk Community College, certainly not on Long Island, New York State, California, the mid-west, Canada, Mexico, or any part of any country or state that comprises the civilized world. Just as 2 + 2 does not = 5, so sexual mutilation does not = morality.

It may be objected that the argument above makes us, students and teachers of Suffolk Community College, residents of Long Island, citizens of New York State, of the United States, followers and proponents of Western Civilization, arbiters of right and wrong. We are imposing our values on the rest of the world, or at least on those few countries, such as Libya and the Sudan where slavery and mutilation are practiced. We are judging people by standards that are not their own; we are committing the "ethnocentric fallacy."

Perhaps we are. Perhaps we have no right to condemn killing, maiming, brutalizing and destroying when other people do these things. Perhaps our beliefs about right and wrong are limited, provincial, naive, uninformed. Maybe slavery for others is not so bad after all; perhaps child abuse for other people's children should be encouraged; murder in other societies condoned, rape in foreign countries commended. Perhaps we must rethink our beliefs about right and wrong. Maybe we don't know the difference.

But if we don't know what we think we know, how can we be certain, how can anyone be sure, that aside from mathematics, there is no universally valid code of conduct? If we don't know that incest was wrong among the ancients, then we don't know that it is wrong today. Aside from the fact that the Egyptians who practiced incest lived many years ago, the act itself has not changed since then. Nor has rape, enslavement, mutilation or murder. If we cannot condemn the acts of others, then neither can we condemn the same acts when performed by those among us. And if we cannot condemn our own rapists and murderers, then rape and murder, and all the rest, are not just to be condoned for others, but condoned for everyone. So there is a universally valid code of conduct, although it seems very different from what we naively take it to be. The question is, which code is correct, the one that condemns ritual mutilation, or the one that condones it? To answer that question we must turn away from the theory of normative ethical relativism.

=====================================

If the theory of Normative Ethical Relativism is flawed then what is the alternative. Can there be an ethics? Can there be a basis for moral rule making? Since Socrates Philosophers have sought that basis in REASON. All humans have reason and if through the use of reason certain principles of ethics, the principle of the GOOD, can be discerned or discovered, then all humans would have contact with the basis for the moral life that all cultures and societies need. Plato believed he had found those principles. After him several others in the West have reached similar conclusions concerning the existence of principles that might have universal application. Unfortunately, they have not all agreed as to what those principles are.

There are some fundamental distinctions to be made in the approaches taken to thinking about the GOOD. What makes something, an action, GOOD? Is it something in the act or in the intention behind the act? Is it the result of the act or what is in the act itself?

There is a terrorist with a gun pointed at a group of innocent hostages being held by the terrorists. There is the declaration that he will kill them. Someone nearby has a gun and points it at the terrorist and shots. The would-be hero misses the target and kills one of the innocent hostages. No is the act of the would-be hero good or bad. Is it the intention behind the act or the result of the act that makes it good or bad?

If something is good is it good because of what it is or because of what it results in?

Intrinsic vs. instrumental value

Something is said to have intrinsic value if it is good ``in and of itself,'' i.e., not merely as a means for acquiring something else.

Something is said to have instrumental value if it is good because it provides the means for acquiring something else of value.

Consequentialist vs. non-consequentialist theories of ethics

There are two broad categories of ethical theories concerning the source of value: consquentialist and non-consequentialist.

A consequentialist theory of value judges the rightness or wrongness of an action based on the consequences that action has. The most familiar example would be utilitarianism--``that action is best that produces the greatest good for the greatest number'' (Jeremy Bentham).

A non-consequentialist theory of value judges the rightness or wrongness of an action based on properties intrinsic to the action, not on its consequences.

Libertarianism--People should be free to do as they like as long as they respect the freedom of others to do the same.

Contractarianism--No policy that causes uncompensated harm on anyone is permitted (Pareto safety).

Consider these Definitions:

READ: Teleological Theories :Consequentialist Approach

READ: Deontological Theories: Non-Consequentialist Approach


Teleological Theories	Deontological Theories
Consequential	Non-Consequential
Egoism	Kantian- Categorical Imperative
Act Utilitarianism	Rawl's Theory of Justice
Rule Utilitarianism	Divine Command Theory
Situation Ethics	Natural Law Theory A theistic B. non- theistic

In the next few sections we shall cover these theories and their advantages and disadvantages or their weaknesses and problems.

There is a third approach that originates with the Greeks and can be found in the East as well. It is Virtue Ethics

VIRTUE ETHICS== eudaimonia

Neither Teleological nor a Deontological approach

Not based on principles at all but on virtues

VIEW: Aristotle & Virtue Theory: Crash Course Philosophy #38 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrvtOWEXDIQ 9:20

VIEW: Ethics Defined: Virtue Ethics 1:42 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMblKpkKYao

View: what is virtue ethics (philosophical definition)4:56 https://www.youtube.com/watchv=jpv2kswmrfc, read: virtue ethics - - character-based ethics.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/introduction/virtue.shtml

Suggested Reference Works:

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-virtue/

https://www.iep.utm.edu/virtue/

https://en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtue_ethics

https://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_virtue_ethics.html

READ Dallas Roark On VALUES and ETHICS

1000-Word Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology

Philosophy, One Thousand Words at a Time

Below are essays on:

contemporary moral issues and topics in applied or practical ethics;
ethical theories or explanations for what, in general, makes wrong actions wrong and makes permissible actions permissible; and
metaethics or philosophical theories of whether and how moral judgments are true or false (or neither) and whether and how we know them (if we do), and other philosophical issues about ethics.

Practical Ethics | Applied Ethics | Moral Issues

Applied Ethics by Chelsea Haramia

Moral Education: Teaching Students to Become Better People by Dominik Balg

Theories of Moral Considerability: Who and What Matters Morally? by Jonathan Spelman

Business Ethics by Thomas Metcalf

Happiness by Kiki Berk

Meaning in Life: What Makes Our Lives Meaningful? by Matthew Pianalto

The Meaning of Life: What’s the Point? by Matthew Pianalto

Philosophy as a Way of Life by Christine Darr

Ancient Cynicism: Rejecting Civilization and Returning to Nature by G. M. Trujillo, Jr.

The Ethics of Abortion by Nathan Nobis

Euthanasia, or Mercy Killing by Nathan Nobis

The Doctrine of Double Effect: Do Intentions Matter to Ethics? by Gabriel Andrade

Principlism in Biomedical Ethics: Respect for Autonomy, Non-Maleficence, Beneficence, and Justice by G. M. Trujillo, Jr.

Philosophy and Race: An Introduction to Philosophy of Race by Thomas Metcalf

What Is Misogyny? by Odelia Zuckerman and Clair Morrissey

Theories of Punishment by Travis Joseph Rodgers

The Death Penalty by Benjamin S. Yost

Philosophy of Law: An Overview by Mark Satta

Ethics and Absolute Poverty: Peter Singer and Effective Altruism by Brandon Boesch

Longtermism: How Much Should We Care About the Far Future? by Dylan Balfour

Saving the Many or the Few: The Moral Relevance of Numbers by Theron Pummer

The Badness of Death by Duncan Purves

Is Death Bad? Epicurus and Lucretius on the Fear of Death by Frederik Kaufman

The Moral Status of Animals by Jason Wyckoff

Speciesism by Dan Lowe

“Can They Suffer?”: Bentham on our Obligations to Animals by Daniel Weltman

The Non-Identity Problem by Duncan Purves

Psychological Approaches to Personal Identity: Do Memories and Consciousness Make Us Who We Are? by Kristin Seemuth Whaley

The Ethics of Drone Strikes by Ryan Jenkins

Videogames and Philosophy by Alex Fisher

Philosophical Inquiry in Childhood by Jana Mohr Lone

Ethics and the Expected Consequences of Voting by Thomas Metcalf

Free Speech by Mark Satta

Licensing Parents by Ryan Jenkins

Moral Luck by Jonathan Spelman

Indoctrination: What is it to Indoctrinate Someone? by Chris Ranalli

Is it Wrong to Believe Without Sufficient Evidence? W.K. Clifford’s “The Ethics of Belief” by Spencer Case

Existentialism by Addison Ellis

African American Existentialism: DuBois, Locke, Thurman, and King by Anthony Sean Neal

Is Immortality Desirable? by Felipe Pereira

Camus on the Absurd: The Myth of Sisyphus by Erik Van Aken

“Hell Is Other People”: Sartre on Personal Relationships by Kiki Berk

The Philosophy of Humor: What Makes Something Funny? by Chris A. Kramer

Marx’s Conception of Alienation by Dan Lowe

On Karl Marx’s Slogan “From Each According to their Ability, To Each According to their Need” by Sam Badger

Hope by Michael Milona & Katie Stockdale

What Is It To Love Someone? by Felipe Pereira

Aristotle on Friendship: What Does It Take to Be a Good Friend? by G. M. Trujillo, Jr.

Sexual Orientation, Sex, and Gender by Raja Halwani

Feminism Part 1: The Sameness Approach by Annaleigh Curtis

Feminism Part 2: The Difference Approach by Annaleigh Curtis

Feminism Part 3: The Dominance Approach by Chelsea Haramia

Aristotle’s Defense of Slavery by Dan Lowe

Removing Confederate Monuments by Travis Timmerman

Mary Astell’s “A Serious Proposal to the Ladies” (1694) by Simone Webb

Rousseau on Human Nature: “Amour de soi” and “Amour propre” by Corey McCabe

Epistemic Injustice by Huzeyfe Demirtas

Ethics and “Extra Credit” by Nathan Nobis

The Ontology of Race by Abiral Chitrakar Phnuyal

Reparations for Historic Injustice by Joseph Frigault

Responding to Morally Flawed Historical Philosophers and Philosophies by Victor Fabian Abundez-Guerra and Nathan Nobis

How to Establish Social Order? Three Early Chinese Answers by Henrique Schneider

Plato’s Crito: When should we break the law? by Spencer Case

Conspiracy Theories by Jared Millson

George Orwell’s Philosophical Views by Mark Satta

Normative Ethics / Ethical Theories / Moral Principles

Cultural Relativism: Do Cultural Norms Make Actions Right and Wrong? by Nathan Nobis

Because God Says So: On Divine Command Theory by Spencer Case

Ethical Egoism by Nathan Nobis

Deontology: Kantian Ethics by Andrew Chapman

Consequentialism by Shane Gronholz

Mill’s Proof of the Principle of Utility by Dale E. Miller

John Stuart Mill on The Good Life: Higher-Quality Pleasures by Dale E. Miller

Ursula Le Guin’s “The Ones who Walk Away from Omelas”: Would You Walk Away? by Spencer Case

W.D. Ross’s Ethics of “Prima Facie” Duties by Matthew Pianalto

Social Contract Theory by David Antonini

“Nasty, Brutish, and Short”: Thomas Hobbes on Life in the State of Nature by Daniel Weltman

Rousseau on Human Nature: “Amour de soi” and “Amour propre” by Corey McCabe

John Rawls’ ‘A Theory of Justice’ by Ben Davies

Distributive Justice: How Should Resources be Allocated? By Dick Timmer and Tim Meijers

Virtue Ethics by David Merry

Situationism and Virtue Ethics by Ian Tully

G. E. M. Anscombe’s “Modern Moral Philosophy” by Daniel Weltman

The African Ethic of Ubuntu by Thaddeus Metz

Mengzi’s Moral Psychology, Part 1: The Four Moral Sprouts by John Ramsey

Mengzi’s Moral Psychology, Part 2: The Cultivation Analogy by John Ramsey

Principlism in Biomedical Ethics: Respect for Autonomy, Non-Maleficence, Beneficence, and Justice by G. M. Trujillo, Jr.

Why be Moral? Plato’s ‘Ring of Gyges’ Thought Experiment by Spencer Case

Evolution and Ethics by Michael Klenk

(Im)partiality by Shane Gronholz

The Ethics of Mozi: Social Organization and Impartial Care by Henrique Schneider

Praise and Blame by Daniel Miller

Nietzsche and the Death of God by Justin Remhof

Plato’s Form of the Good by Ryan Jenkins

The Repugnant Conclusion by Jonathan Spelman

Practical Reasons by Shane Gronholz

Moral Testimony by Annaleigh Curtis

Ignorance and Blame by Daniel Miller

Free Will and Moral Responsibility by Chelsea Haramia

Alternate Possibilities and Moral Responsibility by Rachel Bourbaki

Manipulation and Moral Responsibility by Taylor W. Cyr

Expertise by Jamie Carlin Watson

Hell and Universalism by A.G. Holdier

Meta-Ethics / The Philosophy of Ethics

Ethical Realism by Thomas Metcalf

Seemings: Justifying Beliefs Based on How Things Seem by Kaj André Zeller

Moral Error Theory by Ian Tully

Reason is the Slave to the Passions: Hume on Reason vs. Desire by Daniel Weltman

Also see Social and Political Philosophy

Ethical Theories Of Different Philosophies Philosophy Essay

✅ Free Essay	✅ Philosophy
✅ 2124 words	✅ 1st Jan 2015

Reference this

Get Help With Your Essay

If you need assistance with writing your essay, our professional essay writing service is here to help! Find out more about our Essay Writing Service

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below:

Related Services

Essay Writing Service

Dissertation Writing Service

Student reading and using laptop to study

Assignment Writing Service

DMCA / Removal Request

If you are the original writer of this essay and no longer wish to have your work published on UKEssays.com then please:

Our academic writing and marking services can help you!

Find out more about our Essay Writing Service
Undergraduate 2:2
7 day delivery
Marking Service
Samples of our Service
Full Service Portfolio

Related Lectures

Study for free with our range of university lecture notes!

All Available Lectures

Freelance Writing Jobs

Looking for a flexible role? Do you have a 2:1 degree or higher?

Study Resources

Free resources to assist you with your university studies!

Dissertation Resources at UKDiss.com
How to Write an Essay
Essay Buyers Guide
Referencing Tools
Essay Writing Guides
Masters Writing Guides

Introduction to Ethical Theories

First Online: 02 March 2024

Cite this chapter

Amin Alizadeh 3 &
Deepu Kurian 4

334 Accesses

1 Citations

This chapter is an introduction to ethics, and it briefly covers the historical background of the major ethical theories and principles that are useful for analyzing moral problems. It presents eight theories and highlights the importance of each of them for the field of HRD. Four of these theories—Kantianism, utilitarianism, social contract theory, and virtue ethics—can be counted as the most relevant theories to our field. Such ethical theories are attempts to assist HRD students and practitioners in the decision-making process.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

Get 10 units per month
Download Article/Chapter or eBook
1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
Cancel anytime
Available as PDF
Read on any device
Instant download
Own it forever
Available as EPUB and PDF
Durable hardcover edition
Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Ethical Theory and Moral Practice at 24

Is ethical theory opposed to moral practice.

Introduction: Why Ethics?

Afroogh, S., Kazemi, S. A., & Hajhosseini, F. (2021). Moral sensitive human resource development: A conceptual model and its implementation. International Journal of Business and Management, 16 (6), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v16n6p1

Article Google Scholar

Al Halbusi, H., Tang, T. L. P., Williams, K. A., & Ramayah, T. (2022). Do ethical leaders enhance employee ethical behaviors? Organizational justice and ethical climate as dual mediators and leader moral attentiveness as a moderator–Evidence from Iraq’s emerging market. Asian Journal of Business Ethics, 11 (1), 105–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13520-022-00143-4201

Alizadeh, A., & Russ-Eft, D. (in press). Ethics and the workplace. In T Rocco, M. L. Morris, & R. Poell (Eds.), Handbook of human resource development . SAGE.

Google Scholar

Alizadeh, A., Dirani, K. M., & Qiu, S. (2020). Ethics, code of conduct and ethical climate: Implications for human resource development. European Journal of Training and Development, 45 (8/9), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJTD-04-2020-0077

Alizadeh, A., Kurian, D., Qiu, S., & Dirani, K. M. (2023). Ethics, corporate social responsibility and the role of human resource development: The academic experts’ view. European Journal of Training and Development , 47 (1/2), 223–239. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJTD-07-2021-0087

Appelbaum, S. H., Louis, D., Makarenko, D., & Saluja, J. (2013). Participation in decision making: A case study of job satisfaction and commitment (part one). Industrial and Commercial Training, 45 (4), 222–229. https://doi.org/10.1108/00197851311323510

Ardichvili, A., & Jondle, D. (2009). Integrative literature review: Ethical business cultures: A literature review and implications for HRD. Human Resource Development Review, 8 (2), 223–244. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484309334098

Armitage, A. (2018). Is HRD in need of an ethics of care? Human Resource Development International, 21 (3), 212–231. https://doi.org/10.1080/13678868.2017.1366176

Benton, R. (2015). Environmental ethics: Theory and implications for marketing. In Handbook on Ethics and Marketing (pp. 238–262). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781781003435

Bierema, L. (2002). A feminist approach to HRD research. Human Resource Development Review, 1 , 244–268. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484302012006

Bierema, L. L. (2009). Critiquing human resource development’s dominant masculine rationality and evaluating its impact. Human Resource Development Review, 8 (1), 68–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484308330020

Bowen, S. A., & Prescott, P. (2015). Kant’s contribution to the ethics of communication. Ethical Space: The International Journal of Communication Ethics, 12 (2), 38–44. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281784060_Bowen_S_A_Prescott_P_2015_Kant's_contribution_to_the_ethics_of_communication_Ethical_Space_The_International_Journal_of_Communication_Ethics_122_38-44#fullTextFileContent

Brennan, A., & Lo, Y. S. (2021). Environmental ethics. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford Publishing. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-environmental/

Callahan, J. L. (2013). Creating a critical constructionist HRD: From creativity to ethics. Human Resource Development Review, 12 (4), 387–389. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484313502307

Cash, K. C., & Gray, G. R. (2000). A framework for accommodating religion and spirituality in the workplace. Academy of Management Perspectives, 14 (3), 124–133. https://doi.org/10.5465/ame.2000.4468072

Chalofsky, N. E., Rocco, T. S., & Morris, M. L. (2014). Handbook of human resource development . Wiley.

