The moral decisions that are made every day are as complex as the effects of the leaders. The humanistic identity was established when everyone was a child, and they could make the decision on whether to bully their friends, steal from the peers and do other naughty behaviors. We all have attempted to rationalize the two sides of the dilemma of different issues like capital punishment and the expenditures for the social program for welfare (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2012). The moral issue, therefore, arises when people are faced with decisions that can affect the well-being of their friends and other people. If the individual act to increase pain, depression, and loss of self-worth, then they could be harming the others and acting immorally. Different theories have identified how to deal with issues like capital punishment.
The Devine command theory is inspired by the fact that God is considered to be all-powerful and in control of everything. In this extent He wills the control of everything and values them into existence and so does He will save the human life (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2009). Proponents of the theory believe that God is in charge of everything and He will teach moral principles. This principle, therefore, confers that murder is wrong and that God is the one in charge of all the life in the world. The theory, therefore, does not support the issue of capital punishment.
The theory of Egoism indicates how inherent human selfishness is. The theory suggests that selfish desire prompts the actions made by the humans and even if they will afterward do charity work, it would be out of the selfish causes like experiencing power over other people (Carpanini, 2016). In this context, the theory indicates that people have got the capacity to show benevolence to others so that they can maintain their ego and power. Even if it means to stop the capital punishment, they will carryout the action with the intention to have power over the others.
Virtue Ethics theory believes that morality consists of the defined rules of conduct. The rules indicate that one should not kill and should not steal among others. The individuals should learn the rules and make sure that the person lives up to the rules (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2009). The theory emphasis is on the importance of developing good habits including showing benevolence. The theory defends the central role of virtue and argues that the virtues are grounded in, and they emerge within the social traditions. The theory does not support capital punishment as the action will not be showing benevolence to the victims rather it would be an act of killing which the theory disagrees with.
Kant’s Duty theory emphasizes on the principle of duty. Kant agreed that we all have moral responsibilities to ourselves and also to others. However, Kant argued that the fundamental principle of duty is a single, self-evident and principle of reason which he refers to as the categorical imperative. The issue of categorical imperative means that one ought to do something even if it does not fulfill their desire (Thiroux & Krasemann, 2012). The theory requires people to deal with other people with dignity and not to use them as an instrument. One should regulate the morality of actions that affect them individually like capital punishment would not be a categorical imperative since it is not an act of dignity.
Utilitarianism theory deals with pleasure and pain. The proponents of the theory claim that the two are the only consequences that determine whether the actions done were moral or not. When an individual adopts a rule against theft, it would have more desirable outcomes than the unfavorable ones. The same would apply to the issue of murder or capital punishment (Carpanini, 2016). The theory offers a method of judging since John Stuart Mill Utilitarianism is rule oriented. The theory usually tallies the consequences that fulfill one's preference and simply not as pleasurable or painful.
In conclusion, different theories have been identified to overlap with the controversies of what is right or what is wrong. Ethics have got a gray area. One can decide to draw their conclusion from the utilitarianism theory or the duty theory, but then the divine command theory and ethical virtual theory widens the gray area. The decision that one makes can affect the future of other people and also their future. Capital punishment is an immoral action according to the theories discussed, and people should show dignity and benevolence to other human beings.
Carpanini, F. (2016). Environmental Ethics: From Theory to Practice. Ethics, Policy & Environment, 19(2), 233-235. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21550085.2016.1195526
Thiroux, J. P., & Krasemann, K. W. (2009). Ethics: Theory and practice. Upper Saddle River, N.J: Pearson Education International.
Thiroux, J. P., & Krasemann, K. W. (2012). Ethics: Theory and practice. Boston: Pearson.
Cite this page
Ethics and The Moral Decisions. (2017, Dec 25). Retrieved from https://speedypaper.com/essays/ethics-and-the-moral-decisions
If you are the original author of this essay and no longer wish to have it published on the SpeedyPaper website, please click below to request its removal:
- Visual Argument
- Race and Racism
- FIFA Corruption
- Out of the Transylvania Night Book Analysis
- Stress Management
- Work Experience Essay Samples
- Whistle-blow research
- WHY THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION WAS REVOLUTIONARY
- Love and Hatred
- Employee Satisfaction and Work Motivation in Engineering Company
- Problem identification
- Summary of IMFs Latest Articles:
- Importance of Theory in Nursing
- The Effect of Climate Change on Ski Industry in the Alps
- Sexism in Jobs