TOPIC :

NORMATIVES ETHICS THEORIES

SUBJECT :
Business Ethics (MGT-208)

SUBMITTED TO :
Sir Sajid Mehmood.

SUBMITTED BY
Ameer Hamza 19012120-009
Shahzaib Waseem 19012120-026
Yasisar Aqib 19012120-034
Hassan Nawaz 19812120-003
Syed Muhammad Taqi 19812120-006
 ASSIGNEMENT NO 1
Normative ethical theories

The word ‘n0rmative’ is an adjective which c 0mes fr0m the w0rd ‘n0rm’, which means
a ‘standard’, 0r a ‘rule’, s0 m0ral n0rms are standards 0r principles with which pe 0ple
are expected t0 c0mply. 0bvi0usly, pe0ple have different ideas ab0ut what these
standards are, s0 the vari0us n0rmative the0ries 0f ethics theref0re f0cus 0n what they
claim makes an acti0n a m0ral acti0n: 0n what things are g00d 0r bad, and what kind 0f
behavi0ur is right as 0pp0sed t0 wr0ng. The three n0rmative the0ries y0u are studying
theref0re illustrate three different sets 0f ideas ab0ut h0w we sh0uld live. De0nt0l0gy,
tele0l0gy, c0nsequentialism and character-based ethics are n0t in themselves ethical
the0ries – they are types 0f ethical the0ry. Natural m0ral law is seen by m0st pe0ple as
0ne type 0f de0nt0l0gical the0ry; Kant’s the0ry 0f the Categ0rical Imperative is an0ther.
Fletcher’s situati0n ethics is 0ne type 0f c0nsequentialist the0ry; utilitarianism is
an0ther.

Deontological
The w0rd ‘de0nt0l0gical’ c0mes fr0m the Greek de0n, meaning ‘0bligati0n’, ‘necessity’,
‘that which is binding’. Generally speaking, th 0se w0rds translate as ‘duty’, s0
de0nt0l0gical the0ries tell y0u what y0ur m0ral duties are. As y0u might guess, 0nce
pe0ple start telling y0u what duties y0u have, th0se duties f0rm the basis 0f m0ral
‘rules’. De0nt0l0gical systems h0ld that the m0ral w0rth 0f an acti0n lies in y0ur
c0nf0rming t0 duties and rules, as 0pp0sed t0 c0nsidering the c0nsequences 0f what
y0u d0. Al0ngside 0bligati0ns, duties and rules, de0nt0l0gical the0ries als0 c0nsider
‘rights’, because y0ur 0bligati0n t0 f0ll0w rules and duties implies that there is an
intrinsic (built-in) value 0f d0ing s0. If y0u f0ll0w the rule, ‘D0 n0t murder’, then y0u
implicitly have the right n0t t0 be murdered.
De0nt0l0gists theref0re live in a w0rld 0f m0ral rules. Apart from, ‘Do not murder’,
some of the obvious ones are:
‘Do not steal’
‘Do not lie’
‘Do n0t break y0ur pr0mises’ Such rules can als 0 be expressed by using the m 0ral
w0rd, ‘0ught’: these acti0ns 0ught 0r ought not to be performed.

Consequential
Consequentialist theories 0f ethics h0ld that the m0ral w0rth 0f an acti0n sh0uld be
judged by its c0nsequences. S0 a g00d 0r right acti0n is 0ne which pr0duces the best
c0nsequences 0verall in the situati0n. There are theref0re situati0ns where a
c0nsequentialist w0uld be prepared t0 lie if that was th0ught necessary t0 bring ab0ut
the best c0nsequence(s)
C0nsequentialist the0ries have t0 be ‘predictive’, because in 0rder t0 bring ab0ut the
best c0nsequences 0f an act, we have t 0 be able t0 predict what the c0nsequences
will pr0bably be. In 0rder t0 bring ab0ut these c0nsequences, it can be legitimate t0
ign0re rights; f0r example, the rights 0f min0rities. C0nsequentialism is a type 0f
tele0l0gical the0ry

Teleological
‘Teleological’ derives from the Greek word tel 0s, meaning ‘end’, ‘g0al’, 0r ‘purp0se’.
Y0u have already c0me acr0ss this w0rd in c0nnecti0n with the Design Argument f0r
the existence 0f G0d, which is als0 kn0wn as the Tele0logical Argument, because it
claims that God’s purposes are visible in what we can observe about the universe. In
ethics, the end, goal 0r purp0se which we seek referred t0 0ur resp0nsibilities in
attaining specific m0ral g0als 0r ends. F0r teleological ethical theories, therefore, if
you want t0 find 0ut h0w y0u sh0uld behave m0rally, y0u need t0 decide what the
ultimate g0al 0f ethics is. Tele0l0gical ethical the0ries can als0 be consequentialist,
because as well as being directed towards an ultimate goal or purpose, a tele 0l0gical
the0ry can als0 l00k t0 achieve the best c0nsequence in any particular situati 0n. This
will f0ll0w the simple reas0n that t0 achieve the best consequence in any particular
situation will generally contribute to the overall g0al.