Book Google Scholar

Clark, B., & Foster, J. B. (2002). George Perkins Marsh and the transformation of Earth: An introduction to Marsh’s Man and nature. Organization & Environment , 15 (2), 164–169.

Copp, D. (Ed.) (2005). The Oxford handbook of ethical theory . Oxford University Press.

Craft, J. L. (2010). Making the case for ongoing and interactive organizational ethics training. Human Resource Development International, 13 (5), 599–606. https://doi.org/10.1080/13678868.2010.520484

Dicker, R., & Piepmeier, A. (2003.). Catching a wave: Reclaiming feminism for the 21st century. Northeastern University Press.

Dunfee, T. W., Smith, N. C., & Ross, W. T. (1999). Social contracts and marketing ethics. Journal of Marketing, 63 (3), 14–32. https://doi.org/10.2307/1251773

Evan, W. M., & Freeman, R. E. (1988). A stakeholder theory of the modern corporation: Kantian capitalism .

Foote, M. F., & Ruona, W. E. (2008). Institutionalizing ethics: A synthesis of frameworks and the implications for HRD. Human Resource Development Review, 7 (3), 292–308. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484308321844

Freedman, E. (2002). No turning back . Ballantine Books.

Hatcher, T. (2002). Ethics and HRD: A new approach to leading responsible organizations . Perseus.

Hatcher, T. (2004). Environmental ethics as an alternative for evaluation theory in for-profit business contexts. Evaluation and Program Planning, 27 (3), 357–363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2004.04.009

Hatcher, T. (2006). Democratizing the workplace through professionalization of human resource development. International Journal of Training and Development, 10 (1), 67–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2419.2006.00239.x

Hatcher, T., & Aragon, S. R. (2000). Rationale for and development of a standard on ethics and integrity for international HRD research and practice. Human Resource Development International, 3 (2), 207–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/136788600402663

Hammond, J. L. (1986). Divine Command theories and human analogies. The Journal of Religious Ethics , 216–223. https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/40015031.pdf

Hasnas, J. (1998). The normative theories of business ethics: A guide for the perplexed. Business Ethics Quarterly , 8 (1), 19–42.

Hirudayaraj, M., & Shields, L. (2019). Feminist theory: A research agenda for HRD. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 21 (3), 319–334. https://doi.org/10.1177/152342231985128

Ho, H. C., & Chan, Y. C. (2022). Flourishing in the workplace: A one-year prospective study on the effects of perceived organizational support and psychological capital. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19 (2), 922. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19020922

Hooker, J. (2018). Taking ethics seriously: Why ethics is an essential tool for the modern workplace . Taylor & Francis.

Gedro, J., & Mizzi, R. C. (2014). Feminist theory and queer theory: Implications for HRD research and practice. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 16 (4), 445–456. https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422314543820

Greenwood, M. R. (2002). Ethics and HRM: A review and conceptual analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 36 , 261–278. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014090411946

Jaggar, A. M. (2001). Feminist ethics. In L. Becker & C. Becker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of ethics (pp. 528–539). Routledge.

Kuchinke, K. P. (2017). The ethics of HRD practice. Human Resource Development International, 20 (5), 361–370. https://doi.org/10.1080/13678868.2017.1329369

Lefkowitz, J. (2017). Ethics and values in industrial-organizational psychology (2nd ed.). Taylor and Francis.

Lewis, P. V. (1985). Defining ‘business ethics’: Like nailing jello to a wall. Journal of Business ethics, 4 , 377–383. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02388590.pdf

McGuire, D. (2010). Engaging organizations in environmental change: A greenprint for action. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 12 , 508–523. https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422310394759

McGuire, D., Garavan, T. N., O’Donnell, D., & Watson, S. (2007). Metaperspectives and HRD: Lessons for research and practice. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 9 (1), 120–139. https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422306294500

McGuire, D., Germain, M. L., & Reynolds, K. (2021). Reshaping HRD in light of the COVID-19 pandemic: An ethics of care approach. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 23 (1), 26–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422320973426

Noelliste, M. (2013). Integrity: An intrapersonal perspective. Human Resource Development Review, 12 (4), 474–499. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484313492333

Palaiologos, A., Papazekos, P., & Panayotopoulou, L. (2011). Organizational justice and employee satisfaction in performance appraisal. Journal of European Industrial Training, 35 (8), 826–840. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090591111168348

Pircher Verdorfer, A., & Peus, C. (2020). Leading by example: Testing a moderated mediation model of ethical leadership, value congruence, and followers’ openness to ethical influence. Business Ethics: A European Review , 29 (2), 314–332. https://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12255

Potnuru, R. K. G., & Sahoo, C. K. (2016). HRD interventions, employee competencies and organizational effectiveness: An empirical study. European Journal of Training and Development, 40 (5), 345–365. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJTD-02-2016-0008

Quinn, P. L. (2001). Religious diversity and religious toleration. In Issues in contemporary philosophy of religion (pp. 57–80). Springer Netherlands.

Rawls, J. (2001). Justice as fairness: A restatement . Harvard University Press.

Remišová, A., Lašáková, A., & Kirchmayer, Z. (2019). Influence of formal ethics program components on managerial ethical behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 160 , 151–166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-3832-3

Robin, D., Giallourakis, M., David, F. R., & Moritz, T. E. (1989). A different look at codes of ethics. Business Horizons, 32 (1), 66–74. https://go.gale.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA7394541&sid=googleScholar&v=2.1&it=r&linkaccess=abs&issn=00076813&p=AONE&sw=w&userGroupName=udel_main&aty=ip

Russ-Eft, D. (2014). Morality and ethics in HRD. In N. E. Chalofsky, T. S. Rocco, & M. L. Morris (Eds.), Handbook of human resource development (pp. 510–525). Jossey-Bass.

Sadler-Smith, E. (2015). Communicating climate change risk and enabling pro-environmental behavioral change through human resource development. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 17 (4), 442–459. https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422315601087

Schumann, P. L. (2001). A moral principles framework for human resource management ethics. Human Resource Management Review, 11 (1–2), 93–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1053-4822(00)00042-5

Schwartz, M. S. (2005). Universal moral values for corporate codes of ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 59 , 27–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-005-3403-2

Shaver, R. (2019). Egoism. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy . The Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2019/entries/egoism

Thompson, J. A., & Hart, D. W. (2006). Psychological contracts: A nano-level perspective on social contract theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 68 , 229–241. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9012-x

Tong, R. (1993). Feminine and feminist ethics . Wadsworth.

Valecha, N. (2022). A Study on importance of ethical responsibilities in HR management. International Journal for Global Academic & Scientific Research , 1 (1), 13–22. https://doi.org/10.55938/ijgasr.v1i1.7

Watts, L. L., Medeiros, K. E., Mulhearn, T. J., Steele, L. M., Connelly, S., & Mumford, M. D. (2017). Are ethics training programs improving? A meta-analytic review of past and present ethics instruction in the sciences. Ethics & Behavior, 27 (5), 351–384. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2016.1182025

Zarestky, J., & Collins, J. C. (2017). Supporting the United Nations’ 2030 sustainable development goals: A call for international HRD action. Human Resource Development International, 20 (5), 371–381. https://doi.org/10.1080/13678868.2017.1329370

Zhu, Y., Sun, L. Y., & Leung, A. S. (2014). Corporate social responsibility, firm reputation, and firm performance: The role of ethical leadership. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 31 , 925–947. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-013-9369-1

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA

Amin Alizadeh

University of Texas School of Public Health San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA

Deepu Kurian

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amin Alizadeh .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Technology Leadership and Innovation, Purdue University West Lafayette, West Lafayette, IN, USA

Darlene F. Russ-Eft

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Alizadeh, A., Kurian, D. (2024). Introduction to Ethical Theories. In: Russ-Eft, D.F., Alizadeh, A. (eds) Ethics and Human Resource Development. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-38727-2_2

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-38727-2_2

Published : 02 March 2024

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-38726-5

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-38727-2

eBook Packages : Business and Management Business and Management (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Find a journal
Track your research

Essay Guides
Other Essays
How to Write an Ethics Paper: Guide & Ethical Essay Examples
Speech Topics
Basics of Essay Writing
Essay Topics
Main Academic Essays
Research Paper Topics
Basics of Research Paper Writing
Miscellaneous
Chicago/ Turabian
Data & Statistics
Methodology
Admission Writing Tips
Admission Advice
Other Guides
Student Life
Studying Tips
Understanding Plagiarism
Academic Writing Tips
Basics of Dissertation & Thesis Writing

Research Paper Guides
Formatting Guides
Basics of Research Process
Admission Guides
Dissertation & Thesis Guides

How to Write an Ethics Paper: Guide & Ethical Essay Examples

Table of contents

Use our free Readability checker

An ethics essay is a type of academic writing that explores ethical issues and dilemmas. Students should evaluates them in terms of moral principles and values. The purpose of an ethics essay is to examine the moral implications of a particular issue, and provide a reasoned argument in support of an ethical perspective.

Writing an essay about ethics is a tough task for most students. The process involves creating an outline to guide your arguments about a topic and planning your ideas to convince the reader of your feelings about a difficult issue. If you still need assistance putting together your thoughts in composing a good paper, you have come to the right place. We have provided a series of steps and tips to show how you can achieve success in writing. This guide will tell you how to write an ethics paper using ethical essay examples to understand every step it takes to be proficient. In case you don’t have time for writing, get in touch with our professional essay writers for hire . Our experts work hard to supply students with excellent essays.

What Is an Ethics Essay?

An ethics essay uses moral theories to build arguments on an issue. You describe a controversial problem and examine it to determine how it affects individuals or society. Ethics papers analyze arguments on both sides of a possible dilemma, focusing on right and wrong. The analysis gained can be used to solve real-life cases. Before embarking on writing an ethical essay, keep in mind that most individuals follow moral principles. From a social context perspective, these rules define how a human behaves or acts towards another. Therefore, your theme essay on ethics needs to demonstrate how a person feels about these moral principles. More specifically, your task is to show how significant that issue is and discuss if you value or discredit it.

Purpose of an Essay on Ethics

The primary purpose of an ethics essay is to initiate an argument on a moral issue using reasoning and critical evidence. Instead of providing general information about a problem, you present solid arguments about how you view the moral concern and how it affects you or society. When writing an ethical paper, you demonstrate philosophical competence, using appropriate moral perspectives and principles.

Things to Write an Essay About Ethics On

Before you start to write ethics essays, consider a topic you can easily address. In most cases, an ethical issues essay analyzes right and wrong. This includes discussing ethics and morals and how they contribute to the right behaviors. You can also talk about work ethic, code of conduct, and how employees promote or disregard the need for change. However, you can explore other areas by asking yourself what ethics mean to you. Think about how a recent game you watched with friends started a controversial argument. Or maybe a newspaper that highlighted a story you felt was misunderstood or blown out of proportion. This way, you can come up with an excellent topic that resonates with your personal ethics and beliefs.

Ethics Paper Outline

Sometimes, you will be asked to submit an outline before writing an ethics paper. Creating an outline for an ethics paper is an essential step in creating a good essay. You can use it to arrange your points and supporting evidence before writing. It also helps organize your thoughts, enabling you to fill any gaps in your ideas. The outline for an essay should contain short and numbered sentences to cover the format and outline. Each section is structured to enable you to plan your work and include all sources in writing an ethics paper. An ethics essay outline is as follows:

Background information
Thesis statement
Restate thesis statement
Summarize key points
Final thoughts on the topic

Using this outline will improve clarity and focus throughout your writing process.

Ethical Essay Structure

Ethics essays are similar to other essays based on their format, outline, and structure. An ethical essay should have a well-defined introduction, body, and conclusion section as its structure. When planning your ideas, make sure that the introduction and conclusion are around 20 percent of the paper, leaving the rest to the body. We will take a detailed look at what each part entails and give examples that are going to help you understand them better. Refer to our essay structure examples to find a fitting way of organizing your writing.

Ethics Paper Introduction

An ethics essay introduction gives a synopsis of your main argument. One step on how to write an introduction for an ethics paper is telling about the topic and describing its background information. This paragraph should be brief and straight to the point. It informs readers what your position is on that issue. Start with an essay hook to generate interest from your audience. It can be a question you will address or a misunderstanding that leads up to your main argument. You can also add more perspectives to be discussed; this will inform readers on what to expect in the paper.

Ethics Essay Introduction Example

You can find many ethics essay introduction examples on the internet. In this guide, we have written an excellent extract to demonstrate how it should be structured. As you read, examine how it begins with a hook and then provides background information on an issue.

Imagine living in a world where people only lie, and honesty is becoming a scarce commodity. Indeed, modern society is facing this reality as truth and deception can no longer be separated. Technology has facilitated a quick transmission of voluminous information, whereas it's hard separating facts from opinions.

In this example, the first sentence of the introduction makes a claim or uses a question to hook the reader.

Ethics Essay Thesis Statement

An ethics paper must contain a thesis statement in the first paragraph. Learning how to write a thesis statement for an ethics paper is necessary as readers often look at it to gauge whether the essay is worth their time.

When you deviate away from the thesis, your whole paper loses meaning. In ethics essays, your thesis statement is a roadmap in writing, stressing your position on the problem and giving reasons for taking that stance. It should focus on a specific element of the issue being discussed. When writing a thesis statement, ensure that you can easily make arguments for or against its stance.

Ethical Paper Thesis Example

Look at this example of an ethics paper thesis statement and examine how well it has been written to state a position and provide reasons for doing so:

The moral implications of dishonesty are far-reaching as they undermine trust, integrity, and other foundations of society, damaging personal and professional relationships.

The above thesis statement example is clear and concise, indicating that this paper will highlight the effects of dishonesty in society. Moreover, it focuses on aspects of personal and professional relationships.

Ethics Essay Body

The body section is the heart of an ethics paper as it presents the author's main points. In an ethical essay, each body paragraph has several elements that should explain your main idea. These include:

A topic sentence that is precise and reiterates your stance on the issue.
Evidence supporting it.
Examples that illustrate your argument.
A thorough analysis showing how the evidence and examples relate to that issue.
A transition sentence that connects one paragraph to another with the help of essay transitions .

When you write an ethics essay, adding relevant examples strengthens your main point and makes it easy for others to understand and comprehend your argument.

Body Paragraph for Ethics Paper Example

A good body paragraph must have a well-defined topic sentence that makes a claim and includes evidence and examples to support it. Look at part of an example of ethics essay body paragraph below and see how its idea has been developed:

Honesty is an essential component of professional integrity. In many fields, trust and credibility are crucial for professionals to build relationships and success. For example, a doctor who is dishonest about a potential side effect of a medication is not only acting unethically but also putting the health and well-being of their patients at risk. Similarly, a dishonest businessman could achieve short-term benefits but will lose their client’s trust.

Ethics Essay Conclusion

A concluding paragraph shares the summary and overview of the author's main arguments. Many students need clarification on what should be included in the essay conclusion and how best to get a reader's attention. When writing an ethics paper conclusion, consider the following:

Restate the thesis statement to emphasize your position.
Summarize its main points and evidence.
Final thoughts on the issue and any other considerations.

You can also reflect on the topic or acknowledge any possible challenges or questions that have not been answered. A closing statement should present a call to action on the problem based on your position.

Sample Ethics Paper Conclusion

The conclusion paragraph restates the thesis statement and summarizes the arguments presented in that paper. The sample conclusion for an ethical essay example below demonstrates how you should write a concluding statement.

In conclusion, the implications of dishonesty and the importance of honesty in our lives cannot be overstated. Honesty builds solid relationships, effective communication, and better decision-making. This essay has explored how dishonesty impacts people and that we should value honesty. We hope this essay will help readers assess their behavior and work towards being more honest in their lives.

In the above extract, the writer gives final thoughts on the topic, urging readers to adopt honest behavior.

How to Write an Ethics Paper?

As you learn how to write an ethics essay, it is not advised to immediately choose a topic and begin writing. When you follow this method, you will get stuck or fail to present concrete ideas. A good writer understands the importance of planning. As a fact, you should organize your work and ensure it captures key elements that shed more light on your arguments. Hence, following the essay structure and creating an outline to guide your writing process is the best approach. In the following segment, we have highlighted step-by-step techniques on how to write a good ethics paper.

1. Pick a Topic

Before writing ethical papers, brainstorm to find ideal topics that can be easily debated. For starters, make a list, then select a title that presents a moral issue that may be explained and addressed from opposing sides. Make sure you choose one that interests you. Here are a few ideas to help you search for topics:

Review current trends affecting people.
Think about your personal experiences.
Study different moral theories and principles.
Examine classical moral dilemmas.

Once you find a suitable topic and are ready, start to write your ethics essay, conduct preliminary research, and ascertain that there are enough sources to support it.

