Ethics. Cultural relativism and Divine command theory Essay

EthicsIntroduction Societies discombobulate divers(prenominal) beliefs that atomic number 18 considered as the basis of their existence. They atomic number 18 the object lessons that govern the doings patterns and as far as the community is concerned, they similarly serve as the grounds of what is objurgate and what is wrong. In philosophy, there argon certain theories that have been formulated to describe extensively on the good virtues that the community upholds. They unloosen morality and un faithfulnessfulity. The theories include relativism, utilitarianism, divine dominate opening, deontology and virtue system. This paper leave alone focus on the phoebe bird ethic theories by describing them and major solo on one theory that supersedes the others and justifying the reasons why it is commonly considered.Relativism Cultural relativism is the descriptive view that different groups of people or cultures, have different slipway of evaluating what is right and wh at is wrong. In different cultures, even when we would anticipate to agree on some issues of morality, diversity is evident (Ruth, 2010). Ethical relativism, an betion is right or wrong depending on the moral norms that are pr tourised in a society. Cultural relativism describes the way people actually behave, while ethical relativism describes the position that a society learns from the previous generation, how to behave, think and feel. A well -known render of cultural relativism is the way people behave around the world. For instance, eating flush is moral in USA while it is immoral in India, or eat uping new born females is moral in China and India whereas it is immoral in USA. Ethical relativism argues that the morals of a society evolve with beat and change to fit circumstances. This paper will focus on the five ethic theories by describing them and major solely on one theory that supersedes the others and justifying the reasons why it is commonly considered. Utilitar ianism states that an action being virtuously right or wrong is dependant wholly on its consequences. An action is right if the expiry is better(p) and wrong if the outcome is bad. In this theory, an action is right if it promotes the triumph of the performer of the action and everyone affected by it (Boylan, 2009). An action is wrong if it brings the overturn of happiness, that is, pain and sadness. This theory springs it possible for the right intimacy to be do from a bad motive. The utilitarianism theory is often associated with John Stuart Mill, a philosopher who tell that actions are right to the degree that they tend to promote the greatest nice for the greatest number.Divine look out over theory Divine command theory views that moral obligation consists in obedience to Gods commands. An act is moral if God commands us to do it and it is immoral if God prohibits us from doing it (Brown, 2001). Therefore to say that it is good to tell the truth is semantically equi valent to saying that God commands us to tell the truth. Similarly, to say that it is evil to steal is the same(p) as saying that God prohibits us from stealing. The divine command theory is however wildly improbable for reasons demonstrated by the Euthyphic dilemma. As it states, is an action virtuously good because God commands it or does God command it because it is morally good? By saying that God commands an action because it morally good, threatens the independence of God. It means that the unprejudiced ground of morality is outside of God, and He is indebted to adhere to his standard, and thus He is not sovereign.The characteristic Christian rejoinder to the Euthyphro Dilemma is to ground goodness in Gods nature. Therefore, it is Gods nature to do good and He neer acts divergent to His nature and also, the ground of morality is not some circumferential ordinary to which God must observe. Deontological ethics stern also be referred to as duty-based ethics. It arbitrates morality by scrutinising the nature of actions and the agents will instead of the goals achieved. For deontology, whether a situation is right or wrong depends on the action that resulted in the situation for example, a deontologist would argue that it is wrong to lie to a murderer about the location of a victim. As long as we are following our duties, we are behaving morally and vice versa. In order to make the sic moral choices, we must understand what our moral duties are and what correct practices exist to regulate those duties. Deontological theories have been named as formalist due to their central tenet lying in the conformity of an action to some rule or law. The first philosopher to define deontological principles was Immanuel Rant, who held that nothing is good deprived of experiences with the exception of a good will, which is one that wills to act in concurrence with the moral law and out of respect for that law, rather than out of natural dispositions. The importa nt thing is whether the person is expressing good moral virtues or not. The issues whether the intention is right, the correct rule is being followed or whether the consequences of the action are good, are not relevant. A virtue atheist is likely to advise you to act in the same way as a virtuous person in the abandoned situation. The character of a person is the outcome of his or her character traits which can either be good, bad or somewhere in the middle. laws are the admirable character traits while the opposites of virtues. Ethical relativism indorses right and wrong root in an individuals culture and not an individuals beliefs whereas virtue ethics acquaints a persons character as indication of inherent goodness, rather than gauging the results of actions executed by that person. It supports the theory that a bad person can have good actions. The motives of an action regulates the look on or goodness of that person in spite of the outcome of the actionEthical relativism d iscards sheer(a) moral values because of a lack of proof. Peoples deportment finds provision from where and how they live, unlike the virtue theory where peoples conduct finds provision from their character traits and goodness. According to utilitarian theory, the one thing that brands an act morally right or wrong is whether or not the consequences are beneficial. On the other hand, virtue ethics is of the impression that a morally right act in some state calls for a moral choice is what a virtuous person would do in that state. For example, if a person is sick and goes to the hospital for treatment, the doctor is morally right to kill the patient and give his organs to other patients who need them to survive. This, is in conformity to utilitarian theory. However, this is wrong because it is taking away someones right to live for the motive of making other people happy. Even though deontology and utilitarianism are categorised as ethics of conduct, they differ in their ethic al theory. Deontology indorses an action based on a moral law or code, while for utilitarianism an action that gives the best consequences or happiness to the action is right. Virtue ethics is categorised as ethics of character and it is focused on how people should be instead of the actions people should perform (Moore, 2009). Virtue ethics should be the ethical motivation in a persons sustenance. He or she should use levelheadedness abilities to regulate their duties based on virtues and also the universal rules and schemes that guarantee justice and fairness for everyone. Listening to ones intuition in order to determine the greatest good as well as the virtues that will best serve the society is the best way to ensure this justice and fairness. A human being should not have right over another persons life because everyone is equal.ReferencesRuth Benedict, Martin T.K 2010.. Patterns of Cultures. The Eagle publishersBoylan, M. (2009). Basic Ethics (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, N J Pearson.Brown, C. (2001). Ethical Theories Compared. Delaine publishersMoore, B. N., & Parker, R. (2009). Critical Thinking (9th ed.). Boston, MA McGraw-Hill.Source document