and the final area we have is applied ethics…
that is concerning what a person is obligated (or permitted)
to do in a specific situation or a particular domain of action…
now we can use applied ethics for a particular field of application:
bioethics, business ethic, machine ethics, military ethics, political ethics,
public sector ethics, publication ethics, relational ethics, animal ethics…
there are lots of areas of applied ethics…
now in regards to the questions of ethics, we can do an historical study
which means we think about ethics historically…
so one facet of ethics historically is what might be called, Virtue ethics,
which describes the character of an moral agent as a driving force
for ethical behavior, and it is used to describe the ethics of Socrates,
Aristotle and other early Greek philosophers… self-knowledge
was considered necessary for success and inherently an essential good…
for Socrates, a person must become aware of every fact (and its context)
relevant to his existence, if he wishes to attain self-knowledge. He posited
that people will naturally do what is good if, if they know what is right.
Evil or bad actions are the results of ignorance… any person who “knows”
what is truly right will automatically do it, according to Socrates…while
he accorded knowledge to virtue, he similarly equated virtue to joy… the truly
wise man will know what is right, do what is right, and therefore be happy…
for Aristotle, when a person acts in accordance with virtue this person, will do
good and be content… unhappiness and frustration are caused by doing wrong,
leading to failed goals and a poor life……… happiness was held to be the ultimate goal…
and the practice of virtues is the surest path to happiness…
if we look at various ethical systems after Aristotle, we find that the
Greeks pretty much defined the ethical systems we work with today…
for example, the Greeks worked out Stoicism and hedonism and Epicureanism…
three such examples of the ethical life…
and not until Kant do we find another ethical system…
we have other lesser well known ethical systems, State consequentialism,
consequentialism, Utilitarianism… research those on Wiki at your convenience…
and we reach the Kantian portion of the show…
Deontology: is a approach to ethics that determines goodness or rightness from
examining acts, or the rules and duties that the person doing the act strove to fulfill…
which is oppose to consequentialism, which is the rightness is based on the
consequences of an act, not the act itself…
under Deontology, a act may be considered right even if the act produces a bad
consequence, if, if it follows the rule or moral law… according to deontological
viewpoint, people have a duty to act in a way that does those things that
are inherently good as act…(truth telling for example)….for Kant,
it isn’t the consequences of actions that make them right or wrong, but
the motives (expressed as maxims) of the person who carries out the action…
so now we have the groundwork of ethics laid out…
but we still don’t any theory to work out…
and we don’t have any practical matters to work out…
so, what next?
I would suggest that we take time to understand ethics as
it has been practiced since the beginning of time,
the religious ethics…
for most of human history, ethics has been guided by a religious
context…what is right, what is ethical, right and wrong has
been determined by god and the religious framework that
a society has in place…the ancient Greeks ethics was
worked out in regards to the Greek religion, what was ethical
was decided by god and their laws… the bible is one long
argument for this description of the ethical… both in the old
testament and the new… and in both, god is the only basis for
ethical behavior…….
and the last 2000 years has been one long test of this theory of
the ethical by the religious…think about the word, god and the word, good,
at least in English, the relationship cannot be denied… now other languages
may have a different understanding, but in English…….
when the religious lost its hold on the public, when ism’s and ideologies
was no longer how people viewed ethics, in other words, god is dead,
also meant his ethics was also dead… what/how are we going to
act ethically if there is no religious basis of ethics? that is the question
of Nietzsche…… what is the basis of morality without the rules of god?
upon what rules are we going to act ethically if we aren’t going to act
religiously? what standards are we to use to decide if an act is right or wrong,
or ethical? if we don’t have a religious basis for our ethical standards?
this is the “modern” question and the question upon the last 200 years
has been working out… what is right and wrong if there is no god or a
religious basis for our actions?
and here we stand… the most important question we “moderns” have,
upon what standards are we to use to judge what is “moral”?
upon what basis are we to judge right or wrong?
what is ethical given we have no agreed upon basis for judgement?
no already agreed upon standards for what is right or wrong?
now we are ready to engage in ethics/morality……
Kropotkin