2. Conduct In-Depth Research

Once you choose a topic for your essay, the next step is gathering sufficient information about it. Conducting in-depth research entails looking through scholarly journals to find credible material. Ensure you note down all sources you found helpful to assist you on how to write your ethics paper. Use the following steps to help you conduct your research:

Clearly state and define a problem you want to discuss.
This will guide your research process.
Develop keywords that match the topic.
Begin searching from a wide perspective. This will allow you to collect more information, then narrow it down by using the identified words above.

3. Develop an Ethics Essay Outline

An outline will ease up your writing process when developing an ethic essay. As you develop a paper on ethics, jot down factual ideas that will build your paragraphs for each section. Include the following steps in your process:

Review the topic and information gathered to write a thesis statement.
Identify the main arguments you want to discuss and include their evidence.
Group them into sections, each presenting a new idea that supports the thesis.
Write an outline.
Review and refine it.

Examples can also be included to support your main arguments. The structure should be sequential, coherent, and with a good flow from beginning to end. When you follow all steps, you can create an engaging and organized outline that will help you write a good essay.

4. Write an Ethics Essay

Once you have selected a topic, conducted research, and outlined your main points, you can begin writing an essay . Ensure you adhere to the ethics paper format you have chosen. Start an ethics paper with an overview of your topic to capture the readers' attention. Build upon your paper by avoiding ambiguous arguments and using the outline to help you write your essay on ethics. Finish the introduction paragraph with a thesis statement that explains your main position. Expand on your thesis statement in all essay paragraphs. Each paragraph should start with a topic sentence and provide evidence plus an example to solidify your argument, strengthen the main point, and let readers see the reasoning behind your stance. Finally, conclude the essay by restating your thesis statement and summarizing all key ideas. Your conclusion should engage the reader, posing questions or urging them to reflect on the issue and how it will impact them.

5. Proofread Your Ethics Essay

Proofreading your essay is the last step as you countercheck any grammatical or structural errors in your essay. When writing your ethic paper, typical mistakes you could encounter include the following:

Spelling errors: e.g., there, they’re, their.
Homophone words: such as new vs. knew.
Inconsistencies: like mixing British and American words, e.g., color vs. color.
Formatting issues: e.g., double spacing, different font types.

While proofreading your ethical issue essay, read it aloud to detect lexical errors or ambiguous phrases that distort its meaning. Verify your information and ensure it is relevant and up-to-date. You can ask your fellow student to read the essay and give feedback on its structure and quality.

Ethics Essay Examples

Writing an essay is challenging without the right steps. There are so many ethics paper examples on the internet, however, we have provided a list of free ethics essay examples below that are well-structured and have a solid argument to help you write your paper. Click on them and see how each writing step has been integrated. Ethics essay example 1

Ethics essay example 2

Ethics essay example 3

Ethics essay example 4

College ethics essay example 5

Ethics Essay Writing Tips

When writing papers on ethics, here are several tips to help you complete an excellent essay:

Choose a narrow topic and avoid broad subjects, as it is easy to cover the topic in detail.
Ensure you have background information. A good understanding of a topic can make it easy to apply all necessary moral theories and principles in writing your paper.
State your position clearly. It is important to be sure about your stance as it will allow you to draft your arguments accordingly.
When writing ethics essays, be mindful of your audience. Provide arguments that they can understand.
Integrate solid examples into your essay. Morality can be hard to understand; therefore, using them will help a reader grasp these concepts.

Bottom Line on Writing an Ethics Paper

Creating this essay is a common exercise in academics that allows students to build critical skills. When you begin writing, state your stance on an issue and provide arguments to support your position. This guide gives information on how to write an ethics essay as well as examples of ethics papers. Remember to follow these points in your writing:

Create an outline highlighting your main points.
Write an effective introduction and provide background information on an issue.
Include a thesis statement.
Develop concrete arguments and their counterarguments, and use examples.
Sum up all your key points in your conclusion and restate your thesis statement.

Contact our academic writing platform and have your challenge solved. Here, you can order essays and papers on any topic and enjoy top quality.

Daniel Howard is an Essay Writing guru. He helps students create essays that will strike a chord with the readers.

Sign in through your institution

Browse content in Arts and Humanities
Browse content in Archaeology
Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
Archaeology by Region
Archaeology of Religion
Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
Biblical Archaeology
Contemporary and Public Archaeology
Environmental Archaeology
Historical Archaeology
History and Theory of Archaeology
Industrial Archaeology
Landscape Archaeology
Mortuary Archaeology
Prehistoric Archaeology
Underwater Archaeology
Zooarchaeology
Browse content in Architecture
Architectural Structure and Design
History of Architecture
Residential and Domestic Buildings
Theory of Architecture
Browse content in Art
Art Subjects and Themes
History of Art
Industrial and Commercial Art
Theory of Art
Biographical Studies
Byzantine Studies
Browse content in Classical Studies
Classical History
Classical Philosophy
Classical Mythology
Classical Numismatics
Classical Literature
Classical Reception
Classical Art and Architecture
Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
Greek and Roman Papyrology
Greek and Roman Epigraphy
Greek and Roman Law
Greek and Roman Archaeology
Late Antiquity
Religion in the Ancient World
Social History
Digital Humanities
Browse content in History
Colonialism and Imperialism
Diplomatic History
Environmental History
Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
Historical Geography
History by Period
History of Emotions
History of Agriculture
History of Education
History of Gender and Sexuality
Industrial History
Intellectual History
International History
Labour History
Legal and Constitutional History
Local and Family History
Maritime History
Military History
National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
Oral History
Political History
Public History
Regional and National History
Revolutions and Rebellions
Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
Social and Cultural History
Theory, Methods, and Historiography
Urban History
World History
Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
Language Learning (Specific Skills)
Language Teaching Theory and Methods
Browse content in Linguistics
Applied Linguistics
Cognitive Linguistics
Computational Linguistics
Forensic Linguistics
Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
History of English
Language Evolution
Language Reference
Language Acquisition
Language Variation
Language Families
Lexicography
Linguistic Anthropology
Linguistic Theories
Linguistic Typology
Phonetics and Phonology
Psycholinguistics
Sociolinguistics
Translation and Interpretation
Writing Systems
Browse content in Literature
Bibliography
Children's Literature Studies
Literary Studies (Romanticism)
Literary Studies (American)
Literary Studies (Asian)
Literary Studies (European)
Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
Literary Studies (Modernism)
Literary Studies - World
Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
Literary Studies (19th Century)
Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
Literary Studies (African American Literature)
Literary Studies (British and Irish)
Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
Literary Studies (History of the Book)
Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
Literary Studies (War Literature)
Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
Mythology and Folklore
Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
Browse content in Media Studies
Browse content in Music
Applied Music
Dance and Music
Ethics in Music
Ethnomusicology
Gender and Sexuality in Music
Medicine and Music
Music Cultures
Music and Media
Music and Religion
Music and Culture
Music Education and Pedagogy
Music Theory and Analysis
Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
Musicology and Music History
Performance Practice and Studies
Race and Ethnicity in Music
Sound Studies
Browse content in Performing Arts
Browse content in Philosophy
Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
Epistemology
Feminist Philosophy
History of Western Philosophy
Metaphysics
Moral Philosophy
Non-Western Philosophy
Philosophy of Language
Philosophy of Mind
Philosophy of Perception
Philosophy of Science
Philosophy of Action
Philosophy of Law
Philosophy of Religion
Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
Practical Ethics
Social and Political Philosophy
Browse content in Religion
Biblical Studies
Christianity
East Asian Religions
History of Religion
Judaism and Jewish Studies
Qumran Studies
Religion and Education
Religion and Health
Religion and Politics
Religion and Science
Religion and Law
Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
Religious Studies
Browse content in Society and Culture
Cookery, Food, and Drink
Cultural Studies
Customs and Traditions
Ethical Issues and Debates
Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
Sports and Outdoor Recreation
Technology and Society
Travel and Holiday
Visual Culture
Browse content in Law
Arbitration
Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
Commercial Law
Company Law
Browse content in Comparative Law
Systems of Law
Competition Law
Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
Government Powers
Judicial Review
Local Government Law
Military and Defence Law
Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
Construction Law
Contract Law
Browse content in Criminal Law
Criminal Procedure
Criminal Evidence Law
Sentencing and Punishment
Employment and Labour Law
Environment and Energy Law
Browse content in Financial Law
Banking Law
Insolvency Law
History of Law
Human Rights and Immigration
Intellectual Property Law
Browse content in International Law
Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
Public International Law
IT and Communications Law
Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
Law and Politics
Law and Society
Browse content in Legal System and Practice
Courts and Procedure
Legal Skills and Practice
Legal System - Costs and Funding
Primary Sources of Law
Regulation of Legal Profession
Medical and Healthcare Law
Browse content in Policing
Criminal Investigation and Detection
Police and Security Services
Police Procedure and Law
Police Regional Planning
Browse content in Property Law
Personal Property Law
Restitution
Study and Revision
Terrorism and National Security Law
Browse content in Trusts Law
Wills and Probate or Succession
Browse content in Medicine and Health
Browse content in Allied Health Professions
Arts Therapies
Clinical Science
Dietetics and Nutrition
Occupational Therapy
Operating Department Practice
Physiotherapy
Radiography
Speech and Language Therapy
Browse content in Anaesthetics
General Anaesthesia
Clinical Neuroscience
Browse content in Clinical Medicine
Acute Medicine
Cardiovascular Medicine
Clinical Genetics
Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
Dermatology
Endocrinology and Diabetes
Gastroenterology
Genito-urinary Medicine
Geriatric Medicine
Infectious Diseases
Medical Toxicology
Medical Oncology
Pain Medicine
Palliative Medicine
Rehabilitation Medicine
Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
Rheumatology
Sleep Medicine
Sports and Exercise Medicine
Community Medical Services
Critical Care
Emergency Medicine
Forensic Medicine
Haematology
History of Medicine
Browse content in Medical Skills
Clinical Skills
Communication Skills
Nursing Skills
Surgical Skills
Browse content in Medical Dentistry
Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
Paediatric Dentistry
Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
Surgical Dentistry
Medical Ethics
Medical Statistics and Methodology
Browse content in Neurology
Clinical Neurophysiology
Neuropathology
Nursing Studies
Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Gynaecology
Occupational Medicine
Ophthalmology
Otolaryngology (ENT)
Browse content in Paediatrics
Neonatology
Browse content in Pathology
Chemical Pathology
Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
Histopathology
Medical Microbiology and Virology
Patient Education and Information
Browse content in Pharmacology
Psychopharmacology
Browse content in Popular Health
Caring for Others
Complementary and Alternative Medicine
Self-help and Personal Development
Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
Cell Biology
Molecular Biology and Genetics
Reproduction, Growth and Development
Primary Care
Professional Development in Medicine
Browse content in Psychiatry
Addiction Medicine
Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
Forensic Psychiatry
Learning Disabilities
Old Age Psychiatry
Psychotherapy
Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
Epidemiology
Public Health
Browse content in Radiology
Clinical Radiology
Interventional Radiology
Nuclear Medicine
Radiation Oncology
Reproductive Medicine
Browse content in Surgery
Cardiothoracic Surgery
Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
General Surgery
Neurosurgery
Paediatric Surgery
Peri-operative Care
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
Surgical Oncology
Transplant Surgery
Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
Vascular Surgery
Browse content in Science and Mathematics
Browse content in Biological Sciences
Aquatic Biology
Biochemistry
Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
Developmental Biology
Ecology and Conservation
Evolutionary Biology
Genetics and Genomics
Microbiology
Molecular and Cell Biology
Natural History
Plant Sciences and Forestry
Research Methods in Life Sciences
Structural Biology
Systems Biology
Zoology and Animal Sciences
Browse content in Chemistry
Analytical Chemistry
Computational Chemistry
Crystallography
Environmental Chemistry
Industrial Chemistry
Inorganic Chemistry
Materials Chemistry
Medicinal Chemistry
Mineralogy and Gems
Organic Chemistry
Physical Chemistry
Polymer Chemistry
Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
Theoretical Chemistry
Browse content in Computer Science
Artificial Intelligence
Computer Architecture and Logic Design
Game Studies
Human-Computer Interaction
Mathematical Theory of Computation
Programming Languages
Software Engineering
Systems Analysis and Design
Virtual Reality
Browse content in Computing
Business Applications
Computer Security
Computer Games
Computer Networking and Communications
Digital Lifestyle
Graphical and Digital Media Applications
Operating Systems
Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
Atmospheric Sciences
Environmental Geography
Geology and the Lithosphere
Maps and Map-making
Meteorology and Climatology
Oceanography and Hydrology
Palaeontology
Physical Geography and Topography
Regional Geography
Soil Science
Urban Geography
Browse content in Engineering and Technology
Agriculture and Farming
Biological Engineering
Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
Electronics and Communications Engineering
Energy Technology
Engineering (General)
Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
History of Engineering and Technology
Mechanical Engineering and Materials
Technology of Industrial Chemistry
Transport Technology and Trades
Browse content in Environmental Science
Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
Environmental Sustainability
Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
History of Science and Technology
Browse content in Materials Science
Ceramics and Glasses
Composite Materials
Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
Nanotechnology
Browse content in Mathematics
Applied Mathematics
Biomathematics and Statistics
History of Mathematics
Mathematical Education
Mathematical Finance
Mathematical Analysis
Numerical and Computational Mathematics
Probability and Statistics
Pure Mathematics
Browse content in Neuroscience
Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
Development of the Nervous System
Disorders of the Nervous System
History of Neuroscience
Invertebrate Neurobiology
Molecular and Cellular Systems
Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
Neuroscientific Techniques
Sensory and Motor Systems
Browse content in Physics
Astronomy and Astrophysics
Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
Biological and Medical Physics
Classical Mechanics
Computational Physics
Condensed Matter Physics
Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
History of Physics
Mathematical and Statistical Physics
Measurement Science
Nuclear Physics
Particles and Fields
Plasma Physics
Quantum Physics
Relativity and Gravitation
Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
Browse content in Psychology
Affective Sciences
Clinical Psychology
Cognitive Psychology
Cognitive Neuroscience
Criminal and Forensic Psychology
Developmental Psychology
Educational Psychology
Evolutionary Psychology
Health Psychology
History and Systems in Psychology
Music Psychology
Neuropsychology
Organizational Psychology
Psychological Assessment and Testing
Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
Psychology Professional Development and Training
Research Methods in Psychology
Social Psychology
Browse content in Social Sciences
Browse content in Anthropology
Anthropology of Religion
Human Evolution
Medical Anthropology
Physical Anthropology
Regional Anthropology
Social and Cultural Anthropology
Theory and Practice of Anthropology
Browse content in Business and Management
Business Ethics
Business Strategy
Business History
Business and Technology
Business and Government
Business and the Environment
Comparative Management
Corporate Governance
Corporate Social Responsibility
Entrepreneurship
Health Management
Human Resource Management
Industrial and Employment Relations
Industry Studies
Information and Communication Technologies
International Business
Knowledge Management
Management and Management Techniques
Operations Management
Organizational Theory and Behaviour
Pensions and Pension Management
Public and Nonprofit Management
Social Issues in Business and Management
Strategic Management
Supply Chain Management
Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
Criminal Justice
Criminology
Forms of Crime
International and Comparative Criminology
Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
Development Studies
Browse content in Economics
Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
Asian Economics
Behavioural Finance
Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
Economic History
Economic Systems
Economic Methodology
Economic Development and Growth
Financial Markets
Financial Institutions and Services
General Economics and Teaching
Health, Education, and Welfare
History of Economic Thought
International Economics
Labour and Demographic Economics
Law and Economics
Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
Microeconomics
Public Economics
Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
Welfare Economics
Browse content in Education
Adult Education and Continuous Learning
Care and Counselling of Students
Early Childhood and Elementary Education
Educational Equipment and Technology
Educational Strategies and Policy
Higher and Further Education
Organization and Management of Education
Philosophy and Theory of Education
Schools Studies
Secondary Education
Teaching of a Specific Subject
Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
Teaching Skills and Techniques
Browse content in Environment
Applied Ecology (Social Science)
Climate Change
Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
Management of Land and Natural Resources (Social Science)
Natural Disasters (Environment)
Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Social Science)
Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
Sustainability
Browse content in Human Geography
Cultural Geography
Economic Geography
Political Geography
Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
Communication Studies
Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
Browse content in Politics
African Politics
Asian Politics
Chinese Politics
Comparative Politics
Conflict Politics
Elections and Electoral Studies
Environmental Politics
Ethnic Politics
European Union
Foreign Policy
Gender and Politics
Human Rights and Politics
Indian Politics
International Relations
International Organization (Politics)
Irish Politics
Latin American Politics
Middle Eastern Politics
Political Behaviour
Political Economy
Political Institutions
Political Methodology
Political Communication
Political Philosophy
Political Sociology
Political Theory
Politics and Law
Politics of Development
Public Policy
Public Administration
Qualitative Political Methodology
Quantitative Political Methodology
Regional Political Studies
Russian Politics
Security Studies
State and Local Government
UK Politics
US Politics
Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
African Studies
Asian Studies
East Asian Studies
Japanese Studies
Latin American Studies
Middle Eastern Studies
Native American Studies
Scottish Studies
Browse content in Research and Information
Research Methods
Browse content in Social Work
Addictions and Substance Misuse
Adoption and Fostering
Care of the Elderly
Child and Adolescent Social Work
Couple and Family Social Work
Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
Emergency Services
Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
International and Global Issues in Social Work
Mental and Behavioural Health
Social Justice and Human Rights
Social Policy and Advocacy
Social Work and Crime and Justice
Social Work Macro Practice
Social Work Practice Settings
Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
Welfare and Benefit Systems
Browse content in Sociology
Childhood Studies
Community Development
Comparative and Historical Sociology
Disability Studies
Economic Sociology
Gender and Sexuality
Gerontology and Ageing
Health, Illness, and Medicine
Marriage and the Family
Migration Studies
Occupations, Professions, and Work
Organizations
Population and Demography
Race and Ethnicity
Social Theory
Social Movements and Social Change
Social Research and Statistics
Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
Sociology of Religion
Sociology of Education
Sport and Leisure
Urban and Rural Studies
Browse content in Warfare and Defence
Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
Land Forces and Warfare
Military Administration
Military Life and Institutions
Naval Forces and Warfare
Other Warfare and Defence Issues
Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
Weapons and Equipment

Drawing Morals: Essays in Ethical Theory

Jackman Distinguished Professor of Philosophical Studies

Cite Icon Cite
Permissions Icon Permissions

This volume contains chapters on moral and political philosophy. The chapters address a wide variety of topics, from the well-rounded life and the value of playing games to proportionality in war and the ethics of nationalism. They also share a common aim: to illuminate the surprising richness and subtlety of our everyday moral thought by revealing its underlying structure, which they often do by representing that structure on graphs. More specifically, the chapters all give what the first chapter in the volume calls “structural” as against “foundational” analyses of moral views. Eschewing the grander ambition of grounding our ideas about, for example, virtue or desert in claims that use different concepts and concern some other, allegedly more fundamental topic, the chapters examine these ideas in their own right and with close attention to their details. As well as illuminating their individual topics, the chapters illustrate the insights that this structural method can yield.

