Download ADESANYA JESUTOFUNMI .E. MEDICINE AND SURGERY GST

ADESANYA JESUTOFUNMI .E.
MEDICINE AND SURGERY
GST 113 ASSIGNMENT
Ethics is a field of philosophy where the analytical and critical tools of philosophy are focused
on human actions. It seeks to uncover the nature of morality and what the right moral
judgement entails. It can also be described as an inquiry into the moral worth of human
conducts. There are different variations of ethics which all have their diverse ethical challenges
that are present in different disciplines and aspects of life that require effective responses
which ensure that moral principles are sustained.
Ethics is a rational inquiry into the grounds of moral conduct which stands to contrast
revelations, special intuition, mystical insight and other means of obtaining answers to moral
questions. It is practiced with the belief that human beings are rational and for that reason
would seek adequate reasons and relevant evidence to make them justifiable choices
concerning their actions in their desire to determine the proper way to behave.
The main aim of ethnics is to furnish humans with the standards with which they can make
distinctions between actions that are good and those which are bad, right or wrong, acceptable
or unacceptable, commendable and not commendable. This shows that ethnics are basically
divided into two groups, good or bad; right or wrong. The good and right referring to those
actions that are moral and the bad and wrong referring to those actions which are immoral. By
doing this ethnics seeks to make known moral norms which humans’ should adhere to and
those that should be avoided. Ethics helps to highlight the basic principles of good behavior
that individuals in the society should subscribe to in their relationship with others in the
society. It also shows how people should conduct themselves in order to live peaceful lives both
with themselves and with other individuals around them. Ethics is important for ensuring social
order as it provides a guide for political leaders, public servants and professionals on how to
conduct the affairs of a group of people.
Moral philosophers present us with better understanding of concepts employed in moral
discourse and develop theories that people can appeal to in making moral decisions which
serve as justifications for human conduct.
METAETHICS
This is a branch of analytical philosophy that explores the status, foundations and scope of
moral values, properties and words. It is dedicated to giving a better understanding of concepts
and terms of employed ethical discourse so that people are better positioned to question
principles of action in ethical reasoning. Metaethics unlike normative ethics focuses on what
morality itself is. Metaethics is also concerned with the meaning of ethical statements.
Emotivism which is a metaethical theory claims that moral judgements aren’t ultimately meant
to be true or false but are expressions of our emotions and moral arguments are meant to
change a person’s emotional attitudes towards certain moral judgements. Another metaethical
theory is Prescriptivism, suggests how moral statements should be understood. This means that
when an ethical statement is made it is being made as a universal prescription regarding an act
which is condemned or approved.
Some metaethical theories try to address the issues relating to the origin or justification for
moral standards, aim to understand what makes an action right or wrong, moral or immoral. An
example of such is the divine command theory. In this theory determining what is right or
wrong is based on what God says-if God says it is wrong then such an act is regarded as
immoral, if God says such an act is right then it is regarded as moral. This theory sees God as
the source from which our moral standards are derived. Another example of metaethical
theories is Ethical Relativism. This theory is based on the position that it is the individual,
culture or epoch that determines or justifies the rightness or wrongness of an action. This
means that what is right or wrong varies from person to person, society to society and time to
time. From the perspective of ethical relativism, the justification for moral codes should be
evaluated by considering an individual’s culture, time he lived as well as focusing on the
individuals’ belief system itself.
NORMATIVE ETHICS
Some actions are readily regarded as wrong or right. Then again there are others which are
harder to agree on or come to conclusions. Normative ethics measures the rightness or
wrongness of an action. It asks the questions that determine the standards for right living and
making of moral decisions. Such standards suggest the criteria that make an action immoral or
moral in order for one to make moral judgement on the appropriate course of action to take.
The main purpose of normative ethics is to determine principles that ought to guide human
conduct.
Several normative theories have been put forward in an aim to determine factors that should
be considered in determining whether an action is right or wrong. The first set of theories put
forward is called Teleological Ethical theories. This set of theories place emphasis on the
consequences of an action in determining the rightness or wrongness of such action. An action
is considered as right if it brings about good results and wrong if it brings about bad results.
However, no truth has been reached among proponents of teleological ethical theories on what
qualifies a result as good or bad. Some philosophers believe that an actions ability to bring
about pain or pleasure determines whether if it is wrong or right. Others believe that the ability
of an action to cause more pleasure than pain or more pain than pleasure determines whether
an action is right or wrong. This method used to interpret the rightness or wrongness of an
action is called Ethical Hedonism. The position of ethical hedonist is that pleasure is the only
good intrinsic value worth seeking and pain is the only intrinsic bad that should be avoided.
Eudaemonism uses the ides that happiness is the chief good. Happiness is used to qualify the
goodness of the consequences of an action. If an action brings about happiness then the result
is good but if it brings about despair then the consequence is bad.
One thing to consider as well is ‘who enjoys the pleasure?’ is it the performer of the action or
the recipient of the action or should the individual performing the action take into
consideration all those involved without distinguishing between himself and others involved.
Some normative theories are designed to answer these questions. Ethical Egoism recommends
that the performer of the action should seek pleasure and happiness for himself alone. This
means that in determining the rightness or wrongness of an action the scale of preference
should prioritize that the action favors the individual performing the action. A counter stance is
the theory put forward by the proponents of Ethical Altruism who believe that the criteria for
determining what is wrong or right morally is whether the deed supports the interest of others
rather than oneself interest. The individual is expected to carry out tasks that promote the
wellbeing of others despite the consequences on himself. Mediating between these two
extremes is Utilitarianism, which says that an action is morally right if it provides a great
amount of pleasure and happiness for a greatest number of people. The major difference
between these theories are the scopes of the consequences. Utilitarians believe that the good
that should be maximized is the overall good, which requires that the actor consider the good
of others as well as his own good. Pleasure or happiness should neither be maximized for the
individual performing the action nor others who are recipients of the action but the greatest
number of good should be promoted for the greatest number of people.
Some shortcomings are present in Teleological theories. First off, they require that we forsee
the outcome of our actions which humans are naturally incapable of. Some consequences
which are foreseen sometimes don’t always turn out the way we desire. Also humans are
incapable of foreseeing which actions will benefit oneself, others or the majority. Another
shortcoming of the teleological theory is that it makes it seem like the end justifies the means,
but evil means cannot justify a good end.
In opposition to teleological ethical theory we have the Deontological ethical theory which
rejects the use of an outcome of an action to determine its rightness or wrongness. Moderate
deontological theories agree that consequences do matter but only as one of the factors
relevant to determining the moral rightness of an action. Extreme deontological theories totally
reject the relevance of consequences as a determining factor for the moral rightness or
wrongness of an action. Generally deontological theories place importance on rules, motives
and the nature of the action itself in determining the rightness or wrongness of an action.
The Kant’s moral theory is an example of deontological ethical theories.it is based on the view
that the outcome an action matters less than the will or the motive behind such action. For
Kant acting in line with duty which is the recognition that one is under a moral obligation to do
what is right is an important factor in determining the rightness or wrongness of an action.
In conclusion it is clear that ethics makes available a framework of actions in form of Normative
theories that guide human conduct and if complied with enable people to act rationally and
calmly.