Summary
I do agree with what the author is saying. I think there is definetly a right and wrong in every situation but everyone has different opinions on what they believe is right. I don't think there will be a time in the near future where everyone will agree, but there is always hope!
But the Deprivation Principle implies that abortion is wrong, since abortions deprive individuals (the fetuses) of a future-of-value. Thus, abortion is wrong. In evaluating arguments from inference to the best explanation, Marquis’ included, the most important (but not the only) question to ask is whether the proffered explanation for the initial ethical judgment really is best. Perhaps there is an alternative principle that explains the initial judgment just as well or better, and which doesn’t imply what the proffered principle implies. And indeed this is the issue on which Marquis and his critics have focused.
This seems to incinuate that abortion is not ethically wrong but they have no proof to back up that claim. This is a very controversial topic that should not be taken lightly!
Baby Theresa.
The main point of this section is to give insight on things we will be looking at when studying ethics. These situations can be very hard, depending on what you believe, yet thought provoking. My conclusion would be that it is ethically wrong to kill baby Theresa because miracles have happened before and if there is even the slightest chance that Theresa can live she should get that chance, It is her body. I believe in all situations it is ethically wrong to take the life of another human.
Ethical Argument
Section titles give you an overveiw of what you are about to read, they give organization to the text. Not only the major section titles but also the smaller titles inside the big ones can give us insight on the author and how he/she believes the topics should be read and interpreted. This title in perticular does not reveal much about what we are about to read. It could be how to create an ethical argument, how to distinguish if an argument is considered ethical, or just talking about ethical arguments in general and how to break them down.
We cannot move from the fact that people disagree to the conclusion that there is no answer.
The main topic of this section is there is an answer to what is morally right and wrong even when people disagree, it just makes it harder to find that answer.
So just because different cultures have different moral views, this does not show, by itself, that there is no moral truth and no answer to the question.
I think this is a main point of the text to show people that there is an answer to every moral question even if we disagree. That seems to be a very big point because the entire article leads up to this. The article talks about people disagreeing, how to do what is right, and distinguish right and wrong which all lead up to the fact that there is a set right and wrong, even if people disagree.
So just because different cultures have different moral views, this does not show, by itself, that there is no moral truth and no answer to the question.
This is sort of hard to wrap my head around this idea. I get what they are saying, just because somebody doesnt believe in it doesnt mean its not there, but how would you even begin to come to the same conclusion of what is right and wrong if there is no religion or culture behind it. To me ethics is all about religion and what god says is right and wrong. When you take religion out of the picture it is hard to understand because what makes it right and wrong at that point?
Ethics, like much of life, is more developing an attitude vs. accumulating facts
The main topic of this section is believing what is morally right while having facts. You need facts to support you but you need to believe it also. It is about mindset!
Some people distinguish between “ethics” and “morality”. We do not.
The main topic of this section is about making distictions between words or topics that are often veiwed as the same.
In evaluating a simple ethical argument like A1, there are two basic questions we can ask:
The main point of this section is to look at ethical arguments and how to apply a principle. Ask if the principle fits the case and if the principle is logical and credible.
ethical arguments
The main point of this section is how to think about what you believe is right in the situation and how to back it up. More or less give reasons as to why you believe something is right or wrong. The topic of different principles is brought up as well, but every situation is different and one principle may not apply to every situation.
Why not seek an answer to the question by…
The main point of this section is to get people thinking on how would you determine what is right and wrong or who to ask. Honestly, everyone has different opinoins on what is right and wrong and always will, there is not a person to ask that is 100% going to be right all the time, other than god , which can also vary depending upon what religion you believe or if you even believe at all.
What is Ethics?
This title makes it obvious that this is an informative article, on ethics. So I can assume that the text will elaborate more on all of the different types of ethics.
Virtue Ethics.
Virtue ethics is defined as a veiw of ethics where greatness or high moral standards is a basic quality.
Utilitarianism,
Utilitarianism is the concept that if something is done for the advantage of a majority then that action is morally right.