Ethics in the Social Sciences Nowadays - Essay Example

Ethics in the Social Sciences xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Morality and Ethics Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Name Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Institution xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Lecturer Morality and Ethics We are living in a world where almost everything is changing due to change of various things like technology. In fact, this has made people to always have many questions. The questions include what, where, when and how. This is because they fear to entangle themselves into things that are not socially acceptable depending on their culture, religion, tribe, the country, among other factors hence resulting to the issue of morality and ethics. By definition, morality is the measure of how good or bad our behavior is, and the principles of our behavior. The official study of those behavioral principles is known as ethics. These two terms are commonly used, though most people do confuse while elaborating their meaning and differences. There are 3 categories of ethics; these are explanatory, normative and meta ethics. We need to further elaborate these categories which will help us to understand further the meaning of ethics. To start with, explanatory ethics deals with the elaboration on the way people behave. People may believe that plagiarism is awful. Explanatory ethics will expound on how people are involved in plagiarism cases. From observation, explanatory ethics can speak out all these cases, like the case where academicians download research materials from websites, copy and paste and hand over their research and exam papers for marking yet it is illegal. They may also include other cases such as some authors, professional people and journalists who are involved in the same vice. In the above category, research is carried out, so as to understand the various forms of behavior in various communities within the world. it is of great importance to notify that, if the research is conducted by an honest person, after field work analysis, one can give advice which can help an individual or a community to understand the way they conduct themselves, if it is worthy, or not, if un worthy, how to change for good. In so doing, explanatory research can assist in behavior self-examination and finally result into conduct perfection. Normative ethics, as the name suggests can be best explained by first looking at the word, norm. Norm is a list of traits an individual should have so as to be accepted in a society (Scott 1971). In this category, people are told on how to live peacefully with each other. Basically, as far as morals are concerned, three things are of great consideration for the accomplishment of this study. First of all, there is the agent of the deed, the deed itself and lastly but not the least, the outcome of the deed. As we relate with one another, may be at home, work places, at school, there are some character traits that an individual should possess for good interaction. In school, students ought to be obedient and humble to their teachers so that a favorable study environment can be created. If students are, the teachers can reciprocate the same by loving them and teaching well. Since both parties have good character traits, we can say teaching, understanding and communication during a class lesson is effective. The overall results after doing examination will be good. In normative ethics, people are taught on the way to behave so as to ensure suffer out of arrogance and ignorance (Kohn 1977). In meta ethics, it looks into how people choose out of will how to do things (Fine 2001). In other words, as an individual, the norms you have chosen to apply in your day – to – day life. This mostly comes due to the fact that as a child is being brought up, there several things he can learn from peers, teacher, religious leaders, siblings and friends. The child may learn what is good and bad when he irrational. Once he becomes rational, he can decide the way to follow and bear the consequences. A boy can start smoking because he has being seeing his parents smoke. The difference between the two(Maher 1908) is that, while morality states the code of conduct and the principles behind conduct, ethics studies the principles, and defines how we can apply them to better the world we are living. Ethics does not vary greatly where else morality changes frequently. This is because ethics is essential and established and since people can use ethics for self-examination, they can choose to apply it, hence change in morality. To add on, in ethics, there is question of behavioral values and if some values are found to be not beneficial, people can chose to disregard them. Consequentialist and Non-consequentalist views of morality The views about consequentialist as far as morality are concerned major on the consequences which come as a result of one’s behavior. Generally, this is where if one does what is right, and then the outcome will be good. If he is immoral, then, eventually we expect a bad outcome. This is just to mean that whatever you will sow, definitely you will gather the same. As a matter of fact, if a person mistreats all people who come across him, definitely, all will run away from him and he will end up having no friends to lean on more in time of need. Non- consequentalist views of morality (Posner 2000) can be said to be a state where if you do good or bad, despite the external factors, there are no consequences that will come your way. This is evident in government where there is corruption, impunity and dictatorship. There some leaders like presidents, who can kill, abuse the opposite sex or steal their money or property, and nothing is done to them. This may happen because no, there no penalties which may be set for him. The difference between the two is that in consequentalist views, the outcome gives an out line on how to get to a certain destination. In this view we can also say, outcome is used to determine what is right or wrong. On the other hand, no guide lines which limit people from doing what is wrong since they know they can’t suffer from their bad deeds. This might end up bring a corrupt society where people can abuse others. Absolutism and Relativism Absolutism is a state where in a society, there are some set principles which have been fixed. They are supposed to be followed without being question despite the individual being involved and the current situation he or she is facing. Relativism is a condition where what is precise or erroneous, excellent or bad is not fixed but it is changeable with time, place, and circumstance and depends with the person(s) involved (Bicchieri 2006). Absolutism is involved; to be precise where there laws. To illustrate this, in some communities, there are traditions which require every female to be circumcised. In such case, the community does not state any alternative on what should be done but expects every girl to be circumcised. In relativism, we can consider the day- to –day experiences we have had in most countries concerning traffic rules. The law might be stating that no over speeding or under speeding in the streets. If a driver commits an offence in either or both, he is supposed to be fined failure to which he will be imprisoned for some given period of time. This stands true, but they may give some options which can allow the driver not be charged or imprisoned, for instance, if the vehicle has got some puncture on the street and he has decided to drive slowly to be repaired. The difference between these two cases is that relativism is a favorable principle which allows one to express his or her opinions. This gives an opportunity to people to live without fear and with a sense of security and if one goes contrarily to the set standards, he can have a room to rectify his /her mistake. Absolutism, is cruel, in that, people are prohibited from questioning and bring forth their arguments (Horne 2001). Absolutism may originate in various forms. An good example is where it comes in form of deed with absolute values. Freedom and Determinism The word freedom has several meaning like liberty, choice and lack of restrictions. In the context of behaviour, freedom means that an individual is liberated to make a decision on how to conduct himself (liberated to do your will). Freedom has its merits and demerits. In fact, one will be autonomous and doesn’t have to be limited by the society or preceding cause to chose the principles to follow. On other hand, one can fail to consult where he doesn’t have the knowledge thus indulge himself in unfruitful immoral acts (Alexander 1902). For example, a young man can decide to buy a piece of land and plant some crops so as to sell for his own upkeep. Determinism is a speculation that all human behaviour is as a result of past event(s) (Janet and Seailles 1902). This true in some cases but if a person emphasises on it, he can just be driven by a past happening without reasoning (Ullmann-Margalit 1977). A good illustration can be as follows. A child who has been born in a very poor family can grow and find that she is lazy. Instead of changing, she can fail to realize for this situation to change, she ought to work hard. Finally, she may end up believing due to her poor background she is also poor. The main difference is that freedom allows one to be independent while in the latter one allows him self to be controlled by foregone events. Freedom is applicable where one’s will is liberated despite the environment, people, culture and religions. Bibliography Scott, J, 1971, Internalization of Norms: A Sociological Theory of Moral Commitment, Englewoods Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice–Hall. Kohn, L, 1977, Class and Conformity: A Study in Values, 2nd ed Chicago: University of Chicago Press Fine, G, 2001, Social Norms, ed. by Michael Hechter and Karl-Dieter Opp, New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation Maher, M, The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume IV. Published 1908, New York, Robert Appleton Company Posner, E, 2000, Law and Social Norms, Cambridge MA, Harvard University Press. Horne, C, 2001, Social Norms, ed. by Michael Hechter and Karl-Dieter Opp, New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation. ALEXANDER, 1884, Theories of the Will, New York. Janet, Seailles, 1902, History of Problems of Philosophy, New York and London. Ullmann-Margalit, E, 1977, The Emergence of Norms, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Read More