Personal account

Sign in with email/username & password
Get email alerts
Save searches
Purchase content
Activate your purchase/trial code
Add your ORCID iD

Institutional access

Sign in with username/password
Recommend to your librarian
Institutional account management
Get help with access

Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:

IP based access

Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.

Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institutionâ€™s website and Oxford Academic.

Click Sign in through your institution.
Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institutionâ€™s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.

Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.

Society Members

Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:

Sign in through society site

Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see â€˜Sign in through society siteâ€™ in the sign in pane within a journal:

Click Sign in through society site.
When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.

If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.

Sign in using a personal account

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.

A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.

Viewing your signed in accounts

Click the account icon in the top right to:

View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
View the institutional accounts that are providing access.

Signed in but can't access content

Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.

For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.

Our books are available by subscription or purchase to libraries and institutions.

Month:	Total Views:
October 2022	2
October 2022	1
October 2022	5
October 2022	1
October 2022	1
October 2022	31
October 2022	1
October 2022	1
October 2022	1
October 2022	2
October 2022	1
October 2022	1
October 2022	1
October 2022	1
October 2022	1
October 2022	3
November 2022	1
November 2022	1
November 2022	6
November 2022	1
November 2022	1
November 2022	1
November 2022	3
November 2022	3
November 2022	3
December 2022	3
December 2022	6
December 2022	1
December 2022	1
December 2022	7
December 2022	1
December 2022	2
December 2022	2
December 2022	1
January 2023	6
January 2023	4
January 2023	2
January 2023	1
January 2023	1
February 2023	3
February 2023	2
February 2023	4
March 2023	10
March 2023	1
March 2023	1
March 2023	1
March 2023	1
March 2023	1
March 2023	2
March 2023	7
March 2023	1
April 2023	1
April 2023	1
April 2023	3
April 2023	7
April 2023	10
May 2023	2
May 2023	9
June 2023	4
June 2023	2
June 2023	1
July 2023	4
July 2023	1
July 2023	1
July 2023	1
July 2023	5
July 2023	1
August 2023	4
August 2023	1
August 2023	1
August 2023	1
September 2023	3
September 2023	4
September 2023	5
September 2023	3
September 2023	1
September 2023	2
September 2023	5
September 2023	3
September 2023	3
September 2023	3
September 2023	3
September 2023	3
September 2023	3
September 2023	3
September 2023	3
September 2023	6
September 2023	3
September 2023	3
September 2023	3
September 2023	3
October 2023	25
October 2023	1
October 2023	2
October 2023	10
October 2023	6
October 2023	2
October 2023	2
November 2023	3
November 2023	2
November 2023	1
November 2023	12
November 2023	1
December 2023	2
December 2023	3
December 2023	6
December 2023	1
January 2024	2
January 2024	2
January 2024	6
January 2024	1
January 2024	7
January 2024	1
January 2024	1
February 2024	1
February 2024	3
February 2024	1
February 2024	3
February 2024	15
February 2024	8
March 2024	11
March 2024	6
March 2024	6
March 2024	18
March 2024	1
April 2024	14
April 2024	3
April 2024	19
April 2024	6
April 2024	11
April 2024	3
April 2024	3
April 2024	3
April 2024	3
April 2024	3
April 2024	3
April 2024	4
April 2024	3
April 2024	3
April 2024	3
April 2024	3
May 2024	10
May 2024	5
May 2024	1
May 2024	2
May 2024	16
May 2024	2
May 2024	6
June 2024	1
June 2024	1
June 2024	1
June 2024	1
June 2024	4
June 2024	2
June 2024	1
June 2024	2
June 2024	1
June 2024	8
June 2024	1
June 2024	1
June 2024	1
June 2024	4
June 2024	1
June 2024	1
June 2024	2
July 2024	4
July 2024	6
July 2024	1
July 2024	6
August 2024	1
August 2024	2
August 2024	7
August 2024	1
August 2024	2
August 2024	2

About Oxford Academic
Publish journals with us
University press partners
What we publish
New features
Open access
Rights and permissions
Accessibility
Advertising
Media enquiries
Oxford University Press
Oxford Languages
University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

Cookie settings
Cookie policy
Privacy policy
Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Ethics and Morality Theories: Explanation and Comparison Essay

To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
As a template for you assignment

Introduction

Explanation of the different theoretical models, traditional ethical theories.

Ethics is a field of philosophy that attempts to answer questions on morality that have to do with good and bad, right and wrong, virtue and vice among other moral concerns. Within this field of study are subgroups that deal with the different areas of application of ethics like meta-ethics that deals with issues of hypothetical meaning, and how to establish the level of truth in the propositions. Another branch of ethics is applied ethics that deals with how moral capability develops and what its nature should be like. Normative ethics is applied in deciding between different courses of action and descriptive ethics that seek to point out the moral values that different individuals actually abide by. (Ellis 3-29)

Ethics of care is a theory of ethics that is used to define the different conditions or factors that make an action either wrong or right. However, within this theory are constituent theoretical views that were developed within the late twentieth century by feminists who were seeking to provide women with more fair treatment and rights. The ethics of care give emphasis to the need for relationships unlike the ethical views of deontological and consequentialist theories, that emphasize on the universality of standards and neutrality. The foundation of the ethics of care is the interdependence of different individuals towards achieving their wellbeing. The other aspect that forms a core aspect of the ethics of care is giving extra attention to the needs of the marginalized in provision among other aspects of societal living. The third area that is given consideration in observing the ethics of care is the importance of background information in protecting and upholding the interests of the individuals in question. However, the ethics of care often contrast with the ethical views of Utilitarianism and Kantian ethics in the perspective of view of morality, in the pursuit for justice that the feminists sought to find by giving more consideration to the understanding of social relationships. (Ellis 3-29)

The Metaphysics of Morals by Immanuel Kant is a major study on moral and political knowledge. This work is further divided into parts where the science of right is based on the interpretation of the roots of a political community as a national one. This is helpful in formulation of laws that are positive and which help in safeguarding the welfare of the people. The major role of this part of Kants’ work is to ensure that rights of individuals are upheld and that the political philosophy put in action does not undermine these rights. The second part of Kants’ work is the science of virtue that addresses the issues of ethical development of individuals, as members of the human society. (Sahakian & Sahakian 37-38)

Nicomachean Ethics is the work of ethics by Aristotle that is applied widely in the philosophical, legal and theological fields of study and application. Due to the wide usage of this work and the prominent impact in definition of ethics, his work has gained usage in modern philosophy. In his work Aristotle argues that his ideas are dissimilar as they are not just for the use of defining what things are, but also to help individuals become good in their daily lives by putting them into practice. He goes further to argue that his work is different from others as it proves more practical than theoretical. In his work Aristotle argues that happiness depends on doing according to virtues especially the best and most perfect of the all, and further argues that reason in thought and speech forms the starting point of virtues. In his work he does not equate character with habit as he argues that character consists of the conscious choices of a person and there is no conscious choice in habit development. He further argues that character is a stable state like knowledge that needs maintenance and conscious pursuit. Aristotle also argues that good habits in the long run integrate to form a good character that he explains as a moral virtuous state. According to Aristotle the ultimate virtue that should be attained so as to live a virtuous life is contemplative wisdom, which according to him is an integration of all the other character virtues. (Sahakian & Sahakian 37-38)

According to Held’s Reason, Gender and Moral theory, the society was seen to be sexist in that it did not sufficiently appreciate the insight of women. The other area that is given emphasis in this theory is that the traditional theories ignored the areas that form central moral experience of women, and that there was significant difference between men and women in areas of morality. The other area that this theory gave focus on was that the experiences of women should be regarded strictly as those of men, and that women have equal moral worth as men. Held’s theory was pursuing the consideration of interpersonal relations as well as economic and political relations, which formed part of the traditional theories. This theory was also trying to falsify the idea of universal principles with regard to moral issues, which it argues are wider than can be reflected by the universal principles. In this work emphasis is also given to the role of feelings in morality that works together with reason in arriving at moral judgments. The theory goes further to argue that humans should be exposed to conscious choice where one either accepts or rejects living with the moral issues and their outcomes. Another idea in this theory is that action forms a part of experience as perception is. (Noddings 89-95)

As discussed metaphysics of morals takes a political perspective in defining ethics and morals, while Nicomachean ethics emphasize on conscious choices and character development in issues of morality and ethics. On the other hand Held’s theory gives emphasis to the interpersonal relations and insight of women in defining ethics and morality. (Ellis 3-29)

According to virtue ethics emphasis is given on the disposition of the moral agent, rather than the system of consequences that may result from making certain moral choices. The views of this theory contrast with those of consequentialists who judge the morality of actions based on the consequences of the particular act, and the deontological views that argue that actions are wrong or right based on character of the given individual rather than the outcomes that may result. A good example in application for virtue ethics is the fact that when one does something wrong, the wrong lies in the moral character of that person to have made the choice to do the wrong thing despite the surrounding conditions . (Ellis 3-29)

Utilitarian ethics on the other end hold that the right or wrong nature of an action depends on the overall benefit to the majority of people. This benefit is viewed in terms of the pleasure or happiness, which yields for the utmost number of people and as well reducing the suffering in them. (Sahakian & Sahakian 37-38)

Divine command ethics argue that statements to do with the attitudes of God are right and that those that are against are wrong. It takes the view that anything that God commands is ethically and morally good, and does not give any chance to argue about the morality of these deeds and propositions. (Noddings 89-95)

As discussed virtue ethics put emphasis on the character of individuals in defining ethics and morality, while utilitarian ethics give emphasis on the common benefit and interest of the general group. On the other hand Divine command ethics rely completely on divine propositions and leave no space to question the reality of the truths. (Tong 156-162)

According to Aristotle the preconditions for practical deliberative thinking include naturalism and normativism that has to do with the intentional action, which questions the capacity of an action for genuine reasoning and results. Reasons and motivation is another precondition that guides practical reasoning in that, the reasons for a deed and the expected reward or punishment dictate if the given individual will engage in the given activity. Instrumental rationality also forms another precondition of practical reasoning in that, the objective values and reasons dictate whether an individual will engage in a given act based on psychological facts. Another precondition for practical reasoning is maximizing rationality where individuals foresee current comfort, so as to attain certain set goals that can not be felt at the time. A good example for this case is the sacrificing of ones leisure time in pursuit of academic and professional success, which they deem helpful later in life. Other factors that dictate practical reasoning include the consequences that may result from a given action, the value the individual has attached to the given act and the moral reasons that the individual holds.

The human psyche is the notion of the self that determines and influences an individual’s personality, thoughts and behavior and therefore can at large be attributed to the different levels of morality in different people. The psyche is sometimes equated to the reasoning and responsive part of the human mind that forms the basis of all psychological actions and responses. (Sahakian & Sahakian 37-38)

The ways that mental power arrives at reality, pleasure, and the middle way include the processes of reasoning where the individual chooses an option or an action that seems to be of the highest value to him. The process of planning is the other mode that the intellect uses to arrive at truth and pleasure in that it makes mental formations and acts on the one that seems to yield the best results. The other way of intellectual decision making in arriving at truth and pleasure is problem solution where it seeks to give answers to areas of problems. The other ways of arriving at truth and pleasure is the ability to think abstractly, understand different ideas and the ability to learn. (Noddings 89-95)

How excellence connects to practical wisdom is based on the fact that a virtue is not a tendency to do what is good or beneficial to the person who adopts it, but is a character trait that has connection to the emotions, values, choices, and expectations of the individual among other variables. Therefore it can be argued that adoption of virtues is guided by a mindset that adopts a certain range of considerations and factors guiding the individual’s actions. Therefore the given individual should be able to behave virtuously without having to struggle against contrary wishes, and have full ability to control the wishes and temptations to do otherwise. (Kohlberg 212)

The modes life that are seen as capable of yielding happiness are living a life of pleasure, living a life of knowledge that can also be referred to as a philosophical life, living a life of practical activity and living a virtuous life with regard to reason.

The modes of caring according to Nodding include sympathy where there is motivational and attention displacement between individuals. Another mode of caring according to these ideas is that caring should be entrenched in receptability, responsiveness and relatedness. (Gilligan 240-243)

The criticisms leveled against the traditional ethical theories include that they give emphasis on economic and political relations while ignoring social relations that form a core aspect of ethics and morality. The traditional theories are also critiqued for not giving emphasis on the need for the interdependence of different individuals in ethical development and wellbeing. The other area that they are critiqued for is that they don’t give any attention to the different conditions of society that include marginalization of individuals among others. The fact that they don’t take any consideration to the background information in upholding the rights and interests of different individuals is also critiqued. The traditional theories are also critiqued for not giving consideration to the insight and gender equity on matters of ethics and morality. (Ellis 3-29)

In summary, the traditional theories of ethics can be argued as less extensive in explaining the field of ethics and morality. However, the modern theories of ethics are covering the areas that the traditional theories did not touch on therefore provide a better picture in explaining the field of ethics and morality. However, in practical use, more than one theoretical model should be used together so as to create a true picture of ethics and issues of morality.

Ellis, Carolyn.” Telling secrets, revealing lives: Relational ethics in research with intimate others. Qualitative Inquiry 13 , ” 2007: 3-29

Gilligan, Carol. “In a different Voice: Psychological theory and women’s development.” Cambridge: Harvard University Press . 1982: 240-243

Kohlberg, Lawrence. “Stages in Moral Development as a Basis for Moral Education.” In C.M. Beck, B.S.Crittenden.1971: 212

Noddings, Nel. “Caring: A Feminine Approach to Ethics and Moral Education. Berkeley”. University of California Press.1984: 89-95

Sahakian, William. & Sahakian, Mabel. Ideas of the Great Philosophers.” Barnes & Noble Books 1993: 37-38

Tong, Rosemarie. ‘Nel Noddings’s relational ethics’. In Feminine and Feminist Ethics.” Belmost, Calif: Wadsworth. 1993: 156-162

Moral and Rules: Comparison and Contrast
"Merit: Why do We Value it?" by Louis Pojman
Aristotle's Ethics Conception and Workplace Relations
Aristotle’s Ideas on Civic Relationships
Aristotle’s Ideologies Application in Practices
Ethics and Combination of Religious Faith, Ethical and Aesthetic Beliefs
Modern Science: Issues Posing Ethical Concerns
The Perception of Beauty in David Hume’s Work “Of the Standard of Taste”
Kant’s Opinion on Morality
The Golden Principle of Ethics and Its Arguments
Chicago (A-D)
Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2021, November 28). Ethics and Morality Theories: Explanation and Comparison. https://ivypanda.com/essays/ethics-and-morality-theories-explanation-and-comparison/

"Ethics and Morality Theories: Explanation and Comparison." IvyPanda , 28 Nov. 2021, ivypanda.com/essays/ethics-and-morality-theories-explanation-and-comparison/.

IvyPanda . (2021) 'Ethics and Morality Theories: Explanation and Comparison'. 28 November.

IvyPanda . 2021. "Ethics and Morality Theories: Explanation and Comparison." November 28, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/ethics-and-morality-theories-explanation-and-comparison/.

1. IvyPanda . "Ethics and Morality Theories: Explanation and Comparison." November 28, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/ethics-and-morality-theories-explanation-and-comparison/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Ethics and Morality Theories: Explanation and Comparison." November 28, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/ethics-and-morality-theories-explanation-and-comparison/.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications
Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

Advanced Search
Journal List
Med Princ Pract
v.30(1); 2021 Feb

Principles of Clinical Ethics and Their Application to Practice

An overview of ethics and clinical ethics is presented in this review. The 4 main ethical principles, that is beneficence, nonmaleficence, autonomy, and justice, are defined and explained. Informed consent, truth-telling, and confidentiality spring from the principle of autonomy, and each of them is discussed. In patient care situations, not infrequently, there are conflicts between ethical principles (especially between beneficence and autonomy). A four-pronged systematic approach to ethical problem-solving and several illustrative cases of conflicts are presented. Comments following the cases highlight the ethical principles involved and clarify the resolution of these conflicts. A model for patient care, with caring as its central element, that integrates ethical aspects (intertwined with professionalism) with clinical and technical expertise desired of a physician is illustrated.

