It confirms the already assumed. During the court trial, Dr. Jones was asked “From your conversations and examination of Perry Edward Smith, do you have an opinion as to whether he knew right from wrong at the time of the offense involved in this action?” (296). The doctor replies with a simple no. I strongly disagree what the doctor decides to reply. He claims he has no opinion because of Perry having no opinion.
In the unit, Mary Anne Warren and Don Marquis present two different opinions about abortion. Mary Anne Warren believes that abortion should be morally permissible. Although she agrees that it is immoral to kill a person, she thinks that fetus is not a person because it does not meet the six traits of personhood (LaFollette, 2014). On the other hand, Don Marquis is against abortion because he thinks that killing a fetus deprives it of “a future like ours” (LaFollette, 2014). For my part, I think Don Marquis makes a stronger case for his opinion.
Ronald White, a professor at the college of St. Joseph in Cincinnati wrote a writing piece Moral Inquiry to explained his logical reasons about ethical decision making. White also observed and talked about the Markkula framework opinions about human behavior. Not only did he explain the logic of these theories, but he also revealed some examples to his audience. Throughout the different writing pieces that were displayed, White used three theories to support his main theories; teleological theories, deontological theories, and virtue-based system theories. Each of these theories consist of the act of human behavior.
Mackie believes that there are no objective moral values, and to support his stand, he famously puts forth two arguments. The first argument is the Argument from Relativity or Disagreement, and the second is the Argument from Queerness. The focus of this essay will be on Mackie’s argument from queerness, and I seek to prove that his argument does not succeed in showing that there are no objective values. I will first be summarizing Mackie’s argument from queerness. Subsequently, I will proceed to form an argument on the first part of Mackie’s argument from queerness, the metaphysical component.
He states that this case deals with whether or not opinions are also protected by the First Amendment. He notes that Loraine Journal derives their argument of opinions being protected from Gertz, going on to say that the Supreme Court did not believe that Gertz meant to establish any sort of protection. He then introduces a phrase such as, “In my opinion, Tom is a liar”. According to Rehnquist, the problem with this phrase is that, despite the author claiming it to be his opinion, it can still be interpreted by the reader as being a fact.
Doing something that you might consider morally bad might be the only option for you. The text A Long Way Gone follows the author's life, and his experiences in the 1991-2002 Sierra Leonean war. Beah shows his claim by describing his journey through the Sierra Leonean war from an innocent child loving rap music and reggae to his time as a boy soldier killing with the army fighting against the rebels in the war, and finally to his recovery in a rehabilitation centre that allows him to regain a regular family and even talk about his experiences at a UN conference. This rehabilitation ends with the army attacking his city, his uncle is killed by sickness and loss of hope, and because of a fear instilled in him, he is forced to flee.
War is an event that can have an effect on even the strongest-willed soldier. One of the major themes was morality and the nature of morality. In “The Things They Carried”, there were so many traumatic events that happened throughout the novel. Over time, the soldiers were physically, mentally, and emotionally affected by the events that happened to themselves and each other. Being exposed to these horrific events, one will see how the soldiers’ morality goes back and forth with what’s right and what’s wrong.
Is Ender Wiggin a Murderer? Have you ever done something but you weren’t sure whether it was ethical or not? Or have you ever wondered why some things are ethical and some things are not in society? Who decides what is ethical or not? In the book Ender’s Game, the author Orson Scott Card uses Ender as a metaphor for the choices that people have to make every day.
Mackie’s Arguments Against Ethical Objectivism According to the book The Fundamentals of Ethics, it is stated that ethical objectivism “is the view that moral standards are objectively correct and that some moral claims are objectively true” (Shafer-Landau, p. 294). It is the belief that each individual or person has their own set of moral principles. J.L Mackie explains two arguments against ethical objectivism, which include the argument from relativity and the argument from queerness. In addition he explains and defends his error theory.
One literary text that we read throughout this semester that led to consequences that had lessons about making ethical decisions that I choose is “On the Western Circuit” this text has many lessons that someone today can relate to. This text taught me my own lesson, “On the Western Circuit” is the short story about the three main characters Anna, Edith, and Charles and the consequences of each character’s actions. Charles and Anna fall quickly in love, Charles courts the young Anna, she comes come from nothing and starts working for Edith. During Anna and Charles courtship, he starts writing her letters, and Anna soon confesses to Edith that she doesn’t how to read and write, Edith agrees to read and write to Charles for Anna. In, the text
I think that McMurphy's morals are more dominate in our culture as of today. Trough the generations we have progressed from Nurse Ratched's morals to McMurphy's. McMurphy's morals seem to be barely having any morals, but also standing for what you believe in. McMurphy lives the way he wants to live, without processing the consequences that may follow his decisions. Which is how he ended up as a work camp and then entering the mental institution.
I have chosen Into Thin Air for my project because the main theme of this novel is Danger and Morality. I feel as there’s danger and morality in my city and around the world, with the natural events occurring. Into Thin Air is a great work of literature because of Krakauer’s use of imagery and symbolism to describe the situation of the mountain. Also, the plot is exciting, and it leaves the reader in shock on each page. The writer tells it as it is.
Baier also touches on the justice perspective and discusses the “inadequate” as a moral theory. This shows inequalities between people, it has an unrealistic view of freedom of choice, and it ignores the importance of moral emotions such as love. However, she also says that the best moral theory, she claims, is one that harmonizes justice and care. She goes on to also explain the theory of moral development which has two dimensions. First is to aim at achieving satisfying community with others and the second is to aim at autonomy or equality of power.
Hursthouse’s argument makes sense that a virtuous person should be able to make good and moral decisions through moral philosophy. However, Hursthouse claims further that moral philosophy applies to any circumstances, and a virtuous person would not be uncertain in decision-making. At this point, we need to consider the following objection on Hursthouse’s claim. Hursthouse is not clear on how moral philosophy would be sufficient to provide enough guidance or specific counsel for a virtuous person to make decisions and how it applies to particular circumstances, especially with difficult ones. Due to this reason, a virtuous person can be uncertain.
Once morality requires justification, it stops being moral and becomes a