Normative ethics, as the name suggests can be best explained by first looking at the word, norm. Norm is a list of traits an individual should have to be accepted in society (Scott 1971). In this category, people are told how to live peacefully with each other. Basically, as far as morals are concerned, three things are of great consideration for the accomplishment of this study. First of all, there is the agent of the deed, the deed itself, and lastly but not least, the outcome of the deed.As we relate with one another, maybe at home, workplaces, at school, there are some character traits that an individual should possess for good interaction.

In school, students ought to be obedient and humble to their teachers so that a favorable study environment can be created. If students are, the teachers can reciprocate the same by loving them and teaching well. Since both parties have good character traits, we can say teaching, understanding, and communication during a class lesson are effective. The overall results after doing the examination will be good. In normative ethics, people are taught the way to behave to ensure suffer out of arrogance and ignorance (Kohn 1977).

In meta-ethics, it looks into how people choose out of will how to do things (Fine 2001). In other words, as an individual, the norms you have chosen to apply in your day–to–day life. This mostly comes because as a child is being brought up, their several things he can learn from peers, teachers, religious leaders, siblings, and friends. The child may learn what is good and bad when he irrational. Once he becomes rational, he can decide the way to follow and bear the consequences. A boy can start smoking because he has been seeing his parents smoke.

The difference between the two(Maher 1908) is that, while morality states the code of conduct and the principles behind conduct, ethics studies the principles, and defines how we can apply them to better the world we are living in. Ethics does not vary greatly where else morality changes frequently. This is because ethics is essential and established and since people can use ethics for self-examination, they can choose to apply it, hence a change in morality. To add on, in ethics, there is a question of behavioral values and if some values are found to be not beneficial, people can choose to disregard them.

Consequentialist and Non-consequentialist views of moralityThe views about consequentialist as far as morality is concerned major on the consequences which come as a result of one’s behavior. Generally, this is where if one does what is right, and then the outcome will be good. If he is immoral, then, eventually we expect a bad outcome. This is just to mean that whatever you will sow, definitely you will gather the same. As a matter of fact, if a person mistreats all people who come across him, definitely, all will run away from him and he will end up having no friends to lean on more in time of need.

Non- consequentialist views of morality (Posner 2000) can be said to be a state where if you do good or bad, despite the external factors, there are no consequences that will come your way. This is evident in a government where there is corruption, impunity, and dictatorship. There some leaders like presidents, who can kill, abuse the opposite sex or steal their money or property, and nothing is done to them. This may happen because no, there no penalties which may be set for him.The difference between the two is that in consequentialist views, the outcome gives an outline on how to get to a certain destination.

In this view we can also say, the outcome is used to determine what is right or wrong. On the other hand, no guidelines which limit people from doing what is wrong since they know they can’t suffer from their bad deeds. This might end up bring a corrupt society where people can abuse others.

Read More