Ethical motives is a subdivision if doctrine that trade with thoughts about what is morally good and bad. Ethical motives act as tools. giving us counsel when we need to do of import determinations in personal and professional state of affairss. There are scriptural illations that can associate to most if non all state of affairss that we come across in our day-to-day lives. God will non set us in any state of affairss that we can non be exultant in.
If the Bible is an absolute in all of these theories. so is Jesus Christ. The first ethical theory is Utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is the ethical theory that describes how the moral value or worth of an action is determined by how much benefit is gained from that action. It is measured by non merely the sum of benefit gained but besides the sum of people with benefits in the procedure. This theory hopes to supply counsel when taking a class of action.
Utilitarianism is divided into two groups based away of how they apply the theory. A Rule Utilitarian believes that the action is right if it consequences in felicity of great benefit ( Munson. 2009 ) . For illustration. the commandment. “thou shall non kill” is really consecutive forward and doesn’t leave room for reading. Person who follows Rule Utilitarianism would purely follow this regulation by ne’er perpetrating slaying or killing any living animal.
An Act Utilitarian would decode the commandment harmonizing to its greatest benefit. Act utilitarianism is the belief that an action is right if it is better than all of the other options every bit long as it yields the best consequences. In other words. there may be state of affairss in which interrupting the regulations may be the best option. Interrupting the commandment. “ thou shall non kill” may look incorrect when looking at it from the surface. but if it is done to salvage the life’s of others it may give the best consequence. The absolute that applies to Utilitarianism is the Bible. 2 Corinthians 9:7 says. “Each one must give as he has decided in his bosom ; non reluctantly or under irresistible impulse. for God loves a cheerful giver. ” This theory is about the best benefit and focuses on the sum of benefit every bit good as the sum of people it benefits. In order to accomplish this. the ground for giving can non be egotistically or self- motivated. Immanuel Kant’s deontological theory is the wholly opposite of Utilitarianism. Kantian Ethics believes that right and incorrect are non depended on their effects but on whether the responsibility or undertaking at manus is fulfilled.
Kant theory is besides reliant on the position that worlds. unlike any other animal. have the capacity to apologize. He believes that a person’s feelings and dispositions should non play any portion in actuating a chosen action. This theory does non work good in the field of health care. Feelingss and dispositions are a necessity when working with human existences. Healthcare workers are non reading measure by measure instructions as if they are seting a auto together. but alternatively are caring for a patient whose instance is different and patient particular. Patients can non be treated like a checklist. Although this theory eliminated any of the classs under the Bible: commandments. guidelines. illations. and strong beliefs ; completion is a large subject in the Bible. God completed the creative activity of the universe in six yearss. and rested on the 7th. Jesus Christ rose from the dead on the 3rd twenty-four hours. In John 17:4. Jesus said to them. “My nutrient is to make the will of Him who sent Me and to carry through His work. ” W. D. Ross believed that there was non one regulation or rule that one must stay by. Alternatively he believed that we can come on through moral responsibilities. Ross proposed that we have axiomatic Prima facie moral responsibilities and that there are some things have intrinsic value ( Ross. 2002 ) .
He believed we have the responsibility of fidelity or the responsibility to maintain our promises. the responsibility of reparation or the responsibility to pay for injury done to others. the responsibility of gratitude or the responsibility to return favours. the responsibility of beneficence or the responsibility to maximise the good. and the responsibility of non-injury or the responsibility to decline injury to others ( Ross. 2002 ) . For illustration. it is by and large incorrect to kill a individual because it causes hurting and is one of the 10 commandments. In order for it non to be incorrect to kill. a individual must hold an overruling ground to make it such as salvaging the lives of others. Ross’s belief in overruling ground is really similar to that Act Utilitarianism. The Bible is an absolute in this theory every bit good. Ross puts accent on the responsibilities we must continue. The Bible lays out many responsibilities given to Christians. One of the most popular lists is the Ten Commandments. Virtue Ethics is the attack that deemphasizes regulations and responsibility. concentrating on a person’s character ( Munson. 2009 ) . Character is an of import focal point when taking employees in the Healthcare field. I have worked in many healthcare countries and have worked with many people who truly were non in the field for the right grounds. Passion is a necessity when working with human existences. There are many workers who lack this characteristic and are merely in the field for pecuniary benefit.
Although it may be impossible to wholly free the healthcare field of “bad seeds. ” supplying an flood of kindhearted. loving employees would decidedly assist. The Bible is an absolute in this ethical attack. Matthew 12:35 says. “The good individual out of his good hoarded wealth convey away good. and the evil individual out of his evil hoarded wealth brings away evil. ” As a Christian we must do certain we are populating our lives in God’s image. We are walking hoardings for Christ and need to do certain that we act consequently. As a Christian. this walk will decidedly be difficult and there will be many enticements along the manner but our character will assist us to take the right way. Care Ethics argues that some responsibilities can non be justified by theories of right. justness. and public-service corporation ( Velasquez. 2002 ) . Care moralss believe that the most of import factor is the concrete relationship with a individual or individuals ( Velasquez. 2002 ) . This theory is really apparent in the healthcare field and I find this theory most appealing. I have worked in the health care field for most of my calling and recognize that it is my responsibility to take attention of and supply for each patient I serve.
Through experience. I besides realize that there are certain patients that I have been drawn to. and that I feel nearer to. At my last occupation. I worked on the spinal cord hurt unit. Most of my patients were to the full depended on what I did for them. The interaction could be awkward as I was executing undertakings such as showers. intestine plans. and diaper alterations. I felt it my responsibility to do them experience comfy and to allow them cognize that I care. For a batch of my patients. I was the lone household they had. No one of all time came to see them so our conversation was something to look frontward to. As I worked with a patient every twenty-four hours. particular bonds were formed. We celebrated any and all advancement made. Whether it is something every bit little as traveling a little finger for the first clip or taking a first measure after. everything should be celebrated. Both Jesus Christ and the Bible are absolutes in this theory.
This occupation has besides taught me to be more appreciative of the things I do hold. It has taught me to halt kicking about small things. Most of my patients lived regular lives merely as I do. and in an case it was taken off from them. Most people unwittingly take things for granted such as being able to walk. talk. brush your dentitions. and clothe yourself. Alternatively. we feel that the things are owed to us and that we are meriting of these things. The Bible and Jesus Christ are decidedly absolutes in this theory. We as Christians yearn for a strong. deeper relationship with God and the best manner to achieve this is by analyzing the word of God daily. Proverbs 8:17 says. “I Love those who love me ; And those who diligently seek me will happen me. ”
MentionsHoly BibleKant. I. ( 1785 ) “First Section: Passage from the Common Rational Knowledge of Morals to the Philosophical. ” Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals. Munson. R. ( 2009 ) . Intervention and Contemplation: Basic issues of bioethics ( 9th ed. ) . Ross. W. D. . ( 2002 ) . The Right and the Good. Edited. with an Introduction. by Philip Stratton- Lake. New York: Oxford University Press: rpt. of original 1930 edition. Velasquez. M. G. . ( 2002 ) . Business Ethical motives: Concepts and Cases. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Cite this Ethics Munson’s 5 Ethical Theories
Ethics Munson’s 5 Ethical Theories. (2017, Jul 06). Retrieved from https://graduateway.com/ethics-munsons-5-ethical-theories-essay/