This is an Ethics question: Last week we focused on Nonconsequentialist Theories

Question

This is an Ethics question:

Last week we focused on Nonconsequentialist Theories or Morality. Basically, that moral decisions are right or wrong are independant of the outcome. A moral and good choice can have a bad (evil) result, but the act was still moral.

To illustrate this concept, read this New York Times article called "Pitching with Purpose." Greg Maddux, one of Major League Baseball's best pitchers ever, learned that his only job was to make great pitches. The outcome (whether or not the batter hit it) was not important to him.

Read the article and think of another situation that this principle could apply. Other professions, life situations, governments, ect.

(Full link - http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/01/opinion/01brooks.html?_r=0 )

Explanation / Answer

Nonconsequentialist Theory of morality stands out in absolutism. It regards any action which is inetnded for good even if its outcome turns out to be bad as right. Kant is regarded as the most influential among the non-consequentialist theorists.

The similar situation can be seen in academics, parenting and most of the time government policies.

Academics develop curriculae or teaching methods so as to deliver best to the students and which should enhance their conceptual thinking and innovativeness. However, it is upto the students to grasp that and fulfill the expectations of society, which seldom happens at mass level.

Government devlops welfare policies to help the weaker section of society and its intention is right. However, Lyndon Johnsosn's 'Great Society' initiative tuned out to be disastrous as higher welfare actually disincentivized people to work and lift themselves out of hardship.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse T
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.