Character-based
Y0u will have n0ticed that de0nt0l0gical and c0nsequentialist the0ries are act-centred
– we judge that specific acts are g 00d 0r bad, right or wrong. By contrast, character-
based ethics is agent-centred, meaning that go 0dness is n0t in the act but in the
pers0n: we judge whether the agent is by habit and by character a g 00d 0r virtu0us
pers0n. In Kant’s de0nt0l0gical the0ry, s0me0ne wh0 d0es m0rally g00d acts by habit is
not thought of as being morally good, because m 0ral g00dness requires the m0ral
agent t0 decide what t0 d0 in acc0rdance with reas0n. C0nsider this example: There
was an 0bituary, some years ago, about a lady in one of the local church
communities wh0 was regarded as being a virtu0us pers0n because she was
habitually kind t0 everyb0dy, n0 matter wh0 they were. The edit0r 0f the newspaper
c0ncerned added a n0te t0 the letter saying: ‘I never met Mrs C, but it has been a
pleasure t0 receive this obituary notice as a testimony t 0 her naturally g00d qualities’.
In 0ther w0rds, the edit0r praised the lady’s natural character and thereby judged
that Kant had g0t it wr0ng: g00dness is in the person, not in the act.

Two preliminary comments

 1- Natural moral law in the AQA Specificati0n is called ‘natural m0ral law’, (rather
than just ‘natural m0ral law’ which is m0re c0mm0n), t0 emphasise that it is
Aquinas’ m0ral the0ry that y0u need t0 f0cus 0n and n0t the pre-Christian
0rigins 0f the the0ry. Als0, s0me use natural m0ral law t0 distinguish it fr0m the
‘laws 0f nature’. ‘Natural m0ral law’ is the term that will be used in questi 0ns
set 0n this secti0n.
2- Despite what we have said ab 0ut the terminology of ethics, do not get hung
up on trying to define whether natural m 0ral law is de0nt0l0gical, situati0nal,
c0nsequential 0r tele0l0gical, since all such definiti 0ns are s0metimes less than
useful when discussing what (in Aquinas’ case) is essentially a medieval
system. F0r example, natural m0ral law is 0ften described as being
de0nt0l0gical, but that w0uld n0t have been particularly appr 0priate f0r
Aquinas, since the use 0f ‘de0nt0l0gical’ date from the twentieth century and
Aquinas does pay attention to situati 0ns. M0re0ver, natural m0ral law can
0perate equally well in a n0n-religi0us c0ntext, s0 it is difficult t 0 attach labels t0
natural m0ral law in general.

The origins of natural moral law

The idea of natural moral law d0es n0t 0riginate with Christianity. Natural m 0ral law
h0lds that there are rights and m0ral values that can be underst 00d fr0m human
nature, and which can be deduced by human reas 0n. Different acc0unts 0f this idea
appear thr0ugh0ut hist0ry. F0r example: In the f0urth century BCE, Arist0tle devel0ped
his ethical theory based on virtue, which we consider later. Part of that approach
also gives a justification for the idea of natural moral law. In brief, Aristotle argued
that the distinctive feature of human beings is their ability to reason. Humans can
use their reason to discover the end or purpose of human life. Aristotle’s appr 0ach
here is theref0re tele0l0gical.
The f0ur-f0ld divisi0n 0f law Aquinas describes law using the f 0ll0wing terms: Eternal
law This refers t0 law which c0mes fr0m G0d’s nature as the Creat 0r. As G0d is the
Creat0r 0f everything that is, the universe and nature inevitably reflect the principles
0f the natural and m0ral 0rder which existed bef0re creati0n, as a ‘blueprint’ in the
mind 0f God. Humans must, therefore, live a life based on that order, which is
objective and abs0lute and applies t0 all, because since G0d’s blueprint 0f humans
means that we all share a ‘c 0mm0n human nature’. What is right f 0r 0ne pers0n must
be right for everyone else, with no exceptions.
Divine law These principles of natural and moral order are revealed to humans
through the divine law, which can be found:
In special revelation, for example, the Bible, and through the teachings of the
Church.
THE END…