Highlights of the Study

Main principles of ethics, that is beneficence, nonmaleficence, autonomy, and justice, are discussed.
Autonomy is the basis for informed consent, truth-telling, and confidentiality.
A model to resolve conflicts when ethical principles collide is presented.
Cases that highlight ethical issues and their resolution are presented.
A patient care model that integrates ethics, professionalism, and cognitive and technical expertise is shown.

Introduction

A defining responsibility of a practicing physician is to make decisions on patient care in different settings. These decisions involve more than selecting the appropriate treatment or intervention.

Ethics is an inherent and inseparable part of clinical medicine [ 1 ] as the physician has an ethical obligation (i) to benefit the patient, (ii) to avoid or minimize harm, and to (iii) respect the values and preferences of the patient. Are physicians equipped to fulfill this ethical obligation and can their ethical skills be improved? A goal-oriented educational program [ 2 ] (Table (Table1) 1 ) has been shown to improve learner awareness, attitudes, knowledge, moral reasoning, and confidence [ 3 , 4 ].

Goals of ethics education

• To appreciate the ethical dimensions of patient care

• To understand ethical principles of medical profession

• To have competence in core ethical behavioral skills ( )

• To know the commonly encountered ethical issues in general and in one's specialty

• To have competence in analyzing and resolving ethical problems

• To appreciate cultural diversity and its impact on ethics

Ethics, Morality, and Professional Standards

Ethics is a broad term that covers the study of the nature of morals and the specific moral choices to be made. Normative ethics attempts to answer the question, “Which general moral norms for the guidance and evaluation of conduct should we accept, and why?” [ 5 ]. Some moral norms for right conduct are common to human kind as they transcend cultures, regions, religions, and other group identities and constitute common morality (e.g., not to kill, or harm, or cause suffering to others, not to steal, not to punish the innocent, to be truthful, to obey the law, to nurture the young and dependent, to help the suffering, and rescue those in danger). Particular morality refers to norms that bind groups because of their culture, religion, profession and include responsibilities, ideals, professional standards, and so on. A pertinent example of particular morality is the physician's “accepted role” to provide competent and trustworthy service to their patients. To reduce the vagueness of “accepted role,” physician organizations (local, state, and national) have codified their standards. However, complying with these standards, it should be understood, may not always fulfill the moral norms as the codes have “often appeared to protect the profession's interests more than to offer a broad and impartial moral viewpoint or to address issues of importance to patients and society” [ 6 ].

Bioethics and Clinical (Medical) Ethics

A number of deplorable abuses of human subjects in research, medical interventions without informed consent, experimentation in concentration camps in World War II, along with salutary advances in medicine and medical technology and societal changes, led to the rapid evolution of bioethics from one concerned about professional conduct and codes to its present status with an extensive scope that includes research ethics, public health ethics, organizational ethics, and clinical ethics.

Hereafter, the abbreviated term, ethics, will be used as I discuss the principles of clinical ethics and their application to clinical practice.

The Fundamental Principles of Ethics

Beneficence, nonmaleficence, autonomy, and justice constitute the 4 principles of ethics. The first 2 can be traced back to the time of Hippocrates “to help and do no harm,” while the latter 2 evolved later. Thus, in Percival's book on ethics in early 1800s, the importance of keeping the patient's best interest as a goal is stressed, while autonomy and justice were not discussed. However, with the passage of time, both autonomy and justice gained acceptance as important principles of ethics. In modern times, Beauchamp and Childress' book on Principles of Biomedical Ethics is a classic for its exposition of these 4 principles [ 5 ] and their application, while also discussing alternative approaches.

Beneficence

The principle of beneficence is the obligation of physician to act for the benefit of the patient and supports a number of moral rules to protect and defend the right of others, prevent harm, remove conditions that will cause harm, help persons with disabilities, and rescue persons in danger. It is worth emphasizing that, in distinction to nonmaleficence, the language here is one of positive requirements. The principle calls for not just avoiding harm, but also to benefit patients and to promote their welfare. While physicians' beneficence conforms to moral rules, and is altruistic, it is also true that in many instances it can be considered a payback for the debt to society for education (often subsidized by governments), ranks and privileges, and to the patients themselves (learning and research).

Nonmaleficence

Nonmaleficence is the obligation of a physician not to harm the patient. This simply stated principle supports several moral rules − do not kill, do not cause pain or suffering, do not incapacitate, do not cause offense, and do not deprive others of the goods of life. The practical application of nonmaleficence is for the physician to weigh the benefits against burdens of all interventions and treatments, to eschew those that are inappropriately burdensome, and to choose the best course of action for the patient. This is particularly important and pertinent in difficult end-of-life care decisions on withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining treatment, medically administered nutrition and hydration, and in pain and other symptom control. A physician's obligation and intention to relieve the suffering (e.g., refractory pain or dyspnea) of a patient by the use of appropriate drugs including opioids override the foreseen but unintended harmful effects or outcome (doctrine of double effect) [ 7 , 8 ].

The philosophical underpinning for autonomy, as interpreted by philosophers Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) and John Stuart Mill (1806–1873), and accepted as an ethical principle, is that all persons have intrinsic and unconditional worth, and therefore, should have the power to make rational decisions and moral choices, and each should be allowed to exercise his or her capacity for self-determination [ 9 ]. This ethical principle was affirmed in a court decision by Justice Cardozo in 1914 with the epigrammatic dictum, “Every human being of adult years and sound mind has a right to determine what shall be done with his own body” [ 10 ].

Autonomy, as is true for all 4 principles, needs to be weighed against competing moral principles, and in some instances may be overridden; an obvious example would be if the autonomous action of a patient causes harm to another person(s). The principle of autonomy does not extend to persons who lack the capacity (competence) to act autonomously; examples include infants and children and incompetence due to developmental, mental or physical disorder. Health-care institutions and state governments in the US have policies and procedures to assess incompetence. However, a rigid distinction between incapacity to make health-care decisions (assessed by health professionals) and incompetence (determined by court of law) is not of practical use, as a clinician's determination of a patient's lack of decision-making capacity based on physical or mental disorder has the same practical consequences as a legal determination of incompetence [ 11 ].

Detractors of the principle of autonomy question the focus on the individual and propose a broader concept of relational autonomy (shaped by social relationships and complex determinants such as gender, ethnicity and culture) [ 12 ]. Even in an advanced western country such as United States, the culture being inhomogeneous, some minority populations hold views different from that of the majority white population in need for full disclosure, and in decisions about life support (preferring a family-centered approach) [ 13 ].

Resistance to the principle of patient autonomy and its derivatives (informed consent, truth-telling) in non-western cultures is not unexpected. In countries with ancient civilizations, rooted beliefs and traditions, the practice of paternalism ( this term will be used in this article, as it is well-entrenched in ethics literature, although parentalism is the proper term ) by physicians emanates mostly from beneficence. However, culture (a composite of the customary beliefs, social forms, and material traits of a racial, religious or social group) is not static and autonomous, and changes with other trends over passing years. It is presumptuous to assume that the patterns and roles in physician-patient relationships that have been in place for a half a century and more still hold true. Therefore, a critical examination of paternalistic medical practice is needed for reasons that include technological and economic progress, improved educational and socioeconomic status of the populace, globalization, and societal movement towards emphasis on the patient as an individual, than as a member of a group. This needed examination can be accomplished by research that includes well-structured surveys on demographics, patient preferences on informed consent, truth-telling, and role in decision-making.

Respecting the principle of autonomy obliges the physician to disclose medical information and treatment options that are necessary for the patient to exercise self-determination and supports informed consent, truth-telling, and confidentiality.

Informed Consent

The requirements of an informed consent for a medical or surgical procedure, or for research, are that the patient or subject (i) must be competent to understand and decide, (ii) receives a full disclosure, (iii) comprehends the disclosure, (iv) acts voluntarily, and (v) consents to the proposed action.

The universal applicability of these requirements, rooted and developed in western culture, has met with some resistance and a suggestion to craft a set of requirements that accommodate the cultural mores of other countries [ 14 ]. In response and in vigorous defense of the 5 requirements of informed consent, Angell wrote, “There must be a core of human rights that we would wish to see honored universally, despite variations in their superficial aspects …The forces of local custom or local law cannot justify abuses of certain fundamental rights, and the right of self-determination on which the doctrine of informed consent is based, is one of them” [ 15 ].

As competence is the first of the requirements for informed consent, one should know how to detect incompetence. Standards (used singly or in combination) that are generally accepted for determining incompetence are based on the patient's inability to state a preference or choice, inability to understand one's situation and its consequences, and inability to reason through a consequential life decision [ 16 ].

In a previously autonomous, but presently incompetent patient, his/her previously expressed preferences (i.e., prior autonomous judgments) are to be respected [ 17 ]. Incompetent (non-autonomous) patients and previously competent (autonomous), but presently incompetent patients would need a surrogate decision-maker. In a non-autonomous patient, the surrogate can use either a substituted judgment standard (i.e., what the patient would wish in this circumstance and not what the surrogate would wish), or a best interests standard (i.e., what would bring the highest net benefit to the patient by weighing risks and benefits). Snyder and Sulmasy [ 18 ], in their thoughtful article, provide a practical and useful option when the surrogate is uncertain of the patient's preference(s), or when patient's preferences have not kept abreast of scientific advances. They suggest the surrogate use “substituted interests,” that is, the patient's authentic values and interests, to base the decision.

Truth-Telling

Truth-telling is a vital component in a physician-patient relationship; without this component, the physician loses the trust of the patient. An autonomous patient has not only the right to know (disclosure) of his/her diagnosis and prognosis, but also has the option to forgo this disclosure. However, the physician must know which of these 2 options the patient prefers.

In the United States, full disclosure to the patient, however grave the disease is, is the norm now, but was not so in the past. Significant resistance to full disclosure was highly prevalent in the US, but a marked shift has occurred in physicians' attitudes on this. In 1961, 88% of physicians surveyed indicated their preference to avoid disclosing a diagnosis [ 19 ]; in 1979, however, 98% of surveyed physicians favored it [ 20 ]. This marked shift is attributable to many factors that include − with no order of importance implied − educational and socioeconomic progress, increased accountability to society, and awareness of previous clinical and research transgressions by the profession.

Importantly, surveys in the US show that patients with cancer and other diseases wish to have been fully informed of their diagnoses and prognoses. Providing full information, with tact and sensitivity, to patients who want to know should be the standard. The sad consequences of not telling the truth regarding a cancer include depriving the patient of an opportunity for completion of important life-tasks: giving advice to, and taking leave of loved ones, putting financial affairs in order, including division of assets, reconciling with estranged family members and friends, attaining spiritual order by reflection, prayer, rituals, and religious sacraments [ 21 , 22 ].

In contrast to the US, full disclosure to the patient is highly variable in other countries [ 23 ]. A continuing pattern in non-western societies is for the physician to disclose the information to the family and not to the patient. The likely reasons for resistance of physicians to convey bad news are concern that it may cause anxiety and loss of hope, some uncertainty on the outcome, or belief that the patient would not be able to understand the information or may not want to know. However, this does not have to be a binary choice, as careful understanding of the principle of autonomy reveals that autonomous choice is a right of a patient, and the patient, in exercising this right, may authorize a family member or members to make decisions for him/her.

Confidentiality

Physicians are obligated not to disclose confidential information given by a patient to another party without the patient's authorization. An obvious exception (with implied patient authorization) is the sharing necessary of medical information for the care of the patient from the primary physician to consultants and other health-care teams. In the present-day modern hospitals with multiple points of tests and consultants, and the use of electronic medical records, there has been an erosion of confidentiality. However, individual physicians must exercise discipline in not discussing patient specifics with their family members or in social gatherings [ 24 ] and social media. There are some noteworthy exceptions to patient confidentiality. These include, among others, legally required reporting of gunshot wounds and sexually transmitted diseases and exceptional situations that may cause major harm to another (e.g., epidemics of infectious diseases, partner notification in HIV disease, relative notification of certain genetic risks, etc.).

Justice is generally interpreted as fair, equitable, and appropriate treatment of persons. Of the several categories of justice, the one that is most pertinent to clinical ethics is distributive justice . Distributive justice refers to the fair, equitable, and appropriate distribution of health-care resources determined by justified norms that structure the terms of social cooperation [ 25 ]. How can this be accomplished? There are different valid principles of distributive justice. These are distribution to each person (i) an equal share, (ii) according to need, (iii) according to effort, (iv) according to contribution, (v) according to merit, and (vi) according to free-market exchanges. Each principle is not exclusive, and can be, and are often combined in application. It is easy to see the difficulty in choosing, balancing, and refining these principles to form a coherent and workable solution to distribute medical resources.

Although this weighty health-care policy discussion exceeds the scope of this review, a few examples on issues of distributive justice encountered in hospital and office practice need to be mentioned. These include allotment of scarce resources (equipment, tests, medications, organ transplants), care of uninsured patients, and allotment of time for outpatient visits (equal time for every patient? based on need or complexity? based on social and or economic status?). Difficult as it may be, and despite the many constraining forces, physicians must accept the requirement of fairness contained in this principle [ 26 ]. Fairness to the patient assumes a role of primary importance when there are conflicts of interests. A flagrant example of violation of this principle would be when a particular option of treatment is chosen over others, or an expensive drug is chosen over an equally effective but less expensive one because it benefits the physician, financially, or otherwise.

Conflicts between Principles

Each one of the 4 principles of ethics is to be taken as a prima facie obligation that must be fulfilled, unless it conflicts, in a specific instance, with another principle. When faced with such a conflict, the physician has to determine the actual obligation to the patient by examining the respective weights of the competing prima facie obligations based on both content and context. Consider an example of a conflict that has an easy resolution: a patient in shock treated with urgent fluid-resuscitation and the placement of an indwelling intravenous catheter caused pain and swelling. Here the principle of beneficence overrides that of nonmaleficence. Many of the conflicts that physicians face, however, are much more complex and difficult. Consider a competent patient's refusal of a potentially life-saving intervention (e.g., instituting mechanical ventilation) or request for a potentially life-ending action (e.g., withdrawing mechanical ventilation). Nowhere in the arena of ethical decision-making is conflict as pronounced as when the principles of beneficence and autonomy collide.

Beneficence has enjoyed a historical role in the traditional practice of medicine. However, giving it primacy over patient autonomy is paternalism that makes a physician-patient relationship analogous to that of a father/mother to a child. A father/mother may refuse a child's wishes, may influence a child by a variety of ways − nondisclosure, manipulation, deception, coercion etc., consistent with his/her thinking of what is best for the child. Paternalism can be further divided into soft and hard .

In soft paternalism, the physician acts on grounds of beneficence (and, at times, nonmaleficence) when the patient is nonautonomous or substantially nonautonomous (e.g., cognitive dysfunction due to severe illness, depression, or drug addiction) [ 27 ]. Soft paternalism is complicated because of the difficulty in determining whether the patient was nonautonomous at the time of decision-making but is ethically defensible as long as the action is in concordance with what the physician believes to be the patient's values. Hard paternalism is action by a physician, intended to benefit a patient, but contrary to the voluntary decision of an autonomous patient who is fully informed and competent, and is ethically indefensible.

On the other end of the scale of hard paternalism is consumerism, a rare and extreme form of patient autonomy, that holds the view that the physician's role is limited to providing all the medical information and the available choices for interventions and treatments while the fully informed patient selects from the available choices. In this model, the physician's role is constrained, and does not permit the full use of his/her knowledge and skills to benefit the patient, and is tantamount to a form of patient abandonment and therefore is ethically indefensible.

Faced with the contrasting paradigms of beneficence and respect for autonomy and the need to reconcile these to find a common ground, Pellegrino and Thomasma [ 28 ] argue that beneficence can be inclusive of patient autonomy as “the best interests of the patients are intimately linked with their preferences” from which “are derived our primary duties to them.”

One of the basic and not infrequent reasons for disagreement between physician and patient on treatment issues is their divergent views on goals of treatment. As goals change in the course of disease (e.g., a chronic neurologic condition worsens to the point of needing ventilator support, or a cancer that has become refractory to treatment), it is imperative that the physician communicates with the patient in clear and straightforward language, without the use of medical jargon, and with the aim of defining the goal(s) of treatment under the changed circumstance. In doing so, the physician should be cognizant of patient factors that compromise decisional capacity, such as anxiety, fear, pain, lack of trust, and different beliefs and values that impair effective communication [ 29 ].

The foregoing theoretical discussion on principles of ethics has practical application in clinical practice in all settings. In the resource book for clinicians, Jonsen et al. [ 30 ] have elucidated a logical and well accepted model (Table (Table2), 2 ), along the lines of the systematic format that practicing physicians have been taught and have practiced for a long time (Chief Complaint, History of Present Illness, Past History, pertinent Family and Social History, Review of Systems, Physical Examination and Laboratory and Imaging studies). This practical approach to problem-solving in ethics involves:

Clinical assessment (identifying medical problems, treatment options, goals of care)
Patient (finding and clarifying patient preferences on treatment options and goals of care)
Quality of life (QOL) (effects of medical problems, interventions and treatments on patient's QOL with awareness of individual biases on what constitutes an acceptable QOL)
Context (many factors that include family, cultural, spiritual, religious, economic and legal).

