Theories Of Moral Philosophy

Good Essays
Moral Philosophy has many questions about what it is and what type of theories are involved when figuring out what the concept of this branch of philosophy are. There are many theories that have been examined when coming upon this branch and yet some have always been questioned on what are the basics of moral philosophy comes from or what it is necessary to prove it or rebuttal it. Theories such as Ethics, Moral Theory, Autonomy, and The Principia Ethica are all traced to be implausible and Morality, Natural Law, Ethical Theory, and Utilitarianism are considered plausible. All these theories have been said to be a development to Moral Philosophy and a lead to many doubtful theories that are implausible that they don't have enough proof to …show more content…
This theory is implausible because it states that people’s treatment of moral goodness and badness of human actions which are the results after making a decision. This is made to be implausible because as people make decisions they don't rely on weather its good or bad and what happens after making a decision because decisions are what they are and one can either gain or lose from it it all depends on what you choose. That’s why this theory seems to be implausible because not every decision is suppose to be right every choice has its own outcome. The theory that makes this plausible is actually a law which is made by Kant and is the law of Natural Law. and natural law is based on the action one takes after decision making such as the aftermath of making the choice what they do and what effects they have on it. Not every choice has to be right nor wrong sometimes it can be both cause it can lead to something ending and something new. Therefore, as moral theory is a person depending solely on a choice that is really unnecessary because as the Natural Law lets people see the outcome of a person’s choice and lets them see weather it was good or bad and what it was suppose to do. Everything is important when it comes to Moral Philosophy because every choice has an outcome it can be for the good or …show more content…
This theory was created by G. E. Moore and is the Principia Ethica. Which is the suggestion that naturalistic fallacy and its significant add certain concept of Utilitarianism and doctrine of moral institution. This states that people use moral institution to better themselves as choices are made by them and they accept what happens after it has been made. As decisions are made one never knows the outcome of that situation one only has the opportunity to either learn from it or use it as an advantage. The thing that makes this plausible is the theory of Utilitarianism which was created by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. this was the idea that every action done is either right or wrong and everything that happens depends on the choice that was made. It is for the fact of using a domino effect whatever happens in one occurrence then will have another effect on something else and is endless. These two theories put together make each other plausible if the Principia ethica was mixed with Utilitarianism back each other up to make themselves plausible and have facts to support them. Furthermore, these two theories can be plausible because as The Principia Ethica is something to make people feel that every decision can serve as a positive or negative way it can still be fixed to be better as the other theory of utilitarianism states that every choice has an

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    The rightness or wrongness of actions does not depend on their consequences, but on whether the moral reason is “from duty”. Actions done “in conformity with duty” or out of self-interest, have no moral worth to Kant. Duty is defined as an individual’s rational understanding of the action their pursuing. This relates to an action’s maxim, which is what you’re doing and why you’re doing it. Two main principles are used to further Kant’s theory, one being the principle of universalizability.…

    • 1103 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Kant’s ethics is more concerned with the motivation (reasoning for doing it) of an agents actions and not the goodness of the consequences of those actions therefore making Kantian ethics a deontological ethical theory meaning its an ethical position that judged the morality of an actions based on duty, obligation, or rule. A Kantian ethicist would first consider what actions are “right” actions and proceed from there. In regards to Constitutive luck, Kant would say that constitutive luck doesn’t exist for rational agents because if people are rational then moral action and knowledge is available to everyone according to Grounding. (Everyone has the opportunity to be good). But, if the scenario above agent 2 still hit the kid since their action had good intent and in accordance with duty (because good intention=good will=accordance to duty) then what agent 2 did wasn’t morally wrong.…

    • 1147 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Name: Course: Title: Date: KANT’S GROUNDING FOR THE METAPHYSICS OF MORALS 1. Deontology is the view of the act to be moral or not moral from the action done. In deontology, the consequences that an action may impact to individuals are not considered but rather, the logic behind the action is determined. Consequences should not be used to justify the good in any action, “a good will is not good because of what it effects or accomplishes” (Ross 33). Such action should arise from the duty, and law assigned to individuals by a system but not out of self-interest or the consequences.…

    • 1177 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The moral worth of an action is measured in the intention. If the intention was right the action is just, regardless to the consequences. Further, he argues there is no such thing as a moral act without a good principle who guided it. Though, while good will is necessary, Kant make another distinction between good will that comes from our senses, to an act from a sense of duty. While the former is lesser because it means that we did not fully freely choose to act upon it, the latter is the one we should aspire to.…

    • 913 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    It appeared that he was disdainful of theories not rooted from the periods of Enlightenment and Revolution. Another topic he touched on was Psychological Egoism, and Rachels concluded that this theory brought nothing but a non-factual image of both the human condition and human nature. He backed this notion by his understanding that it would be impossible for reason to demand so much more than what humans can handle. The truth is that humans have aspirations, desires, hopes, and needs whether "the universe" considers these as necessary or not. Thus, Psychological Egoism accounts for every single outcome that reason has brought to us.…

    • 1105 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Also, in this theory, deontologists say that in order for moral rules to be universal (be applicable for everyone) and necessary (a duty no matter the reality of the world), they cannot be based on something that makes society happy; since, what makes people happy can always change. Some of the similarities that these three theories have are that they seek the common good for all. However, at the same time, there are different units of analysis for the Utilitarianism theories. For instance, the unit of analysis of Act-Utilitarianism is measuring particular cases, while the unit of an analysis of Rule-Utilitarianism applies equally for everyone. In conclusion, this philosophy paper has the aim to explore the decision making of both Act and Rule Utilitarian theories based on the evaluation of a scenario and the decision made according to their understanding of what is correct.…

    • 1190 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Whether we feel against or not we know the morally right thing and it’s our duty to care out our action. Apart from what is in the sense of good will nothing else is considered to be good. He says that when guided to do what’s good in by morality there is no seeking for the reward. The simple reward is doing the right thing. When based off of feelings as for a reward for doing the right thing then it is not morality.…

    • 881 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Free Will Vs Determinism

    • 1009 Words
    • 5 Pages

    A neutral stance to this is the claim that “ one can be held morally responsible for one’s actions only if one could have acted otherwise in a given set of circumstances.” (The Philosophical Review, page 440). Determinist would disagree with this claim because it is if an agent is never in control of the situations that they are forced into, how can they be morally responsible. Free will does not easily tie into the premise because if we choose our own action then we should be held morally reasonable for them, but if one said that “X” did Y because she/ he could it fails to prove moral responsibility and seems as if our action or arbitrary or random. However if an act is described as “not determined” or “uncaused” that means that free will cannot be used because the action is random therefore not in the agent’s power, thus making morally responsibility invalid. Simply, without the just the agent being the cause of an action, they cannot be held to moral…

    • 1009 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Kant rejects the idea of virtues because he believes they cannot bring goodness by themselves. He also believes that happiness as an ultimate end in Mill’s argument is a total waste because there would be no need for reason. He forms his own argument around the basis of morality. Kant believes that the purpose of reason is to produce a good will which is good in itself. He then goes on to describe deontology.…

    • 1265 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Theories Of Virtue Ethics

    • 1225 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Utilitarian ethics differ from deontological ethics as it claims that morality is based on the degree of happiness that an action produces while ignoring the quality of the action used to create said happiness. According to deontological ethics, not every action that has positive results can be perceived as good or right if it does not adhere to the stipulated rules and principles of ethical behavior. This is because, an action cannot be deemed good if it is wrong in the first…

    • 1225 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays