Aristotle's Duty-Based Ethical Analysis

Words: 630
Pages: 3

German philosopher Immanuel Kant would say that you make your final decision based on what you could will as a universal law. So, in the event you need to claim that a person should steal, you will need to ask what your law could be. It may be "all individuals can steal so long as they are only stealing what they certainly need from child who can manage it." If a person would not be unable to accept this as a worldwide law then it's right for that person to steal.” (Csus.edu, n.d.)
This school of thought is called deontology or "duty-based ethics". Promoters of the school maintain that there are definite ethical rules which should not be transgressed. Does this mean that the guy shouldn't steal and let his child starve? Yes, to get a strict deontologists stealing is never justifiable. For them certain actions are wrong, whether the outcomes are bad or good is
…show more content…
Aristotle's ethics is situational, meaning that what's right and great in a single circumstance may not be in another. Additionally, attention needs to be taken not to mistake Aristotle's situation ethics that base morality only on purpose on results rather than additionally. Really, if it may be revealed that general wellbeing would be maximized by stealing food to feed the poor in the long-run by saving tens of thousands of people that are starving, then some ethical theories those practical that is named, would countenance it. Nevertheless, Aristotle was not a utilitarian. For Aristotle, this kind of action could continue to be imprudent, that's, almost unwise. According to Aristotle, wise actions are ones where the agent deliberates well about morally acceptable means to attaining acceptable ends. Nevertheless, an issue with stealing food for your starving child, even if the end is noble, the method of realizing it may not be. (Sachs,