Application of principles of ethics in patient care

Beneficence,
nonmaleficence	Nature of illness (acute, chronic, reversible, terminal)? Goals of treatment?
	Treatment options and probability of success for each option?
	Adverse effects of treatment and does benefit outweigh harm?
	Effects of no medical/surgical treatment?
	If treated, plans for limiting treatment? Stopping treatment?

Respect for autonomy
	Information given to patient on benefits and risks of treatment? Patient understood the information and gave consent?
	Patent mentally competent? If competent, what are his/her preferences?
	If patient mentally incompetent, are patient's prior preferences known? If preferences unknown, who is the appropriate surrogate?

Beneficence,	( )
nonmaleficence,	Expected QOL with and without treatment?
respect for autonomy	Deficits − physical, mental, social − may have after treatment?
	Judging QOL of patient who cannot express himself/herself? Who is the judge?
	Recognition of possible physician bias in judging QOL?
	Rationale to forgo life-sustaining treatment(s)?

Distributive justice
	Conflicts of interests − does physician benefit financially, professionally by ordering tests, prescribing medications, seeking consultations?
	Research or educational considerations that affect clinical decisions, physician orders?
	Conflicts of interests based on religious beliefs? Legal issues?
	Conflicts of interests between organizations (clinics, hospitals), 3rd party payers?
	Public health and safety issues?
	Problems in allocation of scarce resources?

Using this model, the physician can identify the principles that are in conflict, ascertain by weighing and balancing what should prevail, and when in doubt, turn to ethics literature and expert opinion.

Illustrative Cases

There is a wide gamut of clinical patient encounters with ethical issues, and some, especially those involving end-of-life care decisions, are complex. A few cases (Case 1 is modified from resource book [ 30 ]) are presented below as they highlight the importance of understanding and weighing the ethical principles involved to arrive at an ethically right solution. Case 6 was added during the revision phase of this article as it coincided with the outbreak of Coronavirus Infectious Disease-2019 (COVID-19) that became a pandemic rendering a discussion of its ethical challenges necessary and important.

A 20-year old college student living in the college hostel is brought by a friend to the Emergency Department (ED) because of unrelenting headache and fever. He appeared drowsy but was responsive and had fever (40°C), and neck rigidity on examination. Lumbar puncture was done, and spinal fluid appeared cloudy and showed increased white cells; Gram stain showed Gram-positive diplococci. Based on the diagnosis of bacterial meningitis, appropriate antibiotics were begun, and hospitalization was instituted. Although initial consent for diagnosis was implicit, and consent for lumbar puncture was explicit, at this point, the patient refuses treatment without giving any reason, and insists to return to his hostel. Even after explanation by the physician as to the seriousness of his diagnosis, and the absolute need for prompt treatment (i.e., danger to life without treatment), the patient is adamant in his refusal.

Comment . Because of this refusal, the medical indications and patient preferences (see Table Table2) 2 ) are at odds. Is it ethically right to treat against his will a patient who is making a choice that has dire consequences (disability, death) who gives no reason for this decision, and in whom a clear determination of mental incapacity cannot be made (although altered mental status may be presumed)? Here the principle of beneficence and principle of autonomy are in conflict. The weighing of factors: (1) patient may not be making a reasoned decision in his best interest because of temporary mental incapacity; and (2) the severity of life-threatening illness and the urgency to treat to save his life supports the decision in favor of beneficence (i.e., to treat).

A 56-year old male lawyer and current cigarette smoker with a pack-a-day habit for more than 30 years, is found to have a solitary right upper lobe pulmonary mass 5 cm in size on a chest radiograph done as part of an insurance application. The mass has no calcification, and there are no other pulmonary abnormalities. He has no symptoms, and his examination is normal. Tuberculosis skin test is negative, and he has no history of travel to an endemic area of fungal infection. As lung cancer is the most probable and significant diagnosis to consider, and early surgical resection provides the best prospects for cure, the physician, in consultation with the thoracic surgeon, recommends bronchoscopic biopsy and subsequent resection. The patient understands the treatment plan, and the significance of not delaying the treatment. However, he refuses, and states that he does not think he has cancer; and is fearful that the surgery would kill him. Even after further explanations on the low mortality of surgery and the importance of removing the mass before it spreads, he continues to refuse treatment.

Comment . Even though the physician's prescribed treatment, that is, removal of the mass that is probably cancer, affords the best chance of cure, and delay in its removal increases its chance of metastases and reaching an incurable stage − the choice by this well informed and mentally competent patient should be respected. Here, autonomy prevails over beneficence. The physician, however, may not abandon the patient and is obligated to offer continued outpatient visits with advice against making decision based on fear, examinations, periodic tests, and encouragement to seek a second opinion.

A 71-year-old man with very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with pneumonia, sepsis, and respiratory failure. He is intubated and mechanically ventilated. For the past 2 years, he has been on continuous oxygen treatment and was short of breath on minimal exertion. In the past 1 year, he had 2 admissions to the ICU; on both occasions he required intubation and mechanical ventilation. Presently, even with multiple antibiotics, intravenous fluid hydration, and vasopressors, his systolic blood pressure remains below 60 mm Hg, and with high flow oxygen supplementation, his oxygen saturation stays below 80%; his arterial blood pH is 7.0. His liver enzymes are elevated. He is anuric, and over next 8 h his creatinine has risen to 5 mg/dL and continues to rise. He has drifted into a comatose state. The intensivist suggests discontinuation of vasopressors and mechanical ventilation as their continued use is futile. The patient has no advance care directives or a designated health-care proxy.

Comment . The term “futility” is open to different definitions [ 31 ] and is often controversial, and therefore, some experts suggest the alternate term, “clinically non-beneficial interventions” [ 32 ]. However, in this case the term futility is appropriate to indicate that there is evidence of physiological futility (multisystem organ failure in the setting of preexisting end stage COPD, and medical interventions would not reverse the decline). It is appropriate then to discuss the patient's condition with his family with the goal of discontinuing life-sustaining interventions. These discussions should be done with sensitivity, compassion and empathy. Palliative care should be provided to alleviate his symptoms and to support the family until his death and beyond in their bereavement.

A 67-year old widow, an immigrant from southern India, is living with her son and his family in Wisconsin, USA. She was experiencing nausea, lack of appetite and weight loss for a few months. During the past week, she also had dark yellow urine, and yellow coloration of her skin. She has basic knowledge of English. She was brought to a multi-specialty teaching hospital by her son, who informed the doctor that his mother has “jaundice,” and instructed that, if any serious life-threatening disease was found, not to inform her. He asked that all information should come to him, and if there is any cancer not to treat it, since she is older and frail. Investigations in the hospital reveals that she has pancreatic cancer, and chemotherapy, while not likely to cure, would prolong her life.

Comment . In some ancient cultures, authority is given to members of the family (especially senior men) to make decisions that involve other members on marriage, job, and health care. The woman in this case is a dependent of her son, and given this cultural perspective, the son can rightfully claim to have the authority to make health-care decisions for her. Thus, the physician is faced with multiple tasks that may not be consonant. To respect cultural values [ 33 ], to directly learn the patient's preferences, to comply with the American norm of full disclosure to the patient, and to refuse the son's demands.

The principle of autonomy provides the patient the option to delegate decision-making authority to another person. Therefore, the appropriate course would be to take the tactful approach of directly informing the patient (with a translator if needed), that the diagnosed disease would require decisions for appropriate treatment. The physician should ascertain whether she would prefer to make these decisions herself, or whether she would prefer all information to be given to her son, and all decisions to be made by him.

A 45-year-old woman had laparotomy and cholecystectomy for abdominal pain and multiple gall stones. Three weeks after discharge from the hospital, she returned with fever, abdominal pain, and tenderness. She was given antibiotics, and as her fever continued, laparotomy and exploration were undertaken; a sponge left behind during the recent cholecystectomy was found. It was removed, the area cleansed, and incision closed. Antibiotics were continued, and she recovered without further incident and was discharged. Should the surgeon inform the patient of his error?

Comment . Truth-telling, a part of patient autonomy is very much applicable in this situation and disclosure to patient is required [ 34 , 35 , 36 ]. The mistake caused harm to the patient (morbidity and readmission, and a second surgery and monetary loss). Although the end result remedied the harm, the surgeon is obligated to inform the patient of the error and its consequences and offer an apology. Such errors are always reported to the Operating Room Committees and Surgical Quality Improvement Committees of US Hospitals. Hospital-based risk reduction mechanisms (e.g., Risk Management Department) present in most US hospitals would investigate the incident and come up with specific recommendations to mitigate the error and eliminate them in the future. Many institutions usually make financial settlements to obviate liability litigation (fees and hospital charges waived, and/or monetary compensation made to the patient). Elsewhere, if such mechanisms do not exist, it should be reported to the hospital. Acknowledgment from the hospital, apologies from the institution and compensation for the patient are called for. Whether in US or elsewhere, a malpractice suit is very possible in this situation, but a climate of honesty substantially reduces the threat of legal claims as most patients trust their physicians and are not vindictive.

The following scenario is at a city hospital during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic: A 74-year-old woman, residing in an assisted living facility, is brought to the ED with shortness of breath and malaise. Over the past 4 days she had been experiencing dry cough, lack of appetite, and tiredness; 2 days earlier, she stopped eating and started having a low-grade fever. A test for COVID-19 undertaken by the assisted living facility was returned positive on the morning of the ED visit.

She, a retired nurse, is a widow; both of her grown children live out-of-state. She has had hypertension for many years, controlled with daily medications. Following 2 strokes, she was moved to an assisted living facility 3 years ago. She recovered most of her functions after the strokes and required help only for bathing and dressing. She is able to answer questions appropriately but haltingly, because of respiratory distress. She has tachypnea (34/min), tachycardia (120/min), temperature of 101°F, BP 100/60 and 90% O 2 saturation (on supplemental O 2 of 4 L/min). She has dry mouth and tongue and rhonchi on lung auscultation. Her respiratory rate is increasing on observation and she is visibly tiring.

Another patient is now brought in by ambulance; this is a 22-year-old man living in an apartment and has had symptoms of “flu” for a week. Because of the pandemic, he was observing the recommended self-distancing, and had no known exposure to coronavirus. He used saline gargles, acetaminophen, and cough syrup to alleviate his sore throat, cough, and fever. In the past 2 days, his symptoms worsened, and he drove himself to a virus testing station and got tested for COVID-19; he was told that he would be notified of the results. He returned to his apartment and after a sleepless night with fever, sweats, and persistent cough, he woke up and felt drained of all strength. The test result confirmed COVID-19. He then called for an ambulance.

He has been previously healthy. He is a non-smoker and uses alcohol rarely. He is a second-year medical student. He is single, and his parents and sibling live hundreds of miles away.

On examination, he has marked tachypnea (>40/min), shallow breathing, heart rate of 128/min, temperature of 103°F and O 2 saturation of 88 on pulse oximetry. He appears drowsy and is slow to respond to questions. He is propped up to a sitting position as it is uncomfortable for him to be supine. Accessory muscles of neck and intercostals are contracting with each breath, and on auscultation, he has basilar crackles and scattered rhonchi. His O 2 saturation drops to 85 and he is in respiratory distress despite nebulized bronchodilator treatment.

Both of these patients are in respiratory failure, clinically and confirmed by arterial blood gases, and are in urgent need of intubation and mechanical ventilation. However, only one ventilator is available; who gets it?

Comment . The decision to allocate a scarce and potentially life-saving equipment (ventilator) is very difficult as it directly addresses the question “Who shall live when not everyone can live? [ 5 ]. This decision cannot be emotion-driven or arbitrary; nor should it be based on a person's wealth or social standing. Priorities need to be established ethically and must be applied consistently in the same institution and ideally throughout the state and the country. The general social norm to treat all equally or to treat on a first come, first saved basis is not the appropriate choice here. There is a consensus among clinical ethics scholars, that in this situation, maximizing benefits is the dominant value in making a decision [ 37 ]. Maximizing benefits can be viewed in 2 different ways; in lives saved or in life-years saved; they differ in that the first is non-utilitarian while the second is utilitarian. A subordinate consideration is giving priority to patients who have a better chance of survival and a reasonable life expectancy. The other 2 considerations are promoting and rewarding instrumental value (benefit to others) and the acuity of illness. Health-care workers (physicians, nurses, therapists etc.) and research participants have instrumental value as their work benefits others; among them those actively contributing are of more value than those who have made their contributions. The need to prioritize the sickest and the youngest is also a recognized value when these are aligned with the dominant value of maximizing benefits. In the context of COVID-19 pandemic, Emanuel et al. [ 37 ] weighed and analyzed these values and offered some recommendations. Some ethics scholars opine that in times of a pandemic, the burden of making a decision as to who gets a ventilator and who does not (often a life or death choice) should not be on the front-line physicians, as it may cause a severe and life-long emotional toll on them [ 35 , 36 ]. The toll can be severe for nurses and other front-line health-care providers as well. As a safeguard, they propose that the decision should rest on a select committee that excludes doctors, nurses and others who are caring for the patient(s) under consideration [ 38 ].

Both patients described in the case summaries have comparable acuity of illness and both are in need of mechanical ventilator support. However, in the dominant value of maximizing benefits the two patients differ; in terms of life-years saved, the second patient (22-year-old man) is ahead as his life expectancy is longer. Additionally, he is more likely than the older woman, to survive mechanical ventilation, infection, and possible complications. Another supporting factor in favor of the second patient is his potential instrumental value (benefit to others) as a future physician.

Unlike the other illustrative cases, the scenario of these 2 cases, does not lend itself to a peaceful and fully satisfactory resolution. The fairness of allocating a scarce and potentially life-saving resource based on maximizing benefits and preference to instrumental value (benefit to others) is open to question. The American College of Physicians has stated that allocation decisions during resource scarcity should be made “based on patient need, prognosis (determined by objective scientific measure and informed clinical judgment) and effectiveness (i.e., likelihood that the therapy will help the patient to recover), … to maximize the number of patients who will recover” [ 39 ].

This review has covered basics of ethics founded on morality and ethical principles with illustrative examples. In the following segment, professionalism is defined, its alignment with ethics depicted, and virtues desired of a physician (inclusive term for medical doctor regardless of type of practice) are elucidated. It concludes with my vision of an integrated model for patient care.

The core of professionalism is a therapeutic relationship built on competent and compassionate care by a physician that meets the expectation and benefits a patient. In this relationship, which is rooted in the ethical principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence, the physician fulfills the elements shown in Table Table3. 3 . Professionalism “demands placing the interest of patients above those of the physician, setting and maintaining standards of competence and integrity, and providing expert advice to society on matters of health” [ 26 , 40 ].

Physicians obligations

• Cure of disease when possible

• Maintenance or improvement of functional status and quality of life (relief of symptoms and suffering)

• Promotion of health and prevention of disease

• Prevention of untimely death

• Education and counseling of patients (condition and prognosis)

• Avoidance of harm to the patient in the course of care

• Providing relief and support near time of death (end-of-life care)

Drawing on several decades of experience in teaching and mentoring, I envisage physicians with qualities of both “heart” and “head.” Ethical and humanistic values shape the former, while knowledge (e.g., by study, research, practice) and technical skills (e.g., medical and surgical procedures) form the latter. Figure Figure1 1 is a representation of this model. Morality that forms the base of the model and ethical principles that rest on it were previously explained. Virtues are linked, some more tightly than others, to the principles of ethics. Compassion, a prelude to caring, presupposes sympathy, is expressed in beneficence. Discernment is especially valuable in decision-making when principles of ethics collide. Trustworthiness leads to trust, and is a needed virtue when patients, at their most vulnerable time, place themselves in the hands of physicians. Integrity involves the coherent integration of emotions, knowledge and aspirations while maintaining moral values. Physicians need both professional integrity and personal integrity, as the former may not cover all scenarios (e.g., prescribing ineffective drugs or expensive drugs when effective inexpensive drugs are available, performing invasive treatments or experimental research modalities without fully informed consent, any situation where personal monetary gain is placed over patient's welfare). Conscientiousness is required to determine what is right by critical reflection on good versus bad, better versus good, logical versus emotional, and right versus wrong.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is mpp-0030-0017-g01.jpg

Integrated model of patient care.

In my conceptualized model of patient care (Fig. (Fig.1), 1 ), medical knowledge, skills to apply that knowledge, technical skills, practice-based learning, and communication skills are partnered with ethical principles and professional virtues. The virtues of compassion, discernment, trustworthiness, integrity, and conscientiousness are the necessary building blocks for the virtue of caring. Caring is the defining virtue for all health-care professions. In all interactions with patients, besides the technical expertise of a physician, the human element of caring (one human to another) is needed. In different situations, caring can be expressed verbally and non-verbally (e.g., the manner of communication with both physician and patient closely seated, and with unhurried, softly spoken words); a gentle touch especially when conveying “bad news”; a firmer touch or grip to convey reassurance to a patient facing a difficult treatment choice; to hold the hand of a patient dying alone). Thus, “caring” is in the center of the depicted integrated model, and as Peabody succinctly expressed it nearly a hundred years ago, “The secret of the care of the patient is caring for the patient” [ 41 ].

Conflict of Interest Statement

The author declares that he has no conflicts of interest.

Home — Essay Samples — Philosophy — Ethics — Ethical Theories And Their Relevance

Ethical Theories and Their Relevance

Categories: Ethics Morality

About this sample

Words: 1847 |

10 min read

Published: Jun 5, 2019

Words: 1847 | Pages: 4 | 10 min read

Introduction, virtue ethics, works cited.

