Ethics Assignment: Analysis of Ethical Frameworks and Theories

This assignment delves into various ethical theories, primarily focusing on utilitarianism and deontology, and their application to moral dilemmas. The student's responses address questions regarding the rationality of utilitarianism versus the emotional basis of deontology, the ethical implications of consequentialist reasoning, and the permissibility of deceptive truth-telling. Further, the assignment explores ethical egoism, the necessity of laws for a peaceful society, and the validity of Anscombe's criticism of Britain's entry into World War II. The answers also discuss virtue ethics, the usefulness of moral principles, and the concept of a moral operating system. The assignment is supported by several academic references.

Ethics

ETHICS 1
Answers
7a. It is true that utilitarianism theory reflects the rational thinking. Utilitarianism theory
refers an action which brings happiness for all (Mill, 2016). In this case, utilitarianism is
more justified because it balances the situation; killing 1 person is good to save the 1000
people as it maximizes the good or minimizes the bad. Deontology theory refers the right and
wrong (Paquette, Sommerfeldt, & Kent, 2015). In this case, this theory states that it is wrong
to kill 1 person, but it can be considered as an emotional decision. Utilitarianism theory is
more justified because it balanced the situation by saving the 1000 instead of 1.
7b. It is right choice to realise the person from the prison, because it is good to save the
number of people instead of giving him punishment. Utilitarianism theory refers an action
which brings the maximum utility. According the utilitarianism theory, it is right choice to
leave the person and provide the services to the poor people. It is ethical to save the lives of
poor people; it shows the ideal behaviour which helps the other (Mill, 2016).
7c. Using truth deceptively for a good reason of peace is permissible. Telling lie is generally
wrong but sometimes it is right due to some specific reason; it depends on the intention
behind the lie. Telling the truth may cause conflicts at times and when it is spoken
deceptively for the humility or maintaining the modesty; it becomes permissible. If changing
the truth protects someone else from inconvenience or from harm then it can be said that
using the truth deceptively is good and it can be permissible. According to utilitarianism
theory, telling the lie is wrong or unethical but if the objective of it brings the happiness then
it is ethical (Wiegmann, Samland, & Waldmann, 2016).
9a. Ethical egoism is not an ethical behaviour; if any one followed it then his/her life may
become miserable. Because everyone is pursuing their own interest without thinking for
others as per Ethical Egoism. It raises many conflicts which has no solution. For example-

ETHICS 2
Manufacturing industries throw their waste in rivers without thinking that is harmful for the
other people. Ethical egoism is completely against the principle of impartiality. It makes the
life worst instead of bringing happiness (Machan, 2015).
9b. It is not possible to live in a peaceful place without the laws. It can be said that without
laws a better society cannot be framed because it is obligation for everyone to obey the laws
and it makes the environment peaceful. Without laws, government or police there would be
conflict between social group and communities. Because different people have different
opinion on Ethics which will create social conflict. Thus, it can be said that the people would
not live peacefully without government and laws (Cotterrell, 2017).
9c. No, Anscombe’s criticism of Britain’s entry into World War II, cannot be considered fair.
The conditions put by the critique are too strict and in real life scenario such canditions
cannot be followed. If a country will think about justifying its deeds ethically then it will not
enter into a war. The conditions of just war theory are impossible to meet in real life. Just
War theory is established for peace that does not require any war (Zupan, 2017).
11a. No, this cannot be said that virtue ethics is a more promising moral theory. It has been
seen that people follow the reasoning of virtue ethics and do what they want to do to become
virtuous (Hooft, 2014). People do not act like good or do not have any right motives; they
just follow their thoughts and that would be a right action for them instead of following virtue
ethics. Virtue ethics is not satisfactory for some people because it has criteria to perform the
right action. Some people would agree that everyone has to perform the good role because it
recognises the goodness in acting. It is accepted by people then it has to be accepted that the
virtue ethics is a self- effacing and it should not be favoured over other moral theories.
11b. No it is not very useful, there are ambiguity in the explanation. It has been seen that
there is lack of unifying moral theory which connect the principles together to provide the

ETHICS 3
proper guidelines. Without the guidelines and connection it is very difficult for weigh and
balances various principles. Principles can create conflicts and theories provide no decision
making procedure to solve these conflicts. Thus, it can be said that it is necessary to connect
the moral theories with the principles so that they can easily provide the guidelines (Dietrich,
& List, 2017).
11c. Yes, he has provided an idea of what a moral operating system could be. It is right
because most of the people have their own views about right and wrong; few people follow
the moral theories which they explain in their own way to other people. Common sense or
new ideas of people provide the guidance and helps each other in many situations of daily
life. These ideas shared by people with each other helps in more specialise areas like software
development. Too many people mean many views from which the people get a different view
of their own belief and by the same view the decision taken by the group is better decision as
compare to an individual (Gallois, & Giles, 2015).

ETHICS 4
References
Cotterrell, R. (2017). Law, culture and society: Legal ideas in the mirror of social theory.
Routledge.
Dietrich, F., & List, C. (2017). What matters and how it matters: A choice-theoretic
representation of moral theories. Philosophical Review, 126(4), 421-479.
Gallois, C., & Giles, H. (2015). Communication accommodation theory. The international
encyclopedia of language and social interaction, 1-18.
Machan, T. R. (2015). Egoism, Psychological Egoism, and Ethical Egoism. Wiley
Encyclopedia of Management, 1-4.
Mill, J. S. (2016). Utilitarianism. In Seven Masterpieces of Philosophy (pp. 337-383).
Routledge.
Paquette, M., Sommerfeldt, E. J., & Kent, M. L. (2015). Do the ends justify the means?
Dialogue, development communication, and deontological ethics. Public Relations
Review, 41(1), 30-39.
Van Hooft, S. (2014). Understanding virtue ethics. Routledge.
Wiegmann, A., Samland, J., & Waldmann, M. R. (2016). Lying despite telling the truth.
Cognition, 150, 37-42.
Zupan, D. S. (2017). War, morality, and autonomy: an investigation in just war theory.
Routledge.