Download Name: OLADUJA BOLUWAJI Matric no: 14/ENG06/047 College

Name:
OLADUJA BOLUWAJI
Matric no:
14/ENG06/047
College:
ENGINEERING
DEPT:
MECHANICAL
Course Code:
GST 113
Course Title:
LOGIC, PHILOSOPHY AND
HUMAN EXISITENCE
Level:
400(Direct Entry)
Lecturer:
Mr OLADIPO TEMIDAYO
Question:
Write a reports on chapter 19
ethics and human conduct
Summary of Chapter 19
Ethics and human conduct
Man has been portrayed as “Zoon politikon” meaning “political animal” by Aristotle. In his
portrayal, it is believed that no man is self-sufficient. Everyone needs others in the pursuit of
social, political, spiritual and economic goals among others. Aristotle also states that “he who
is unable to live in society, or who has no need because he is sufficient from himself must be
either a beast or a god”
Living in a community with others, there are certain codes that are set to guide individuals in
relating with one another, known as ‘code of conduct’. There are also other rules in a society
enacted to govern conducts regarding how a person should relate to other things that are of
value to the society, such as ‘moral code’. The realisation of the importance of moral rules to
a society has led to the systematic study of what is right or wrong, good or bad, just or unjust
called ethics. Ethics can be defined as the field of philosophy where the analytical and critical
tools of philosophy are focus on human actions.
The different variation of ethics such as business ethics, Environment ethics, research ethics,
work ethics, medical Ethics, Bioethics, etc. Ethics is not just any kind of inquiry, it is a
rational inquiry into the grounds of moral conduct which stand in contrast to revelations,
special institutions, mystical insight, and other arbitrary means obtaining answers to moral
questions. The ultimate aim of ethics is to furnish human beings in the standard with which
they can make distinctions between actions that are good and actions that are bad, between
right and wrong and between those that are acceptable and those unacceptable etc. The
ultimate aim also shows that it can be categorized into two main divides known as the good
or bad, or even right or wrong. The good is moral whereas the bad is immoral.
The sub branches of ethics include: Metaethics and Normative ethics. The issues addressed in
metaethics are rather concerned with terms such as “right,” “wrong,” “good,” “bad,”
“morality,” “moral judgement” etc. The attempt to shed some light on the term “good” had
antinaturalism had that ‘goodness is a simple, non-natural, and undefinable property’.
Metaethics is concerned with the meaning of ethical statement, in my level of understanding
basically means that because a certain action has been condemned by society as immorally
wrong, everyone else tends to see it as a bad action. The fact that the statement had the ability
to influence everyone makes society feel that it has already been written in ‘pen and paper’
and cannot be erased as an immoral act. The metaethical theories try to shed some light on
what makes an action ‘moral’ or ‘immoral,’ ‘right’ or ‘wrong’. According to the theories
determining whether an action is right or wrong depends on what God says about it. If God
says it is wrong then the society automatically develops the same feeling towards that action.
For example the Ten Commandments in the bible such as ‘do not kill,’ ‘do not steal,’ ‘do not
fornicate’ etc have already been marked as an act of immorality by society because God says
so. The theory of ethical relativism states that “it is the individual, culture or epoch that
determines or justifies the rightness of wrongness of an action”. Basically means that what is
right varies from person to person, society to society and time to time.
Normative ethic is the sub- branch of moral ethic which deals with the difficulty to get
consensus on certain actions that may be deemed wrong by a person and right by another.
The main focus on this division is on determining principles that ought to guide human
conduct or formulating moral rules that have direct implications for what human actions,
institutions and ways of life should be like. Theories such as teleological ethical theories is
one of the theories recommending what ought to be considered in determining whether an
action is right or wrong. Teleological ethical theories states that an action is right if it brings
about bad ones. The normative ethical theory called ethical hedonism is an ethical theory that
interprets the rightness or wrongness of an action through pleasure. The position of the theory
is that pleasure is the only intrinsic bad should be avoided. Many have asked whether the
pleasure or happiness should be for the performer of the action or the recipients of the action,
or should the action take into consideration all those affected. Ethical egoism theories among
others attempted to answer the question by stating that the performer of an action should seek
the maximum pleasure of happiness for himself, in other ways. In determining the rightness
or wrongness the scale of preference should prioritise that action that will favour the
individual performing the action. The ethical altruism theory counters the stance of the ethical
egoism theory by stating that the moral agent is expected to undertake the action that will
advance the wellbeing of others regarding the consequences for him. However the theories in
the position of utilitarnism mediates between the previous two theories by stating “an action
is morally right if it promotes the greatest number of pleasure or happiness for the greatest
number of people”.
Teleological ethical theories have some short comings such as , they require that we foresee
the outcomes of our actions which humans are not totally capable of doing due to the fact that
some actions end up having unexpected results. Some consequences which are foreseen to
bring out good results end up bad, the same goes vice versa. In other words in some cases it is
almost impossible to predict the outcome because a person may have no direct control over it.