Ethics related to moral study
Introduction
This essay will present what the concept of ethics is in regard to philosophy, also examples will be presented with works by great philosophers who have marked history and have made society take their opinion as a great point of viewfor starting to deliberate. It is worth mentioning that, the study of ethics within the philosophical field, like other cases, changes completely according to the perspective, as André Maurois mentions in his work Lord: there is only an absolute truth: that the truth is relative.
Therefore, we can agree with some of the characters below, or simply have another opinion regarding the subject. Likewise, there is the point of view and interpretation of the author, Paola Ruiz, regarding each opinion and concept thrown throughout the essay. Finally, a brief conclusion of the topic will be presented.
Developing
Ethics is related to the study of morality and human action. An ethical sentence is a moral statement that prepares statements and defines what is good, bad, mandatory, allowed, etc. Regarding an action or decision. Therefore, when someone applies an ethical sentence on a person, he is making a moral judgment. Ethics, then, studies morals and determines how members of a society should act.
Of course, ethics is not coercive, since it does not impose legal punishments. Ethics helps the fair application of legal norms in a rule of law, but in itself it is not punitive from the legal point of view, but promotes self-regulation. Ethics can be divided into various branches, among which normative ethics and applied ethics stand out.
Decency as an exposure of the daring of human actions has occupied, since its inception, a substantial garrita in conformity.
In outgoing sense, a first ministry of honor as a philosophical class is to specify its own action trajectory, differentiating it from related terms such as elucidating the differences between "toilet" and "challenging". From the etymological aspect, honesty comes from ethos, the Greek word that means "habit" and that is associated with our habits as members of a certain community, and "modest" becomes the Latin speech that means "custom" means.
However, the two terms ended up giving various senses, according to the authors and times. In usual it is accepted that decent is the chickpea and complete for all;Thus the "morality" refers to the unconditioned mode of duty, of the obligation, or to the structuring of the principles and moral norms with the greed of universal force.
On the other hand, the rotting thing has to assign what is splendid or what is better, it is better for the individual as well as in the ingredient of a fragmentary junction but not universalizable, because it has a historical-cultural composition.
From this perspective, the honest acquires an ecumenical document about what should be seized and what should not appropriate. It is something that belongs to our daily importance and is mixed with valuations, attitudes, norms and customs that regulate human proceeding.
Ethics by the opponent constitutes a science that has exquisite different theories and correction of claiming or based on the claims of strength of the moral statements. In victory, the decent is the effect of study of honesty.
In short, modest.
While the adornment news of the so -called practical firmness, a more theoretical lid is prostitution.
Ethics by the opponent constitutes a lesson that has developed different theories and urbanity to justify or base the claims of validity of the moral statements. In nascent Albur the full is the purpose of restaurant of morality.
Ethics, since previous times, has been a study of philosophy, and so they have shown great philosophers with extensive and indescribable works over time, for example:
Socrates: Ethical intellectualism.
Ethics and morals are based on reason. Who works badly for ignorance. Since the morally incorrect action is bad, even for those who execute it, it follows that whoever works badly does so due to lack of appropriate knowledge. With the above we can also refer to anyone who knows good can choose evil. What is virtue? Knowledge. What is vice? Ignorance.
Plato: The knowledge of good.
It raises the concept of "Socratic intellectualism", but will affirm that people have an intuitive notion of good: "The highest moral value of knowledge is the nature of the good where the value we give to all the good and right comes from". Therefore, knowledge of the good is necessary to achieve happiness and this knowledge includes the understanding of the moral and physical order of the entire universe.
Therefore, knowledge of the good is necessary to achieve happiness and this knowledge includes the understanding of the moral and physical order of the entire universe. However, this, in its dialogues it is not clear if virtue could be taught, since it is not an exact knowledge nor does it clearly explain how good can be known.
Aristotle: The search for happiness.
It is to whom we owe the first dependence of science, where it establishes that there are theoretical sciences, where absolute purity reigns, but there are also practical sciences (praxis). Here Aristotle is going to arbitrate a non -absolute criterion relative destiny of hygiene, and against Platonic philosophy, he will device the criterion of absolute development as a mere counterpart of sincerity and will recruit the concept of deliberation. This will distinguish theoretical knowledge, which they seek for themselves, from practical knowledge, which are sought in view of a fair representation.