Eudemonism: this is the component of excellence morals that says the essential point of individuals in his/her life is thriving or bliss or live well life. A virtue that empowers a person to accomplish prime objective of life that is bliss contributes in the prosperity and prompts great life.
Ethics of fidelity and self-care: This virtue ethics suggest that the significance of community, commonality and relationship lies on top of the universal lies means on top of the universal standards and fairness. This theory requires that we treat people closer to us with special care. This theory have a novel responsibility to worry for ourselves, affectively, mentally, physically, and spiritually.
Agents based theories: This is the third components of morals theories that portrays a specific activity of the specialist or gives the moral judgment based on moral sense.

Theories of ethics: Rights

Theory of relativist, theory of objectivist, theory of consequentialist.

The consequences of the act confirm if the character of act is correct or incorrect
The number of negative results of associate degree act verify the incorrectness of the act and vice-versa

Theory of deontology

Comparison of theories.

Australian computer society(ACS) code of ethics. The Australian computer society code of ethics is part of the ACS constitution. this in light of number of society esteems, for example, priority of the public interest should be way above the personal, business or sectional interests, improvement of quality of lifetime of those full of the work, honesty is that the illustration of skills, knowledge, services and merchandise, ably and diligently alongside skilled development and expertise
Connection between code and ethical theories. There area unit moral theories that show all the principles that area unit gift within the ACS code of ethics like those of the idea of consequentialism and objectivism. whereas theory of ethics doesn’t come back to first priority in ACS code of Ethics that says public interest ought to be higher than the private interest. however just in case of virtue ethics it’s okay to place personal interest at prime level.

ACM and IEEE Codes of Ethics

The assets in the field of ICT must keep the general population enthusiasm over the individual intrigue
The interest of the consumer and leader should be thought-about and amalgamated with the general public interest
Proficient guidelines and best practices must be followed in each and every phase of the venture course of events
The skilled judgment should embrace the weather of integrity and independence
A moral approach might be trailed by the directors and pioneers to oversee and keep up the undertaking exercises
Integrity and name of the profession should be per the interest of the general public
Team spirit coordinated effort and participation must be of abnormal state and the reasonableness might be kept up
Bynum, T. W. (2008). Computer and information ethics. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-computer/
Floridi, L. (2013). The ethics of information. Oxford University Press.
Kizza, J. M. (2013). Ethical and social issues in the information age. Springer Science & Business Media.
Martin, C. D. (2019). Virtue ethics: An introduction. Routledge.
Nissenbaum, H. (2004). Privacy as contextual integrity. Washington Law Review, 79(1), 119-157.
Quinn, M. J. (2011). Ethics for the information age. Pearson.
Rachels, J., & Rachels, S. (2019). The elements of moral philosophy. McGraw-Hill Education.
Rees, J. (2018). Cybersecurity ethics: An introduction. Routledge.
Spafford, E. H. (1992). Are computer hacker break-ins ethical?. Journal of Systems and Software, 17(1), 41-47.
Spinello, R. A., & Tavani, H. T. (2016). Readings in cyberethics. Jones & Bartlett Publishers.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr. Heisenberg

Verified writer

Expert in: Philosophy Psychology

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

1 pages / 591 words

2 pages / 973 words

1 pages / 554 words

2 pages / 799 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Ethical Theories and Their Relevance Essay

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Ethics

Drug addiction is a complex and pervasive issue that affects millions of individuals worldwide. It not only harms the individual struggling with addiction but also has far-reaching consequences for their families, communities, [...]

In the film A Few Good Men, directed by Rob Reiner, obedience is a central theme that is explored through the characters and the events that unfold. At the heart of the story is a young lawyer, Lieutenant Daniel Kaffee, who is [...]

As individuals, our values shape our beliefs, guide our decisions, and influence our actions. Our personal values are the principles that we hold dear and that define who we are. In this essay, I will explore the development of [...]

Board Certified Behavior Analysts (BCBAs) play a crucial role in the field of applied behavior analysis (ABA). They are highly trained professionals who specialize in the assessment, design, and implementation of behavior [...]

The ethics are principles based on doing the right thing. They are the moral values by which an individual or business operates. The business should act ethically until attaining the ultimate success. The history of doing right [...]

In ethics, ethical relativism is one of the most controversial topics. In fact, many known ethicists reject and completely neglect the theory. They believe that even though moral practices in societies may differ, the [...]

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

Instructions Followed To The Letter
Deadlines Met At Every Stage
Unique And Plagiarism Free

Homework Help
Essay Examples
Citation Generator
Writing Guides
Essay Title Generator
Essay Topic Generator
Essay Outline Generator
Flashcard Generator
Plagiarism Checker
Paraphrasing Tool
Conclusion Generator
Thesis Statement Generator
Introduction Generator
Literature Review Generator
Hypothesis Generator
Human Editing Service
Essay Hook Generator
Ethical Theories Essays

Ethical Theories Essays (Examples)

Filter by keywords:(add comma between each), example essays.

Application of Ethical Theories in Ethical Reasoning

Forensic Mental Health The purpose of this paper is to discuss the practicalities of capacity, confidentiality, and consent concerning the Family esponsibilities Commission and how these three compare to the forensic context that is probation and parole in Australia. The paper will seek to highlight the similarities and the differences that exist within these two contexts. With regards to the Family esponsibilities Commission, the practicality of confidentiality is that everything is private. This is because the Family esponsibilities Commissions Act of 2008 states that a person is not allowed by the law to record, disclose or use any confidential information that is attained by such an individual by being involved in the administration of the Act. There is preservation of confidentiality such that an individual is not mandated in any way to disclose any information that is deemed confidential by a court or a tribunal. In addition, an individual is not mandated…...

mla References Bevan, C.R., Watt, A.J. (1991). Probation: Current Position and New Directions. Australian Institute of Criminology. Retrieved 24 August, 2015 from: http://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/archive/training-project-proceedings/training-project-proceedings-98.pdf Family Responsibilities Commission Act (2014). Queensland. Kopelman, L.M. (1990). On the evaluative nature of competency and capacity judgments. International Journal of Law and Psichiatry, 13, 309-329. Leivesley, S. (1983). Queensland Probation and Parole Service. Retrieved 24 August, 2015 from: http://crg.aic.gov.au/reports/24-82.pdf

Ethical Theories the Three Basic Ethical Theories

Ethical Theories The three basic ethical theories share a number of similarities, because they each attempt to describe and explicate the ethical decisions made by humans as well as the logic (or illogic) that is used to inform any particular behavior. Utilitarianism offers what is perhaps the most sound ethical theory due to the way it chooses for itself the goal of its efforts, but it is hampered by disagreement regarding the precise execution of the theory. A deontological theory of ethics may be useful for formulating general rules regarding proper behavior, and as such is popular is the workplace, but these rules are not universally applicable and in some cases can actually lead to unethical behavior if followed without fail. Finally, while virtues-based ethics purports to offer individuals instruction for the cultivation of ideal behavioral traits, by definition it cannot offer a universal ethical norm, as it is based on…...

mla References Begley, A.M. (2005). Practising virtue: A challenge to the view that a virtue centred approach to ethics lacks practical content. Nursing Ethics, 12(6), 622-37. Broad, C. (1930). Five types of ethical theory. New York: Routledge. Darwall (Ed.). (2003). Virtue ethics. Malden: Blackwell Publishing. DeConinck, J.B., & Lewis, W.F. (1997). The influence of deontological and teleological considerations and ethical climate on sales managers intentions to reward or punish sales force behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(5), 497-506.

Ethical Theories Describe in Detail Teleological Deontological

Ethical Theories Describe in detail Teleological, deontological, and virtue ethics: A comparison Teleological ethics are also called consequence-based ethics. Teleological ethical systems emphasize the results of ethical decisions, versus the moral principles behind such decisions. Utilitarianism is an excellent example of teleological ethics. The stress in utilitarianism is doing the greatest good for the greatest number of people, versus setting a precedent for all ethical actions. "It denies that moral rightness depends directly on anything other than consequences, such as whether the agent promised in the past to do the act now" (Armstrong 2011). What is good for the greatest number of people one day may not be the case several years from now, or even to morrow. For example, no one would state that as an abstract moral principle, having to fire competent employees is a 'good thing.' However, bosses are often forced to do so, because of the financial limitations they are…...

mla References Alexander, Larry & Michael Moore. (2007). Deontological ethics. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-deontological/ Armstrong, Walter. (2011). Consequentialism. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/consequentialism/

Ethical Theories and Abortion Issues

Utilitarian Abortion Considerations: The utilitarian perspective applied to the abortion issue would focus on whether permitting or prohibiting elective abortion would contribute more positively the interests of society Mill, 2003 p160). The principal difference between the utilitarian and deontological perspectives is that utilitarianism is wholly unconcerned with the underlying motivation for decisions. Whereas deontological formalism values the state of mind of the individual, utilitarianism focuses on the ultimate consequences of the act, irrespective of motivation Russell, 2002 p 99). Within the utilitarian ethical perspective, rule utilitarianism would promote the choice associated with the overall benefit to others and to society if it were adhered to religiously in all circumstances, irrespective of isolated cases in which the rule produced a negative result Russell, 2002 p101-2). For example, in a society where relative birth and death rates were such that the continuation of society were in jeopardy, the utilitarian perspective might require a prohibition of…...

mla (Dershowitz, 2002 p112). Therefore, the contemporary utilitarian approach to morality in human life is to consider other definitions of "goodness" and "benefit" rather than equating morality with the interests of the greatest number. In many respects, that is the perspective exemplified by the modern American justice system (Dershowitz, 2002 p112). Under that view, the moral rightness or wrongness of elective abortion would seek to weigh the manner in which permitting abortions might benefit society and how that decision would affect all of the individuals directly involved in specific situations. If the initial assumption is that society is benefited by the respect for the autonomous rights of individuals to make personal decisions about abortion without interference from the state, utilitarianism would support the freedom to make that decision. Under the act utilitarianism perspective, therefore, certain types of abortions (such as in cases of rape, incest, or medical necessity for the life of the mother)

Ethical Theories Ethical Theories Are

For example, and employee might decide they will never be late for a meeting, which will appear to be a noble duty, but there might be a hidden reason towards this action. Maybe the employee prefers to sit in a particular place or sit. Another negative attribute of the deontology theory is the fact that it is mostly concerned with the individual's welfare and not others. Utilitarianism theory This theory deals with the individual's ability to foresee the consequences of their actions. A person will have to analyze the choice they make to ensure that they benefit more people Weymark, 2005. Using this theory a person can compare similar past solutions, and develop a system that determines which choice will be most beneficial for a majority of people. For a large corporation, this theory would be beneficial because employees will endeavor to perform their duties while analyzing the consequences of their actions. These…...

mla References Ronzoni, M. (2010). Teleology, Deontology, and the Priority of the Right: On Some Unappreciated Distinctions. [Article]. Ethical Theory & Moral Practice, 13(4), 453-472. doi: 10.1007/s10677-009-9209-z Weymark, J.A. (2005). Measurement theory and the foundations of utilitarianism. [Article]. Social Choice & Welfare, 25(2/3), 527-555. doi: 10.1007/s00355-005-0017-7

Ethical Theories in Nursing

Nursing Ethical Theories Ethical Theories in Nursing Significance of Moral in Nursing Deontology vs. Utilitarianism Deontology Utilitarianism Justice Ethics vs. Care Ethics Justice Ethics Care Ethics ights Ethics Conflict of ights Ethical Theories in Nursing Moral philosophy has moved from addressing Plato's question of what makes the good person, to Kant's query as to the right thing to do, to Buber's concern with relationship. Whether referring to business ethics' interest in relationships between corporations and consumers; legal ethics' focus on relationships among the legal system, clients, and society; or nursing ethics' consideration of the relationship between patient and nurse; ethics and morality are conceptualized and actualized on the playing field of relationship. The nature of nursing as a moral endeavor is an assumption embedded in any philosophical or theoretical consideration of the discipline and practice of nursing. An the goal of nursing is a moral one, namely, the good of those for whom nurses care, no aspect of practice exists that does not…...

mla References Bandman, E.L., & Bandman, B.(1995). Nursing ethics through the lifespan (3rd ed.). Stamford, CT: Appleton & Lange Buber, M.(1965). Between man and man (R.G. Smith & M.Friedman, Trans). New York: Macmillan. (Original work published 1947). Carper, B. (1979). The ethics of caring. Advances in Nursing Science, 1(3), 11-19 Cooper, M.C. (1991). Principle-oriented ethics and the ethic of care: A creative tension. Advances in Nursing Science, 14(2), 22-31.

Ethical Theories Ethics Is an

These are ethics that know no cultural bounds. hat is perceived as ethical in one society as well as any other is an example of a natural law. These are typically based on the human desire for equality as well as the desire to do good ("hat is Natural Law?"). Furthermore, natural rights evolve legally from natural laws often. They also often see an intertwining of religious beliefs, although they can also be expressed as more an intertwining of moral beliefs that are then supported by religion. The primary weakness of natural law theory is that it is sometimes difficult to determine if a belief is truly universal, or simply cultural. Virtue Ethics: Virtue ethics determines whether an action is right or wrong by the virtue of the action. Virtue ethics is currently one of three major approaches in normative ethics. It may, initially, be identified as the one that emphasizes the…...

mla Works Cited "Kant's Moral Philosophy." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. N.p., 23 Feb. 2004. Web. 9 Feb. 2011. . MacKinnon, Barbara. Ethics: theory and contemporary issues. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth Pub. Co., 1995. Print. "Virtue Ethics." Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. N.p., 18 July 2007. Web. 9 Feb. 2011. . "What is Ethical Relativism?" Philosophy - AllAboutPhilosophy.org. N.p., 2011. Web. 9 Feb. 2011. .

Ethical Theories

Cruzan Case through a variety of medical ethical perspectives The Consequentialist Paradigm The ethical paradigm of consequentialism, as its name suggests, is the view that "normative properties," in other words, ethical actions in the world, should be judged upon and "depend only" upon their resultant consequences. (Sinnott-Armstrong, 2003) The Nancy Cruzan case is famous legal a 'right to die' case whereby, after Nancy Cruzan was almost killed in a car crash, "years later, Cruzan's parents wanted to withdraw the artificial hydration and nutrition that kept their daughter alive," whom was deemed 'brain dead' or in a permanent vegetative state, at the time (Healthcare ethics, 2004) The general approach of consequentialist ethics could be applied in this case regarding the moral rightness of acts, holding that "whether an act is morally right depends only on the consequences of that act or of something related to that act (such as the motive behind the…...

mla Works Cited Gowans, Chris. "Moral Relativism." The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Spring 2004 Edition. Edward N. Zalta, Editor. URL = . Healthcare ethics. (2004) "Cruzan, Nancy." Ascension healthcare website. Retrieved 10 November 2004 at URL= http://www.ascensionhealth.org/ethics/public/cases/case11.asp Hughes, James & Damien Kewon. "Buddhism and Medical Ethics." Journal of Buddhist Ethics. 1995. Retrieved 10 November 2004 at URL= http://www.changesurfer.com/Bud/BudBioEth.html

Ethics and Experimentation Ethics and Medical Experimentation On Staten Island there was an institution for the mentally disabled which operated from 1947 to 1987, but in the period from 1956 through 1971, children at the institution were used for experiments involving hepatitis. Although the experiments are considered to be successful, the involvement of mentally disabled children has brought many ethical considerations to the forefront. Dr. Saul Krugman, the man who ran the experiment, stated that his team took a number of ethical considerations into question before the experiment began. Firstly, Krugman rationalized the use of children by stating that "It is recognized that infectious hepatitis is a much milder disease in children." (obinson 81) Then, a mild form of the disease was inflicted upon the children under conditions that were the most favorable including special medical personnel and isolation quarters. Krugman specifically stated that only children who's parents consented were used in…...

mla References Rivers, Eunice, et al. "Twenty Years of Follow-up Experience in a Long-Range Medical Study." Public Health Reports 68.4 (April 1953). Web. 30 Mar. 2013. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmc2024012/ Robinson, Walter, Brandon Unruh. "The Hepatitis Experiments and the Willowbrook

Western Ethical Theories

Western Ethical Theories The objective of this work is to examine Western Ethical theories including teleological, deontological, natural law, and interest view and virtue ethics. The work of Bennett-Woods (2005) states that while the words 'ethics' and 'morality' are "often used interchangeably, morality is more precisely used to refer to the customs, principles of conduct and moral codes of an individual, group or society." Ethics, is also stated to be termed "moral philosophy of the science of morals" and is the branch of philosophy that examines "morality through the critical examination of right and wrong in human action." (Bennett-Woods, 2005) The study of ethics is generally characterized into three specific domains of study include those of: (1) metaethics which is related to the nature of right and wrong insofar as the where and how of the original of ethical judgments and what these judgments mean regarding the human nature and behavior; (2) Normative…...

mla References Virtue Ethics (2010) Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-virtue/ Eric Wingrove-Haugland (1999) The Foundations of the Core Values in Western Ethical Theories. Retrieved from: http://isme.tamu.edu/JSCOPE99/Wingrove99.html Lovin, R.W. (2004) Moral Theories. Blackwell Publishing Company. Retrieved from: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/content/BPL_Images/Content_store/Sample_chapter/0631216340/Schweiker_sample%20chapter_A%20companion%20to%20religious%20ehtics.pdf Bennett-Woods, D. (2005 ) Ethics at a Glance. 2005 Regis University. Retrieved from: http://rhchp.regis.edu/HCE/EthicsAtAGlance/EthicsAtAGlance.pdf

Ethical Treatment of Prisoners Is a Complex

Ethical treatment of prisoners is a complex question, involving the nature of the prison system in the U.S. And the nature of those incarcerated in it, as well as ethical obligations that individuals owe to society as well as those that society owes to those who are imprisoned. Deontological ethics might hold, for example, that those who have violated the law and the basic moral norms of society deserve to be punished but at the same time even those convicted and imprisoned have certain basic human rights. For example, they have the right to food, clothing, shelter and medical care, and cannot be tortured, abused or brutalized. Another problem from a deontological perspective would be to criticize a society where blacks and Hispanics are a minority of the population but also the majority of the prison population, including those on death row. Indeed, they are more likely to be profiled,…...

mla REFERENCES Capital Punishment (2011). Bureau of Justice Statistics. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=18 Prison Inmate Characteristics (2009). Bureau of Justice Statistics. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=132

Ethical Treatment of Animals the

The main concern in virtue ethics becomes about a person's moral character. When people choose to develop their moral character, better virtues will be created, and thus there will be more people acting in virtuous ways in all aspects of their lives -- and this includes how they treat all animals. One example to be considered when thinking about how a person with a strong sense of virtue might behave is to counter it with how a person with a strong sense of duty might behave. From a duty sense, if one were a livestock farmer, he or she might believe that his or her duty lies in what is best for the people because, after all, the job is about raising livestock for slaughter, which will then become food for people. Therefore, the first duty would be to humans and the second duty to animals (Panaman 20008) (which may…...

mla Bibliography Garner, R. (2005). Animal ethics. Cambridge: Polity. Gruen, L. (2011). Ethics and animals: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1st edition. Hursthouse, R. (2000). Ethics, humans and other animals: An introduction with readings. New York: Routledge.

