Download Ethical egoism

NAME: OJINIKA SANDRA CHINEMEREM
DEPARTMENT: LAW
COLLEGE: LAW
COURSE: GST113, LOGIC, PHILOSOPHY AND HUMAN EXISTENCE
ETHICS AND HUMAN CONDUCTS IN THE SOCIETY
Aristotle in his famous book ’politics’, aimed at the portrayal of human
beings as social beings, which gave rise to the conception of man as ‘zoon
politikon’ which means ‘political animal’.
No man is an island; therefore everyone needs others to pursue their goals in
all spheres. As Aristotle said ‘he who is unable to live in society, or who has no
need because he is sufficient for himself must be either a beast or a god. In such
a situation, living together gives rise to challenges and these challenges, relate
to having a code of conduct that will regulate individual activities, acting as a
guide against the situation of ‘war of all against all’, as found in the state of
nature which is nasty, brutish and short as written by Thomas hobbies.
Such codes of conducts tell people how to behave within and outside the
society with both humans and animals and sometimes celestial beings. The
realization of moral rules in the society hence has lead to the systematic study of
what is right or wrong, good or bad, just or unjust called ethics.
Ethics and its goals: there are so many questions to consider when talking
about ethics such as, what is ethics? Of what importance is its study? These are
questions to be considered when on the quest to see how it can shape human
conduct in the society.
Ethics is a field of study where the analytical and critical tools of philosophy
are focused on human actions. It is a field the seeks to unearth the nature of
morality and what moral judgement entails. A definition of ethics conceives it
as ‘an inquiry into the moral worth of human conducts.’ As an inquiry, it
touches every facet of life where one can point to one human conduct or the
other. Hence, the ethics of everything. This type of ethics recognise challenges
that involve them and how to give effective response in order to ensure that
moral principles and sustained in human society.
Ethics is not just plain inquiry but rational inquiry in the aspect of moral
conducts, which stands in contrast to means of obtaining answers to moral
questions. Humans are believed to be rational beings hence their judgements are
expected to also be rational. The main aim of ethics is to show humans the
standard of how to go about their behaviours, knowing what is right or wrong or
good or bad. With the main of channelling their thinking towards moral
behaviours, by dividing such behaviours into two categories for them to be able
to identify positive ones and choose from it, leading to the principle of good
behaviour that people should subscribe to in their relationship with others in the
society. This is what ethics aims to achieve.
Metaethics: According to bodunrin, ‘the first step of philosophical reasoning is
conceptual.’ The main aim of metaethics is to understand concepts and terms
widely used in ethics to enable better understanding of the subject and avoid
linguistic muddle. Metaethics is concerned with the meaning of ethical
statements and clarifying concepts such as good, bad wrong, right, moral and
statements like ‘stealing is wrong.’ Which under EMOTIVISM, that is an
ethical theory would interpret as revealing the emotion of the speaker, and at the
same time, bringing attention to shearing the same idea of stealing as the person
making claim.
PRESCRIPTIVISM: is another ethical theory that suggests how ethical
statements should be understood like which one says stealing is wrong this
theory is only suggesting that stealing is bad and should be avoided, hence the
aim is to understand what makes an action moral or immoral.
THE DIVINE COMMAND THEORY: is an example of metaethical theories
addressing this issue. This theory sees God as the determinant of our moral
actions, good and bad are all based on what he says and what he decides is good
or bad.
ETHICAL RELATIVISM: this is determines on the position of the source to
justify whether such an action is right or wrong. Hence percept of what is right
or wrong differs from person to person, time to time, state to state. Hence
morals of a people are justified based on their own culture and what they
themselves believe to be right or wrong, some definitions of ethics reduces all
of ethics to what is done in metaethics. This explains why Simon Blackburn
defined ethics as ‘the study of concepts involved in practical reasoning: good,
right, duty, obligation, virtue, freedom, rationality, choice. Since moral
philosophers do not only clarify concepts but in addition, generate normative
theories that ought to guide moral decision. A reductionist uses approaches such
as the second-order study of objectivity, subjectivity e.t.c.
NORMATIVE ETHICS
Normative ethics is a sub-branch of moral philosophy that deals with actions
whose right or wrongness cannot be clearly defined unlike, stealing etc. Hence
standards or norms will stipulate criteria that make an action wrong or right.
The main focus of this division of ethics is on determining and formulating
principles that ought to guide human conduct, leading to the formulation of
normative theories by philosophies. The first set of theories is Telelogical
ethical theories. These theories have in common the emphasis placed on the
consequence of an action in determining in wrongness or rightness.
Ethical hedonism is an ethical theory that interprets the rightness or wrongness
of an action this way the position of ethical hedonists is that pleasure is the only
intrinsic good worth seeking the pain the only intrinsic bad that should be
avoided. Eudaemonism in ethics is used to capture the idea that happiness is the
chief good. However, one may ask: happiness or pleasure for whom? Should it
be for the performer or audience or both? Three different normative theories are
attempts to answer these questions. Ethical egoism recommends that the
performer of an action should seek to maximise pleasure of happiness for
himself. Hence wrongness or rightness is based on what favours the individual
countering the stance of ethical altruism which states that rightness or
wrongness of an action is determined by the fact of if the deed prompts the
interest of others and not the individual alone. The agent is meant to take
actions that interest and benefit others. However, mediating between these two
extreme theories is the position of utilitarianism, which holds that an action is
morally right if it promotes the greatest number of pleasure for the greatest
number of people. Hence, a major distinct between utilitarianism, ethical
egoism and ethical altruism is the scope of the consequence. Utilitarianism
believes that the good that must be maximised is the overall good, which
requires that the actor considers the good of others and his own good.
Teleological ethical theories have some short comings. One is that they require
foreseeing the outcomes of our action, which incidentally is what humans are
largely incapable of. Benevolent actions might end up favouring one and
sometimes others, which is not expected. The fact is that the demarcation is not
often an easy one to make. Another major failure of consequentialism (or the
teleological theory) is that it makes it appear that the end justifies the means and
the problem is that an evil means cannot justify a good end, making some
philosophers favour deontological theories. Deontological ethical theories reject
the use of the outcome of an action in judging its rightness or wrongness.
Moderate deontological ethical theories hold that ‘consequences do matter, but
only as one of the factors relevant in determining the moral rightness of an
action, while extreme deontological ethical theories totally reject the relevance
of consequences in determining if an action is morally right or wrong instead
placing importance on rules, motives, and the nature of an action. Kant’s moral
theory is an example of deontological ethical theories.
Immanuel Kant believes ‘we are responsible for our motives to do well or
bad, and thus it is for this we are held morally accountable.’ To back up his
view that the outcome of an action matters less than the will or motive
informing an action to be performed.
CONCLUTION: This essay has been on examining how human conduct is
influenced by ethics. And the influence that ethics has could be in two
dimensions. The first could be through enabling persons have better
understanding of terms, concepts and statements employed in moral reasoning.
The other is that ethics makes available frameworks of action in form of
normative theories that can guide human actions and, if adhered to, enables
people to act rationally and morally.