College research paper
research paper on ethics
The primary advantages of the inductive approach to ethics have already been touched on. First, no more is required than some reason for preferring one outcome to others; in the absence of competing reasons, any reason can be decisive. There is no need to seek absolute measures of normative quality, which again simplifies justification. Within the epistemological/methodological framework, reasons can be offered for accepting certain kinds of reasons for preference and rejecting others, and that provides a foundation, however minimal, on which to construct a critical system.
free apa research papers
As a corollary, focusing on real, particular cases effectively rules out efforts to use the result of imaginary cases, literary illustrations, or hypothetical problems as evidence in argument about real-world actions. Imaginary cases are sometimes useful for clarifying meaning or illustrating a point, but they carry no weight whatever in argument. Of course, if there are reasons to suppose that at least some of the essential features of real cases have been incorporated into the hypothetical case, that is another matter-but in such instances, the relation is abstracted rather than merely hypothetical or imaginary.
free college research paper
Finally, the fact that a particular case must be resolved before a priority can be created forces development of procedures and criteria that are adequate for handling nonrecurring or unique choices. The decision to drop the first atomic weapon on a civilian population, for example, is both unique and nonrecurring. Given the enormous importance of some such events, a critical apparatus that could not deal with them would be seriously inadequate. What is needed is a sharp distinction between the recurrence of a specific case, the appearance of another member of a limited class of cases, and the availability of generalized prior experience, developed from a number of cases, that is relevant to the decision that must be made.
free college research papers
If nothing in past human experience can be linked to the case at hand, the actor is helpless; there is then no alternative to pure trial and error, acting randomly to generate information that can be used in subsequent cases. Such conditions, if they occur at all, are extremely rare. In most instances, some of past experience can be linked to the case at hand providing a better-than-random basis for action. In such circumstances, proceeding experimentally and cautiously is probably a good strategy, but the uncertainty level will have been reduced to some degree, and improvements should come more rapidly, and at lower costs, than would be true with pure trial-and-error learning.
free english research papers
The principal hazard associated with inductive development in ethics, or in "bottom-up" development in any field of inquiry, is failure to notice and eliminate internal inconsistencies or contradictions. If each case is solved uniquely, and only real cases are dealt with as they arise, the overall priority apparatus or ethic is likely to develop unevenly. Some areas will be fairly well developed; others will remain virtually untouched. The opportunities to check internal consistency between one area and another will be limited, and since each element has its own independent existence and unique justification, there is little reason to seek support from allied areas.
free essays research papers
In the justification of preferences, it is essential that the bias associated with particular individual perspectives, or special relationships between the individuals affected by action and the individuals who assess the action, be reduced or eliminated. In psychological terms, elimination of such bias is difficult at best and perhaps impossible. But analytically, a very simple procedure will lead to the desired result: In justification, the identity of the individuals whose lives are affected by action is separated rigorously from the attributes or characteristics of those individuals, including their relations with others. Nothing of substance is lost by the separation, for all the relations, and effects of relations, can be projected for a given situation and incorporated into the outcomes.
free example of research paper
As the structure grows in size, the likelihood that inconsistency will not be noticed increases, for within each area a justification will be sought in the root cases in that area. Elements of the priority apparatus can be integrated or "reduced," as in scientific theorizing, and efforts to produce such reductions will reveal inconsistencies very quickly. But "reduction" is characteristic of well-developed disciplines and is unlikely to occur in ethics for some time. The possibility of generating a set of overarching principles that could be used to test every ethical proposition (from which every ethical generalization could be deduced) is not merely remote but impossible in principle, for even if that state were achieved, it would not be possible to give reasons for believing that it had been achieved.
free example of research papers
A further complication is produced by the fact that not every element in a choice must be given a priority; all that need be identified is the preferred outcome. Where elements of the ethic intersect, a transitive ordering must be maintained, else the system may contain contradictions. That is, if A is preferred to B and B is preferred to C, then A must also be preferred to C, else there is a contradiction within the system. The need to identify only the preferred outcome in a set much facilitates the ordering: All that need be done is begin with any two outcomes, find reasons for preferring one and discard the other, then compare the "winner" with another one of the outcomes, discard the "loser" again, and continue until the full list of options has been exhausted.
free help online papers research
Put another way, abstracting the identity from the attributes serves to separate the ethical from the psychological dimensions of action and allows justification to focus on what should be done, judged by the outcomes or consequences, regardless of the actor involved or the identity of those affected. That serves to rule out the use of such observer-relevant concepts as utility, and to eliminate pure selfishness or solipsism from justification. The separation of identity and attributes will not stop the use of identity in justification, overtly or covertly, but it does provide a base for locating and eliminating such indefensible foci without undue effort or analysis.
free high papers research school
The strategy of inquiry in ethics, if an action orientation is accepted, tends to be forced by procedural and structural requirements. Clearly, inquiry begins with an examination of current practice, seeking improvements. That in turn implies concentration on the particular case. And most important, there is no reason to seek, and every reason to avoid, the kind of perfectionism that sometimes plagues philosophic ethics. A commitment to acceptablesolutions to real problems means that the solution need not be any more precise than present capacity allows. Crude and effective measures, if they are the best available, can serve as a launching pad for improvements.