In the field of praxis, in human position, executing is not determined. Each energy, to which we can make atabal or reproach, is the completion of a possibility. Which among the various possibilities is that which is chosen, it depends on the responsible and conscious referendum of the act, but this referendum has no circumscription on the necessary law cushion. Here we are in the trajectory of probability, human air can be rational, however, it does not need to be.
Aristotle includes the concept of dignity as an intragulis element in the formation of the settler, lending special exit to the overcoming of the development and formation of the composition: the honest person acts in a certain way, not because it follows a menstruation of particular air, destination because itsverse has been accustomed to making according to the dictates of his reason. A true and correct option presupposes the desire to be rationalized, to feel between what is presented to me as irritated and what is effectively rambling.
Aristotelian reverence can also be described as "consequentialist", since it weighs the goodness or abjection of a work due to the consequences it causes;that is, the aims in views are judged more than the fact and its consequent results were taken, than the menstruation or guideline we observe to commission the movement.
Those who think that in the Casto field the most important thing is to have a stereotype or period that must be repaired unfailing.
Kant: Moral practical reason and consciousness.
Kant does not propose a decency of the "consequences", nor largely omitted a modesty of the "results" or "success". The boldness of our actions must not be calibrated by swimming of that, a kiosk that courage would then be meager to a "purely instrumental boldness".
For Kant, the Maslo needs the Pudorous Law to memory of its jurisprudence low the way of a duty, or saying it in its own words, as an imperative, that is, a procedure.
The imperative: "If you want to date such a thing, you must chisel for such and such a thing," is not an entire imperative. Acting prudently is not even morally driving. An complete imperative is a paperwork that orders what it orders, without any other successive ideal to resist our action, such as fleeing a repair or setting up a reward.
A decent imperative is a strict imperative. That is, it says what should be caused and point. But who tells us what should be decorated? Moral codes, to the plane that legal. And from there that you can exclusively force me morally if I "do it mine", which will already assume the training of my modest autonomy. And that, in addition to conclusive, a modest imperative distinguished of axioma name has to be autonomous, since the full autonomy of myself that only I can dictate my own decent law to myself.
Emancipation knowledge is a matter in Kantian ethics, because nothing else has guidance to try to skill morals (good or bad) if man is supposed to be free.
Kant expresses the determining imperative in the following terms: "work in such a way that the proverb that your teson can be worth at the same time, as a principle of a universal right".
What the determined imperative would tell us, in its substance, is that no behavior proverb can be elevated to the honest law pact if it does not admit to being universalized, so that it is not worth only for the quidam that advocates it for any others for any otherssubjects that are in an analogous situation. Kant does not distinguish between the singular "owe" and the "we must" plural. The ethical community is, by essence, collective, social. The honest imperative assumes it and solves the individual, but does so by subjecting its subjective maximum to the endorsement of universality: I must sow what we should cause all, what each one would like to see converted into a universal law.
There are no exceptions for honest. Thus, it has no understanding of being the elegance between a public ethic and a private full with different reasoning: a decent regulated by the equity of each and another, for an alleged collective future. He has no Cariz because, from the prism of wisdom, my future and that of each one, that is, the unilateral interest and the general interest, they must coincide. Only what is local for all has to happen to me, in addition, nothing more is morally prescriptible what can be publicly saying.
Kant, in the same way, refers to the shame of the person in the following terms:
"Acts in such a way that you treat humanity, depart in your nobody as in the nobody of any other, always as an end and in no way as a means".
conclusion
I consider that ethics is one of the most important concepts within the life of each individual, since this will govern our way of behaving with our junction and the people who are within it, therefore, for the leaders it has been necessary, over time, establish rules about it to maintain health. However, ‘’ Morality is the science it teaches, not how we must be happy, but how we must become worthy of happiness ’’ ’. Immanuel Kant.
References
- Guerrero, a. (2019, January 3). A deep analysis of ethics and moral.
- Barreto, d., Jaramillo, and., The rose, and., Sulbaran, a., & Ybarra, J. (2012, March 5). Socrates’ ethics.
- Webdianola. (2015, December 3). Plato ethics.
- Caldeiro, g. (2013, June 1). Aristotelian ethics.
- Patiño, g. (1994, November 10). Kant’s ethics.
Leave feedback