Nature of the Ethical System or Problems in the Ethical System:

Belief:

Eternal Law: Religious authorities
or philosophers interpret the Eternal
Law, which provides moral
guidelines and is revealed in
scripture or manifested in nature.
Everyone should behave according
to the belief.
There are several sources of the law
and interpretations of the law within
each, but there is no way to select
between them other than using
human reason, which is at risk for
the impact of circumstance and self
interest. In order to make a decision,
human resources requires an
unwavering principle or value,
which completes a circle and return
us to the beginning and in the
absence of a consensus .

Ethical Egoism: focuses on the One could argue that this is more of
individual's point of view. The idea an image of a “survival of the fittest”
is that people need to act in their society than it is an ethical notion.
own best interests and strive to According to some, ethical egoism is
maximize the ratio of good to bad a contradiction in terms since if
for themselves. One could argue that people always act in their own best
ethical egoism is the norm for interests, then there’s no need to
companies operating in a free remind them that they should. This
market. Economist Milton perspective leaves a lot to be desired
Friedman's assertion that a in terms of social production and
company's sole duty is to maximize collaboration because ethical egoism
profits has been viewed by some as offers no means of resolving
expressing an egoist viewpoint. The conflicting claims when they do
foundation of our own market-based occur or establishing which interest
economy is the idea that people is more important than another.
would typically act morally while Moreover, an egoist is not in a
making judgments about purchases position to offer counsel or make
and many other aspects of their lives. moral judgments on the behavior of
others as they do not hold a position
of disinterest.

Utilitarianism: A teleological This system has a number of issues:

theory applies moral criteria to the (a) utilitarians can’t agree on what
result of an action or decision, “good” should be maximized (e.g.,
affecting not only oneself but also all truth, health, peace, freedom,
those impacted by the activity. pleasure, etc.); (b) it doesn’t explain
According to the adage “greatest how the benefits are distributed (e.g.,
good for the greatest number”—that it wouldn’t be against a society that
is, the highest net social benefit to owned slaves if the total amount of
society—or “maximizing the social “goodness” were greater than that of
benefit function”—everyone should an egalitarian society); and (c) it
conduct in a way that maximizes doesn’t seem to include rights or
advantages for the greatest number justice. Even at exorbitant expense
of people. A deed is only considered or injury to the minority, immoral
“right” if and when it results in a behaviors might be “justified” if they
larger net benefit for society than result in significant benefits for the
any other deed that would be feasible majority. It takes one more value or
given the circumstances. When principle to make the benefit-cost
applying this technique, one must equation balanced. For example,
take into account both the Dostoevsky questioned in The
advantages and disadvantages, as Brothers Karamazov what should be
well as non-material satisfactions done if the happiness of the entire
like friendships and health.The human species might be achieved,
majority of supporters of this eternally, by the sacrifice of a single
approach think that utilities should person—a single, innocent child—
be weighed equally for each member who would have to undergo
of society, whereas some propose excruciating suffering to the point of
weighting [Jeremy Bentham (1748– death. That transaction should never
1832) was the founder of be acceptable to anyone. There isn’t
utilitarianism; also see J. S. Mill] a single, universal method for
weighing the advantages of the
majority against the disadvantages of
the minority.

Universalism: Because the results of It Is difficult to precisely state and

an action are so unpredictable and test the principle of one’s acts; for
unknown when it is decided to take example, it may be feasible to define
it, moral standards are applied to the “immoral” behaviors in such a
intent of the action or decision. The manner that they would satisfy
idea is that everyone should take Kant’s tests, even though, when
action to make sure that, in stated broadly, they would contradict
comparable situations, other people the categorical imperative.
would make the same choices. This Furthermore, no framework for
approach is deontological, or based addressing conflicts between
on duties or obligations; it is obligations is provided by this
essentially the opposite of ethical paradigm (e.g., conflict
teleological theory. Treating other between duty to one’s firm and duty
people as ends in and of themselves to society at large). There is no scale
is the primary responsibility of to compare “shoulds”—nor degrees
universalism. In order to secure or priorities—and immoral activities
respect for the moral value of others might be “justified” by those who
and to eradicate self-interest and are prone to self-deception or self-
self-deception, Kant (1724–1804) importance. To further develop the
developed a straightforward test for concept of the Categorical
personal obligation and goodwill: Imperative, one more principle or
Consider if you would be willing for value is required. (For instance, one
everyone on the planet to be person may desire greater personal
compelled to act in the same way freedom, while another may prefer
under identical circumstances (the absolute law and order, with no
so-called “categorical imperative”). opposition to the government outside
This would require everyone to act of the formal election process.).
as though their choice of action were Additionally, if we are too clumsy or
going to become a universal law that ineffective, it will crash!
would apply to everyone.

Enlightened Self interest: This Embodies an ideal that is well

system is a combination of egoist beyond the reach of the majority of
philosophy and utilitarianism. ESI us, or demands perfect individuals. It
contends that if one adopts a long- is prone to rationalization and offers
term perspective and comprehends little direction in particular
his or her own actual self-interests, applications.
then an individual’s self-interest and
society’s interests are (should be)
identical. This can be seen of as
“self-interest rightly understood by a
reasonable person.” According to
Spinoza, all poor decisions are the
product of intellectual error and
come from a failure to recognize
one’s own genuine self-interest. A
fully ethical individual, by this view,
will understand that the long-term
interests of society and oneself are
very similar. With this perspective,
one could ask: from my deathbed,
how will I likely evaluate this
action?

Ethics of Interdependence: This is another example of an ideal.

Confucius advocated for peaceful It is difficult to apply to larger or
compromise as a means of resolving more general situations because it is
disputes so that nature can proceed concentrated on small-scale human
in harmony. The interconnectedness interactions.
of people's interactions is essential to
defining what is moral in a system
based on his ideas. People's
responsibilities are prioritized over
their rights. The two qualities of li
and jen include these
responsibilities. Li describes a set of
behaviors that are intrinsic to the
idea of filial responsibilities and
duties, including manners, ritual,
custom, etiquette, and propriety. Jen,
the other fundamental idea, signifies
humanity. Reasonable individuals
can always find a way to
compromise in this system, and each
party has an obligation to make an
effort to offer the other side with
what it needs in order to satisfy itself
and reach its objectives. To act in
any other way is to be dishonest,
exploitational, divisive, and
immoral.

Distributive Justice: The Acceptance of (a) justice as the first

foundation of moral standards is the and most important virtue of social
supremacy of one value: justice. institutions and (b) the idea that
Assuring a more equitable social cooperation is the foundation
distribution of advantages is for all economic and social benefits
something that everyone should do (fair benefit distribution guarantees
since it fosters personal self-respect, social cooperation) are necessary
which is fundamental to societal conditions for the primacy of the
collaboration. [This and Personal value of justice. For different people,
Liberty are two contemporary ethical “justice” or “just distribution” might
frameworks created by two distinct mean different things. For example,
Harvard academics; this one is by it can mean anything like equally,
John Rawls] according to need, work,
participation, skill, etc. Individual
work is not valued.

Personal Liberty: Moral standards The Idea that a market system of

are predicated on the idea that liberty commerce guarantees social
is the most important value. productivity and that liberty is the
Everyone should take action to primary value and necessity for
guarantee more freedom of choice society are prerequisites for the
since it encourages market supremacy of the value of liberty.
transaction, which is necessary for This theory is predicated on a very
the productivity of society. This is restricted interpretation of liberty,
the system that libertarians support. which is restricted to the negative
[created at Harvard by Robert right to be free from external
Nozick] interference; there might also be a
positive right to partake in some of
the advantages that others have.