Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The future amplification of the effects of small decisions [54] is an important factor that makes it more difficult to predict the ethical value of consequences, [55] even though most would agree that only predictable consequences are charged with a moral responsibility.
G. E. Moore's ethics can be said to be a negative consequentialism (more precisely, a consequentialism with a negative utilitarian component), because he has been labeled a consequentialist, [11] and he said that "consciousness of intense pain is, by itself, a great evil" [12] whereas "the mere consciousness of pleasure, however intense, does not, by itself, appear to be a great good, even if ...
Moral blindness, also known as ethical blindness, is defined as a person's temporary inability to see the ethical aspect of a decision they are making. It is often caused by external factors due to which an individual is unable to see the immoral aspect of their behavior in that particular situation.
(5) “diffusion of responsibility” distributed the accountability from one person to an poorly-defined group. (6) “distortion of consequences” misrepresents the effects of the act as not significant. (7) “dehumanization” states, that the victims do not deserve fairness, because they have done something similarly bad or worse.
Negative utilitarianism is a form of negative consequentialism that can be described as the view that people should minimize the total amount of aggregate suffering, or that they should minimize suffering and then, secondarily, maximize the total amount of happiness.
But they are not okay. This series came from a determination to understand why, and to explore how their way back from war can be smoothed. Moral injury is a relatively new concept that seems to describe what many feel: a sense that their fundamental understanding of right and wrong has been violated, and the grief, numbness or guilt that often ...
Meta-ethical moral relativists believe not only that people disagree about moral issues, but that terms such as "good", "bad", "right" and "wrong" do not stand subject to universal truth conditions at all; rather, they are relative to the traditions, convictions, or practices of an individual or a group of people. [7]
After experiencing a bad outcome with a decision problem, the tendency to avoid the choice previously made when faced with the same decision problem again, even though the choice was optimal. Also known as "once bitten, twice shy" or "hot stove effect". [105] Mere exposure effect or familiarity principle (in social psychology)