ethics
ˈɛθɪks/
noun
plural noun: ethics; noun: ethics
- 1.moral principles that govern a person's behaviour or the conducting of an activity."medical ethics also enter into the question"
synonyms: moral code, morals, morality, moral stand, moral principles, moral values, rights and wrongs, principles, ideals, creed, credo, ethos, rules of conduct, standards (of behaviour), virtues, dictates of conscience
"the ethics of journalism" - 2.the branch of knowledge that deals with moral principles."neither metaphysics nor ethics is the home of religion
In Reader 5 we discover that there are 3 main contexts where ethics are considered; Personal, Professional and Organisational.
Personal ethics can come from many sources such as family values and religion. My own personal ethics come from my upbringing at home and experiences I've had, and are determined by the people or situations we deal with in every day life, these ethics have stayed with me through my life and have defined me as a person. Many people are guided by their religion and live their lived following that path.
Professional ethics have evolved over the years of a particular profession, in may case the teaching profession, they are a set of rules that an employee must adhere to in respect of their business. In most workplaces these ethics are in a 'code of conduct' and as i work in many different schoold i have to be sure i follow each schools ethics correctly.
Organisational ethics is the way a certain organisation creates their own guidelines and principles "how we do things around here" (Reader 5).
Reading through Reader 5 I have discovered that there are 3 different Theoretical Approached to Ethics; Consequentialism, Deontology and Virtue ethics.
The BBC website says this about concequentialism 'Consequentialism says that right or wrong depend on the consequences of an act, and that the more good consequences are produced, the better the act.'
Deontology is a compete contrast to concequentialism, it is 'duty-based' and more concerened with what people do rether than the concequences of their actions.
Virtue ethics looks at the person carrying out the action rather than the action itself.
'The difference between these three approaches to morality tends to lie more in the way moral dilemmas are approached than in the moral conclusions reached. For example, a consequentialist may argue that lying is wrong because of the negative consequences produced by lying—though a consequentialist may allow that certain foreseeable consequences might make lying acceptable. A deontologist might argue that lying is always wrong, regardless of any potential "good" that might come from lying. A virtue ethicist, however, would focus less on lying in any particular instance and instead consider what a decision to tell a lie or not tell a lie said about one's character and moral'
This quote found on http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Consequentialism.html explains these 3 different approaches to lying.
Organisational ethics is the way a certain organisation creates their own guidelines and principles "how we do things around here" (Reader 5).
Reading through Reader 5 I have discovered that there are 3 different Theoretical Approached to Ethics; Consequentialism, Deontology and Virtue ethics.
The BBC website says this about concequentialism 'Consequentialism says that right or wrong depend on the consequences of an act, and that the more good consequences are produced, the better the act.'
Deontology is a compete contrast to concequentialism, it is 'duty-based' and more concerened with what people do rether than the concequences of their actions.
Virtue ethics looks at the person carrying out the action rather than the action itself.
'The difference between these three approaches to morality tends to lie more in the way moral dilemmas are approached than in the moral conclusions reached. For example, a consequentialist may argue that lying is wrong because of the negative consequences produced by lying—though a consequentialist may allow that certain foreseeable consequences might make lying acceptable. A deontologist might argue that lying is always wrong, regardless of any potential "good" that might come from lying. A virtue ethicist, however, would focus less on lying in any particular instance and instead consider what a decision to tell a lie or not tell a lie said about one's character and moral'
This quote found on http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Consequentialism.html explains these 3 different approaches to lying.
No comments:
Post a Comment