Style: MLA. Kids Definition of ethical. Medical Definition of ethical Entry 1 of 2. Medical Definition of ethical Entry 2 of 2. Legal Definition of ethical. Other Words from ethical ethically adverb. Get Word of the Day daily email! Test Your Vocabulary. Test your visual vocabulary with our question challenge! Love words? This is not illegal and is a normal business practice, but some consider it unethical. An example might be the different standards in tire valves that are sold to car companies and retail locations.
The car companies have a higher standard for what they expect in the tire valves they buy. Retail locations often don't impose the same standards on the manufacturer. Having more than one standard for the same product opens the door for a company to be accused of being unethical because it applies different standards to different classes of customers. Keith Dooley has a degree in outdoor education and sports management.
He has worked as an assistant athletic director, head coach and assistant coach in various sports including football, softball and golf.
Nov 12, , am EST. Nov 11, , pm EST. Edit Story. Oct 16, , pm EDT. Leadership Strategy. Tweet This. Getty Royalty Free. Follow me on LinkedIn. The problem for ethical realists is that people follow many different ethical codes and moral beliefs. So if there are real ethical truths out there wherever! One form of ethical realism teaches that ethical properties exist independently of human beings, and that ethical statements give knowledge about the objective world.
To put it another way; the ethical properties of the world and the things in it exist and remain the same, regardless of what people think or feel - or whether people think or feel about them at all.
On the face of it, it [ethical realism] means the view that moral qualities such as wrongness, and likewise moral facts such as the fact that an act was wrong, exist in rerum natura, so that, if one says that a certain act was wrong, one is saying that there existed, somehow, somewhere, this quality of wrongness, and that it had to exist there if that act were to be wrong.
That's the sort of question that only a philosopher would ask, but it's actually a very useful way of getting a clear idea of what's going on when people talk about moral issues. We can show some of the different things I might be doing when I say 'murder is bad' by rewriting that statement to show what I really mean:.
Moral realism is based on the idea that there are real objective moral facts or truths in the universe. Moral statements provide factual information about those truths.
Subjectivism teaches that moral judgments are nothing more than statements of a person's feelings or attitudes, and that ethical statements do not contain factual truths about goodness or badness. In more detail: subjectivists say that moral statements are statements about the feelings, attitudes and emotions that that particular person or group has about a particular issue.
If a person says something is good or bad they are telling us about the positive or negative feelings that they have about that something. These statements are true if the person does hold the appropriate attitude or have the appropriate feelings. They are false if the person doesn't. Emotivism is the view that moral claims are no more than expressions of approval or disapproval.
This sounds like subjectivism, but in emotivism a moral statement doesn't provide information about the speaker's feelings about the topic but expresses those feelings. When an emotivist says "murder is wrong" it's like saying "down with murder" or "murder, yecch!
So when someone makes a moral judgement they show their feelings about something. Some theorists also suggest that in expressing a feeling the person gives an instruction to others about how to act towards the subject matter.
So if I say something is good, I'm recommending you to do it, and if I say something is bad, I'm telling you not to do it. There is almost always a prescriptive element in any real-world ethical statement: any ethical statement can be reworked with a bit of effort into a statement with an 'ought' in it.
For example: "lying is wrong" can be rewritten as "people ought not to tell lies". Supernaturalism makes ethics inseparable from religion.
It teaches that the only source of moral rules is God. So, something is good because God says it is, and the way to lead a good life is to do what God wants.
Intuitionists think that good and bad are real objective properties that can't be broken down into component parts. Something is good because it's good; its goodness doesn't need justifying or proving. Intuitionists think that goodness or badness can be detected by adults - they say that human beings have an intuitive moral sense that enables them to detect real moral truths. They think that basic moral truths of what is good and bad are self-evident to a person who directs their mind towards moral issues.
So good things are the things that a sensible person realises are good if they spend some time pondering the subject. This is the ethical theory that most non-religious people think they use every day. It bases morality on the consequences of human actions and not on the actions themselves. Consequentialism teaches that people should do whatever produces the greatest amount of good consequences. The most common forms of consequentialism are the various versions of utilitarianism, which favour actions that produce the greatest amount of happiness.
Despite its obvious common-sense appeal, consequentialism turns out to be a complicated theory, and doesn't provide a complete solution to all ethical problems. Non-consequentialism is concerned with the actions themselves and not with the consequences.
It's the theory that people are using when they refer to "the principle of the thing". It teaches that some acts are right or wrong in themselves, whatever the consequences, and people should act accordingly. Virtue ethics looks at virtue or moral character, rather than at ethical duties and rules, or the consequences of actions - indeed some philosophers of this school deny that there can be such things as universal ethical rules.
0コメント