Ethical Reasoning Donaldson and Werhane Outline the

Ethical Reasoning," Donaldson and Werhane outline the three fundamental theories of ethics: consequentialism, deontology, and human nature ethics. Consequentialism, also known as teological ethics, can be further divided into ethical egoism and utilitarianism. Ethical egoism is based on the theory that to act out of self-interest will ultimately be the most ethical decision. Ethical egoism is rarely supported by philosophers, especially in relation to other ethical reasoning theories such as utilitarianism. Philosophers like Bentham and John Stuart Mill argued that the ethical decisions should be based on the principle of the greatest good for the greatest number. Although Mill framed the concept of "good" in terms of happiness, the "greater good" does not necessarily entail happiness and may refer to other abstract concepts like aesthetics. Utilitarianism can itself be subdivided into pluralistic utilitarianism and preference utilitarianism: the former embraces all abstract concepts that can be classified as "good" whereas the…...

Ethical Analysis Holding an Ethical

According to research, "Each man deserves respect because only he has had those exact life experiences and understands his emotions, motivations, and body in such an intimate matter," (ainbow 2010). Thus, Broadway was respecting the individual decisions of its players to decide whether or not the game was ok to play. However, this was only followed outside of the United States. The decision locally was much different. Because of the nature of the young audience, there was the moral dilemma for the insertion of such sexually explicit references. And so, Broadway was not acting ethically when they failed to uphold local ethics abroad. According to research, "A winking tolerance of other's unethical behavior is in itself unethical," (Jennings 2007:14). ather than acting out of ethical obligation to others as they did to their own, Broadway let it slide and moved sales elsewhere, where they knew they could get away with…...

mla References Alexander, Larry & Moore, Michael. (2007). Deontological ethics. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved February 25, 2010 from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-deontological/ Jennings, Marianne Moody. (2007). Business Ethics: Case Studies and Selected Readings. Cengage Learning Publishing. Newton, Lisa H. (2008). Taking Sides: Clashing Views on Controversial Issues in Business Ethics and Society. 10th ed. McGraw Hill. Rainbow, Catherine. (2010). Descriptions of ethical theories and principles. Davidson College. Retrieved February 25, 2010 from http://www.bio.davidson.edu/people/kabernd/indep/carainbow/Theories.htm

Ethical Behavior Employees in the

Immanuel Kant, an 18th century German philosopher, established a set of categorical imperatives on how one should conduct their lives, one of them being treat people as an end, and never as a means to an end (Johnson, 2010). A more recent duty-based theory is by British philosopher W.D. oss, which emphasizes prima facie duties. Like those before him, oss argues that our duties are part of the fundamental nature of the universe. oss claims his list of duties reflects our actual moral convictions. They are 1) fidelity - the duty to keep our promises, 2) reparation - the duty to compensate others when we harm them, 3) gratitude - the duty to thank those who help us, 4) justice - the duty to recognize merit, 5) beneficence - the duty to improve the conditions of others, 6) self-improvement - the duty to improve our virtue and intelligence, and…...

mla References Fieser, J. (2009). Ethics. Internet encyclopedia of philosopy. Retrieved November 27, 2010, from http://www.iep.utm.edu/ethics/ Johnson, R. (2010, Summer). Kant's moral philosophy. The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Edward N. Zalta, (ed.). Retrieved November 27,2010, from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2010/entries/kant-moral/ Skelton, a. (2010, Fall). William Davis Ross. The Stanford encyclopedia of philosopy. Edward N. Zalta, (ed.) Retrieved November 27, 2010, from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2010/entries/william-david-ross/ Uzgalis, W. (2010, Summer). John Locke. Ethics. The Stanford encyclopedia of philosopy. Edward N. Zalta, (ed.) Retrieved November 27, 2010, from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2010/entries/locke/

How do ethical theory , principles, values, and morals guide nursing practice?

The practice of nursing is strongly guided by ethical theories and principles, because nurses are charged with the duty of taking proper care of patients and ensuring that they do no harm to them. The principles, values, and morals they must adhere to are based on what is needed for them to provide the maximum benefit and level of care to the largest number of patients on a daily basis. The values and morals they hold may differ from those of the patients they care for, and they must be careful to avoid putting down on or otherwise dismissing what....

Can you provide essay topic ideas related to political theory?

1. The Concept of Justice in Rawls and Nozick's Political Theory: - Analyze and compare John Rawls' and Robert Nozick's theories of justice. - Discuss the implications of their views on social and economic equality. - Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of their respective arguments. 2. Utilitarianism vs. Deontology: A Comparative Analysis: - Compare and contrast the ethical theories of utilitarianism and deontology. - Explore the strengths and weaknesses of each theory in terms of their application to political decision-making. - Discuss the relevance of these theories in contemporary political debates. 3. The Legitimacy of Political Authority: - Examine different theories of....

Need assistance developing essay topics related to Compare and Contrast. Can you offer any guidance?

Choosing Comparative Essay Topics 1. Literary Works: Compare and contrast the themes and characters in two novels or plays by the same author. Analyze the similarities and differences in the narrative structure, setting, and style of two short stories. Discuss the different perspectives and interpretations presented in two poems on the same subject. 2. Historical Events: Compare the causes and consequences of two major historical revolutions. Analyze the similarities and differences in the strategies and tactics used by two military leaders during a particular war. Discuss the impact of two different technological advancements on society. 3. Social Issues: Compare and contrast the experiences....

can you help me make an outline of a research proposal entitled ethical implications of ai in society?

I. Introduction A. Background and Significance - Emergence of artificial intelligence (AI) and its increasing presence in society - Potential benefits of AI, such as automation, efficiency, and personalized experiences B. Ethical Concerns - Ethical implications of AI in areas such as: - Privacy and data security - Job displacement and economic inequality - Bias and discrimination - Automation of decision-making and accountability II. Literature Review A. Existing Research on Ethical Implications of AI - Review of previous studies that have examined ethical issues related to AI - Identification of key ethical concerns and perspectives B. Theoretical Frameworks - Discussion of ethical theories that can be applied to AI, such as: ....

Sign Up for Unlimited Study Help

Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.

IMAGES

Business And Society Application Of Ethical Theories Commerce Essay
Ethical Theories Overview
Ethical Considerations in Research: Safeguarding Principles Free Essay
Ethical Principles/Theories (300 Words)
Summary of major ethical theories
Meta-ethical theories ESSAY PLANS- Philosophy & Ethics A Level OCR

COMMENTS

Ethical Theories: Virtue Ethics, Utilitarianism, and Deontology
Virtue Ethics is an ethical theory that places emphasis on the character of the moral agent. It is distinct from other ethical theories, such as utilitarianism and deontology, because it focuses on the development of the individual's character and understanding of the virtues that make up good character. This theory holds that a good and moral ...
Ethical Theories: Explanation and Examples
Examples of Ethical Theories. Utilitarianism: This represents Consequentialism because it looks at the outcome of actions. A utilitarian decision, like when a government decides to spend money on vaccines to save many lives instead of funding a few large sports stadiums, is judged good because it creates the greatest happiness for the largest ...
Ethical theories
In most circumstances ethical theories are the foundation for ethical principles and whenever actions are being defended upon, by business people it is common to find the principles and not the theories appealing. There are several theories that include: deontology, utilitarianism, casuist, virtue, kantianism, aristotelianism, consequentialism ...
Ethics
The term ethics may refer to the philosophical study of the concepts of moral right and wrong and moral good and bad, to any philosophical theory of what is morally right and wrong or morally good and bad, and to any system or code of moral rules, principles, or values. The last may be associated with particular religions, cultures, professions, or virtually any other group that is at least ...
Moral Theory
There is much disagreement about what, exactly, constitutes a moral theory. Some of that disagreement centers on the issue of demarcating the moral from other areas of practical normativity, such as the ethical and the aesthetic. Some disagreement centers on the issue of what a moral theory's aims and functions are. In this entry, both questions will be addressed.
7.6.1: Ethical Theories
Consequentialist vs. non-consequentialist theories of ethics. There are two broad categories of ethical theories concerning the source of value: consquentialist and non-consequentialist. A consequentialist theory of value judges the rightness or wrongness of an action based on the consequences that action has. The most familiar example would be ...
Ethical Theories: Virtue and Utilitarian Ethics
Virtue Ethics emphasizes an individual's character as the key element of ethical thinking, rather than rules about the acts themselves. Deontology and consequentialism are two ethical theories and or philosophies that are associated closely with virtue ethics. In my understanding virtue ethics is a moral philosophy that emphasizes the role of ...
PDF Introduction to Ethical Theories
This chapter is an introduction to ethics and ethical theories, and it briefly covers the historical background of several ethical theories and principles that are useful for analyzing moral problems. It presents eight ethical theories and highlights the connection of each one to the field of. A. Alizadeh (B) University of Delaware, Newark, DE ...
Ethics
Ethics. Below are essays on: contemporary moral issues and topics in applied or practical ethics; ethical theories or explanations for what, in general, makes wrong actions wrong and makes permissible actions permissible; and. metaethics or philosophical theories of whether and how moral judgments are true or false (or neither) and whether and ...
Essays In Ethical Theory
In this volume, R. M. Hare has collected a number of essays which fill in the theoretical background of his thought and which together give an overall picture of his views on a variety of questions. Each essay is self-contained, and topics covered include the objectivity and rationality of moral thinking, the issue between the ethical realists ...
Ethical Theories Of Different Philosophies Philosophy Essay
Ethical Theories Of Different Philosophies Philosophy Essay. Ethical theory examines the different philosophies or systems used to explain and make judgments regarding right/wrong/good/bad. It attempts to introduce clarity, substance, and precision of argument into the domain of morality. They also argue on how we should value humans in our ...
Introduction to Ethical Theories
Abstract. This chapter is an introduction to ethics, and it briefly covers the historical background of the major ethical theories and principles that are useful for analyzing moral problems. It presents eight theories and highlights the importance of each of them for the field of HRD. Four of these theories—Kantianism, utilitarianism, social ...
How to Write an Ethics Essay: Guide & Paper Examples
What Is an Ethics Essay? An ethics essay uses moral theories to build arguments on an issue. You describe a controversial problem and examine it to determine how it affects individuals or society. Ethics papers analyze arguments on both sides of a possible dilemma, focusing on right and wrong. The analysis gained can be used to solve real-life ...
Exploring the Ethical Theories: [Essay Example], 1433 words
In conclusion, the exploration of ethical theories, including consequentialism, deontology, postmodern ethics, and principlism, provides a comprehensive understanding of diverse perspectives in ethical decision-making.Consequentialism, represented by Utilitarianism and Hedonism, focuses on the outcomes of actions, emphasizing the greater good or the pursuit of pleasure.
PDF A Guide to Writing in Ethical Reasoning 15
This guide is intended to provide advice for students writing the papers in Ethical Reasoning 15. Most of the paper assignments for the course can be approached flexibly and creatively — there is no single recipe for writing successful papers in the course. But the paper assignments do involve a few common intellectual tasks
Drawing Morals: Essays in Ethical Theory
Abstract. This volume contains chapters on moral and political philosophy. The chapters address a wide variety of topics, from the well-rounded life and the value of playing games to proportionality in war and the ethics of nationalism. They also share a common aim: to illuminate the surprising richness and subtlety of our everyday moral ...
Ethical theories essay
They provide us with principles or guidelines to follow when making moral decisions. There are several different ethical theories, each with its own strengths and weaknesses. In this essay, we will explore some of the most prominent ethical theories and their applications. One of the oldest and most influential ethical theories is consequentialism.
Reflection on Ethical Theories: Utilitarianism and Deontology
In conclusion, ethics has developed as people have reflected on the intentions and consequences of their acts. From this reflection on the nature of human behavior, theories of conscience have developed, giving direction to much ethical thinking.
Ethics and Morality Theories: Explanation and Comparison Essay
Get a custom essay on Ethics and Morality Theories: Explanation and Comparison---writers online . Learn More . Ethics of care is a theory of ethics that is used to define the different conditions or factors that make an action either wrong or right. However, within this theory are constituent theoretical views that were developed within the ...
Ethical Theory Essays: Examples, Topics, & Outlines
Ethical Theory Despite the fact that codes of conduct and belief systems permeate everyone's life on an everyday basis, developing a universally acceptable concept of ethics or moral philosophy remains a seemingly impossible task that has plagued philosophers and the world's great thinkers since the beginning of time. Over time a great number of different philosophical theories have arise.
Principles of Clinical Ethics and Their Application to Practice
The 4 main ethical principles, that is beneficence, nonmaleficence, autonomy, and justice, are defined and explained. Informed consent, truth-telling, and confidentiality spring from the principle of autonomy, and each of them is discussed. In patient care situations, not infrequently, there are conflicts between ethical principles (especially ...
Ethical Theories and Their Relevance
Introduction. Ethics is a collection of knowledge that deals with moral principles (i.e. act of right or wrong that is accepted by an individual or a society group) and theories is a set of principles on which practice of an activity is based. Ethical theories are more applicable in each sector and more used in ICT industry.
Ethical Theories Essays: Examples, Topics, & Outlines
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more. Get Started Now. At paperdue.com, we provide students the tools they need to streamline their studying, researching, and writing tasks. [email protected].

Newest Articles

Virtue Ethics

Top Articles

Exploring the Philosophy of Beauty

Exploring Religious Pluralism and Exclusivism

Altruism: Exploring the Power of Selflessness

New Articles

Ethical Theories

Types of Ethical Theories

Examples of Ethical Theories

Why is it Important?

Controversies

Related Topics

Introduction of moral codes

What is ethics?

Recent News

The origins of ethics

Bibliography

Moral Theory

1.1 Common-sense Morality

1.2.1 Morality and Ethics

1.2.2. Morality and Aesthetics

2. Theory and Theoretical Virtues

Support SEP

Margin Size

7.6.1: Ethical Theories

VIEW: Ethics Defined: Virtue Ethics 1:42 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMblKpkKYao

Practical Ethics | Applied Ethics | Moral Issues

Normative Ethics / Ethical Theories / Moral Principles

Meta-Ethics / The Philosophy of Ethics

Also see Social and Political Philosophy

Ethical Theories Of Different Philosophies Philosophy Essay

Cite This Work

DMCA / Removal Request

Introduction to Ethical Theories

Cite this chapter

Access this chapter

Similar content being viewed by others

Ethical Theory and Moral Practice at 24

Introduction: Why Ethics?

Author information

Corresponding author

Editor information

Rights and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Download citation

Share this chapter

How to Write an Ethics Paper: Guide & Ethical Essay Examples

What Is an Ethics Essay?

Purpose of an Essay on Ethics

Things to Write an Essay About Ethics On

Ethics Paper Outline

Ethical Essay Structure

Ethics Paper Introduction

Ethics Essay Introduction Example

Ethics Essay Thesis Statement

Ethical Paper Thesis Example

Ethics Essay Body

Body Paragraph for Ethics Paper Example

Ethics Essay Conclusion

Sample Ethics Paper Conclusion

How to Write an Ethics Paper?

1. Pick a Topic

2. Conduct In-Depth Research

3. Develop an Ethics Essay Outline

4. Write an Ethics Essay

5. Proofread Your Ethics Essay

Ethics Essay Examples

Ethics Essay Writing Tips

Bottom Line on Writing an Ethics Paper

You may also like

Sign in through your institution

Drawing Morals: Essays in Ethical Theory

Personal account

Institutional access

IP based access

Society Members

Sign in through society site

Sign in using a personal account