On the first page of the chapter (35), Johannesen states that "we often 'yearn' for what is not good." I find this statement to be very true. It seems as if some people are always wanting what they cannot have. Unfortunately, a lot of time this lust leads to affairs or people blowing their money on materialistic things. Some people even yearn for addictive things such as gambling, drugs, alcohol, or sex (in a premarital, or floozy type way). These things are ethically wrong, at least most people would agree that they are wrong if done in excess (an occasional drink is not the end of the world).
I thought it was an interesting, and true statement.
Another item that stuck out to me was Aristotle's rejection of the idea "the end justifies the means when the means is unethical," talked about in Human Rational Capacity.
Last time in class we talked about the idea of right and wrong, and continue to do so as we try and figure out what ethics, or being ethical really is.
We know that stealing is wrong. But what if you had to steal food (or money for food) in order to feed your family?
Does the end justify the mean?
Is this still wrong?
Based on what the author of the text is saying, it seems as if Aristotle would say it is wrong.
We have so many different ways to go about studying and understanding ethics.
I just wonder, are there instances when doing something bad, is really a good thing? Is it worth breaking the ethical expectations if it will bring peace or happiness to someone?
What do you think?
Would you steal the food or money for food to feed your family?
Where and how do you draw the line?
I thought it was an interesting, and true statement.
Another item that stuck out to me was Aristotle's rejection of the idea "the end justifies the means when the means is unethical," talked about in Human Rational Capacity.
Last time in class we talked about the idea of right and wrong, and continue to do so as we try and figure out what ethics, or being ethical really is.
We know that stealing is wrong. But what if you had to steal food (or money for food) in order to feed your family?
Does the end justify the mean?
Is this still wrong?
Based on what the author of the text is saying, it seems as if Aristotle would say it is wrong.
We have so many different ways to go about studying and understanding ethics.
I just wonder, are there instances when doing something bad, is really a good thing? Is it worth breaking the ethical expectations if it will bring peace or happiness to someone?
What do you think?
Would you steal the food or money for food to feed your family?
Where and how do you draw the line?
No comments:
Post a Comment