Normative question of ethics - opinion
Normative ethics seeks to set norms or standards for conduct. The term is commonly used in reference to the discussion The central question of normative ethics is determining how basic moral standards are arrived at and justified. The answers to this question fall into two broad categories— deontological and teleological , or consequentialist. The principal difference between them is that deontological theories do not appeal to value considerations in establishing ethical standards, while teleological theories do. Deontological theories use the concept of their inherent rightness in establishing such standards, while teleological theories consider the goodness or value brought into being by actions as the principal criterion of their ethical value. In other words, a deontological approach calls for doing certain things on principle or because they are inherently right, whereas a teleological approach advocates that certain kinds of actions are right because of the goodness of their consequences. Deontological theories thus stress the concepts of obligation, ought, duty, and right and wrong, while teleological theories lay stress on the good, the valuable, and the desirable. Deontological theories set forth formal or relational criteria such as equality or impartiality; teleological theories, by contrast, provide material or substantive criteria, as, for example, happiness or pleasure see utilitarianism. The application of normative theories and standards to practical moral problems is the concern of applied ethics. normative question of ethics.In other words, these questions encompass some crucial dimensions of economic analysis, rubbing against the core of the discipline. Given this background, one can imagine the interest with which economists, and especially specialists of economic philosophy, can open Jonathan.
It does not intend to exhaust the subject, but to be an introduction as the subtitle explicitly claims providing non-specialist readers with some basic concepts and analytical tools. Indeed, if economists maintain that normative question of ethics do not rely on ethics at all, this is troublesome.
Numéros en texte intégral
Specifically, chapter 1 sketches the distinction between positive and normative issues in moral philosophy and economics, and provides a brief presentation of three main moral frameworks used in the book: outcome-based ethics consequentialismduty- or rule-based ethics deontologismand virtue-based ethics. Chapter 2 focuses on the outcome-based ethics and develops the stance according to which the jormative action is the one that causes the best outcome.
Notably, it distinguishes between classical act- utilitarianism and rule-utilitarianism, and presents the classical criticisms these two positions have to face. Chapter 3 discusses more broadly non-consequentialist approaches in moral philosophy. This chapter presents Kantian categorical imperative along with the classical criticism of Kantian deontologism.
Further, there is a quick mention of the distinction between negative and positive rights. Finally, the discussion turns to Aristotelian ethics of virtue, its modern revival, and its criticism. Chapter 4 is about the concepts of welfare and efficiency.
Navigation menu
Chapter 5 develops a bit more the concept of Pareto efficiency and cost-benefit analysis. This chapter ends by emphasizing that economic analysis takes efficiency as an ethical concept and is, consequently, deeply embedded in consequentialism.
Chapter 6 tackles the question whether welfare can be defined in a satisfactory way as preference satisfaction.]
Let's talk on this theme.
The nice answer
It is not pleasant to me.