Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
[7] [1] Proponents of teleological ethics (Greek: telos, 'end, purpose' + logos, 'science') argue that the moral value of any act consists in its tendency to produce things of intrinsic value, [1] meaning that an act is right if and only if it, or the rule under which it falls, produces, will probably produce, or is intended to produce, a ...
Situational ethics can also be classed under the ethical theory genre of "proportionalism" which says that "It is never right to go against a principle unless there is a proportionate reason which would justify it." [6] J. A. T. Robinson, a situational ethicist, considered the approach to be a form of ethical relativism. [citation needed]
A means can be justified only by its end. But the end in its turn needs to be justified. But the end in its turn needs to be justified. From the Marxist point of view, which expresses the historical interests of the proletariat , the end is justified if it leads to increasing the power of man over nature and to the abolition of the power of man ...
A rational being cannot rationally consent to be used merely as a means to an end, so they must always be treated as an end. [27] Kant justified this by arguing that moral obligation is a rational necessity: that which is rationally willed is morally right.
Plato (left) and Aristotle, depicted here in The School of Athens, both developed philosophical arguments addressing the universe's apparent order (). Teleology (from τέλος, telos, 'end', 'aim', or 'goal', and λόγος, logos, 'explanation' or 'reason') [1] or finality [2] [3] is a branch of causality giving the reason or an explanation for something as a function of its end, its ...
The only thing that can justify P is another statement – let's call it P 1; so P 1 justifies P. But if P 1 is to be a satisfactory justification for P, then we must know that P 1 is true. But for P 1 to be known, it must also be a justified true belief. That justification will be another statement - let's call it P 2; so P 2 justifies P 1.
Wolfgang Daschner felt that in the circumstances it was justified. German Chancellor Merkel, in an interview on January 9, 2006, in reference to the Metzler case, stated that "The public debate showed that the overwhelming majority of citizens believed that even in such a case, the end does not justify the means. That is also my position." [26]
No human society today advocates immorality, such as theft or murder, because it would undoubtedly lead to the end of that particular society and any chance for future survival of offspring. Scottish empiricist David Hume made a similar argument, that belief in objective moral truths is unwarranted and to discuss them is meaningless.