If a group believes that a particular activity is "wrong" it can then use morality as the justification for attacking those who practice that activity. When people do this, they often see those who they regard as immoral as in some way less human or deserving of respect than themselves; sometimes with tragic consequences. Virtue Ethics is particularly concerned with the moral character of human beings. Searching for the source of right and wrong At times in the past some people thought that ethical problems could be solved in one of two ways:
The Ethics of Technology: Would geometrical methods be equally helpful in ethics? Peterson thinks so and offers a "geometric method" for ethical decision-making While Spinoza attempted to apply Euclid's method to philosophy by deriving many propositions from a few axioms and definitions, Peterson's method "derives its normative force from the Aristotelian dictum" that agents "should 'treat like cases alike'" 4.
If agents repeatedly intuit the pairwise degree of moral similarity between two technology-ethics Ethics moral principles -- one they know how to resolve ethically and one about which they are uncertain -- Peterson says they eventually can reach a "warranted conclusion" about "what it is right or wrong to do, in each.
After a helpful introduction, chapter 2 summarizes Peterson's method of intuiting the "moral similarity" between pairwise cases and between cases and each of the "5 geometrically construed.
Chapter 3 presents results of Peterson's "test" of his method.
He asked several hundred professional philosophers and undergraduates to estimate the pairwise moral similarity between technology-ethics cases and which of the 5 principles they think applies to each 24then analyzed their responses.
Chapters "defend five Ethics moral principles moral principles" 3,18 that Peterson says are "necessary" and "jointly sufficient for analyzing all cases related to.
To his credit, Peterson admits there is nothing new about these 5 principles whose discussion comprises most of his book 3. Chapter 9 criticizes some non-analytic views of technology ethics, and chapter 10 presents a 4-page conclusion. The geometric method of Peterson is built on "three central concepts": Though he defines none of these concepts and says case is "a primitive concept" 29Peterson construes a case as a situation of moral choice among alternatives, such as whether or not to use greenhouse-gas-reducing technologies In Peterson's "moral space," geometric points represent cases.
Straight lines between points cases represent the "moral concept" of pairwise-case moral similarity 30as subjectively assessed by each agent on a 7-point cardinal scale.
Surprisingly, although Peterson says these pairwise-case estimates are "analogous [to]. Instead Peterson says agent estimates "merely reflect the relative positions of the data points" 39 ; "it is up to the researcher to propose a plausible interpretation of the [agent-estimated] dimensions" by doing the MDS [multidimensional scaling] analysis.
After agents' numerically- represented, subjectively-assessed similarities are plotted in Peterson's geometric "moral space," agents estimate "the most typical case" of all cases to which they think the earlier, single, moral principle applies "by calculating the mean location center of gravity " of these cases Agents treat this "most typical" case as the "paradigm case" for that ultima-facie moral principle It "dictates the moral verdict" in the case However, as agents discover new-case applications of an ultima-facie principle, its paradigm case may change Claiming his "geometric method can.
He wants his method to show that using his "meticulous reasoning" can make practical philosophy "as clear, precise, and intellectually challenging as the best work in. Does Peterson deliver on this worthy aim? A first conceptual concern is that he asks agents to assess pairwise-case "moral similarity" without specifying "similarity with respect to what?
However, I agree with Nelson Goodman. It's conceptually incoherent to ask people to assess pairwise moral similarity without first specifying moral-similarity dimensions.
Answering Peterson's assessment question, I would respond: Some other moral-similarity dimension? Thus for the same two cases, one agent might estimate "moral similarity" with respect to catastrophic consequences, while another might estimate similarity with respect to fairness. If so, Peterson has a common, moral-similarity label, but no common concept.
Because different agent-responses likely presuppose different moral-similarity concepts, their responses don't make logical contact.
If so, there's little justification for Peterson's quantifying and aggregating many agents' moral-similarity estimates e. Peterson defends his failure to pre-specify moral-similarity dimensions with a rhetorical question. But if agents really can't identify "dimensional" moral similarity, why does Peterson beg the question that agents can reliably identify his indeterminate, "something-I-know-not-what" moral similarity?
Why does he beg the question that some after-the-fact, MDS researcher can reliably identify the implicit, unmentioned, moral-similarity dimensions that earlier agents used? Explaining how to assess moral similarity, Peterson says it depends on "the nature of the cases under consideration" May 26, · A moral is a subset of principles that more specifically applies to human behavior and the principles of right and wrong or good and bad.
A moral by its textbook definition is: concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior and the goodness or badness of human character. Four fundamental ethical principles (a very simple introduction) The Principle of Respect for autonomy Autonomy is Latin for "self-rule" We have an obligation to respect the autonomy of other persons, which is to respect the decisions made by other people concerning their own lives.
Peterson likewise begs the question when he stipulates that his 5 moral principles "cannot be overridden by other principles" (18), and that "when two or more principles clash, all [behavioral-ethics] options come out as being somewhat wrong" (18).
Ethic definition is - the discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation. How to use ethic in a sentence.
Ethics vs Morals: Is there a difference? While ethics can refer broadly to moral principles. Some common ethical principles include honesty, equality, respect for rights, integrity and adherence to the law. While these are all fairly standard ethical principles, their precise applications depend on the setting.
For instance, the implications and importance of ethical principles vary greatly. Business ethics (also corporate ethics) is a form of applied ethics or professional ethics that examines ethical principles and moral or ethical problems that arise in a business environment, including fields like medical ethics.
Business ethics represents the practices that any individual or group exhibits within an organization that can.