Consequentialism Ethics - Equality and Risk

Question: Discuss about the Consequentialism for Ethics, Equality and Risk. Answer: Introduction: An ethical absolutist would believe his culture and practices to be the best, the right and unquestionable. They deem other cultures wrong if they do not match their own. An example of this is found if we consider the act of Catholics who enforced conversion to Christianity in Native Americans. An ethical relativist believes each culture to be an entity of their own, correct in their own context and in no need of any all-encompassing standard by which cultures can be evaluated. Such as, in Christianity, Jesus is the Gods son; and in Islam, Mohammed is the God's prophet and relativists find nothing wrong in that. In case of an ethical pluralist, he believes every culture has a right to exist, pass judgments about one another and listen to what each has to say. Pluralism encourages tolerance, recognition and but also opposes the wrong and this is where it is different from relativism. For instance, in Canada, LGBT people enjoy basic rights just like everyone else, but self-burning is not encouraged there (Hinman, 2013). Absolutists response to female circumcision An absolutist, residing in a society where female circumcision is practiced and considered necessary, would believe the practice to be essential for other societies also. They view the non-observance of this practice in other societies as a disrespectful act and attitude. Whereas, if he is not a part of the practicing society, he would consider it as a heinous crime, and would try to stop it. Relativists response to female circumcision A relativist would justify the performing of female circumcision or female genital mutilation if it is important to a culture. Pluralists response to female circumcision A pluralist, if residing in a culture where female circumcision is practiced then he would support the practice and would not mind if other cultures or societies do not practice that. If he were not residing in the practicing society then he would stand up against it and point it out as something that should not be performed. The Ethics of Selfishness: Egoism Ethical egoism is the notion of having moral obligations towards oneself only and pursuing own ends. They have no obligation to help others, unless the act would coincide with their own wants. Amorality opines there is nothing immoral about egoism, but there is nothing ethical also. It is alleged that egoism is the basis of immorality. Human service work or youth work requires altruism, not egoism. Egoists are not suitable for such social work, as they only look out for themselves and do not contribute anything to the society. Even if they take part in such social work it would only be if they find something to be gained from it (Rachels, 2012). Ethics of Consequences: Utilitarianism Lying can be justified ethically Utilitarians found their logic on the claim that lying is ethically acceptable if the resultant consequences increase profit or decrease risks. A lie, hence, is not at all times morally wrong; in reality, when lying is compulsory to maximize profit or minimize hurt, it might be unethical not to lie. Utilitarianism even entails that lying is ethically permissible particularly when there is no alternative strategy that can provide a better outcome instead of lying. For instance, if a military son of an old woman, who suffers from heart disease, dies then it is ethically right to hide the news of his death for some time to not risk the lady falling sick. This is an example of minimization of risk. Act and Rule utilitarianism Act utilitarianism suggests an action is morally right if it provides happiness and wrong if it does not. Rule utilitarianism suggests an action is right if it conforms to a rule that leads to a greater happiness. The above-mentioned example abides by the act utilitarianism rule; however, it does not follow the rule utilitarianism as it does not follow any rule, only an emotional obligation (Hayry, 2013). Strengths and weaknesses of consequentialism Consequentialism is the idea that the conclusions of events, the resultsof some normative properties determine the correctness or unfairness of the act. Consequentialism is humanistic in its approach, is even unbiased and egalitarian, and is a flexible moral theory. On the other hand it can be considered as a violent theory also, for instance, if a violent attack gives the attacker pleasure and the victim pain. The theory is complicated in some cases, and over-demanding in the context of responsibility. Further, the goods and bads cannot always be calculated or measured (Peterson, 2013). Justification of consequentialism in lying Lies would be wrong only if they do more harm than good. The morality of lying depends on the situation, motives and purposes, too. White lies, which do not harm or influence majorly on a situation are not considered unethical. Further, if the lie results in something fruitful then it would a positive act. In case of social work, if a lie can do good to an underprivileged individual or bring in capital for an NGO then it would be a justified lying, as long as its not doing any harm (Jones, 2016). The Ethics of Duty: Immanuel Kant Deontologist argue lying as unjustified In accordance with deontology theory of Kant, lying is ethically immoral if the person lying has a compulsion to be honest. The compulsion to be honest might be relevant to all, the majority, or only a number of situations (Kleingeld, 2014). Categorical imperative Categorical imperative of Kant is an absolute moral law that relates to all normal beings and is free of any individual purpose or aspiration (Harris, 2015). An example of categorical imperative could be situation when a person thinks about breaking a red light early in the morning, when no one is around and he is running late for work. If he goes ahead then it can be because he thinks it is not unethical or okay to do so and thinks in the situation laws do not apply. However, that is not the case, as we know. Deontology is correct Deontology theory is correct by stating that telling the truth to colleagues and clients in the social work profession is the right thing to do, particularly if the person has an obligation to be honest in a situation (Saha, 2015). The Ethics of Rights: Contemporary Theories Every individual has a basic right to freedom of choice. Sometimes human services workers push civilians to donate funds for social help due to being pressurized by the senior level management. The human services organization has their own motive of helping people, however the individual who is being pressurized to donate has his own rights. Social help should not be imposed as a necessity on anyone. It is a matter of choice. References Harris, M. E. (2015). Examining Moral Necessity in the Kantian Categorical Imperative.The Catalyst,2(1), 2. Hayry, M. (2013).Liberal utilitarianism and applied ethics. Routledge. Hinman, L.M. (2013 ). Ethics: A pluralistic approach to Moral Theory (5 th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth Jones, N. (2016). Against Consequentialism. Kleingeld, P. (2014). Debunking Confabulation: Emotions and the Significance of Empirical Psychology for Kantian Ethics. InKant on Emotion and Value(pp. 146-165). Palgrave Macmillan UK. Peterson, M. (2013).The dimensions of consequentialism: Ethics, equality and risk. Cambridge University Press. Rachels, J. (2012). Ethical egoism.Ethical Theory: An Anthology,14, 193. Saha, B. (2015). The analytical study of the application of the ethical theories in the business governance.Scholedge International Journal of Business Policy Governance ISSN 2394-3351,1(3), 28-31.