NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
An Analysis of Joanne who is HIV Introduction In this paper Ethical Subjectivism Joanne, argues that it's the right thing to do anything that is in her nature to do. She is willing to engage in sex with Doug, a friend of hers; even though she knows that she's HIV positive. The question I'll be looking for, in this paper, is whether or not she is doing the right thing. Her moral stance will be analyzed from the prospective of different ethical concepts, such as Ethical Subjectivism, Utilitarianism and Deontology. This will enable us to realize the strongest and weakest points of either approach. Only the complete logical examination of her case can help us, when it will come to giving Joanne ethical advice.
We need to understand that the issue of ethics and morality is a very sensitive one; therefore, we need to keep our minds open, while discussing it. The arguments, that are emotionally or religiously based, can only be thought of as legitimate, if they are logically structured. Otherwise, we will have to brush them aside. Also, during the course of this paper, we will discuss certain notions, which are considered to be politically-incorrect. Still, this does not make them less plausible. (1) Ethical Subjectivism suggests that we base our moral judgments on our ability to approve or disapprove things, which is irrational in its essence.
Therefore, the moral dogmas, accepted by the society, have a subjective nature and cannot be considered as such that posses universal properties. Of course, the proponents of conventional morality will never admit the fact that it is their personal feelings that affect their judgments, more than anything else. But traditional argument against Ethical Subjectivism does not stand a chance, since it is very easy to prove that ethical standards derive from peoples ability to subjectively evaluate the matters of morality. Joanne, as Ethical Subjectivism, is obviously not concerned about the consequences of her actions. It is only whether having sex with her classmate is going to be justifiable in her own eyes that is what really important to her. Knowing that she is terminally ill, Joanne understands that the sexual contact with Doug will result in transmitting this disease to him, as well.
Still, she does not understand why she should not do this, given the fact that she feels absolutely no guilt about it. This means that her moral position, in regards to the issue, finds nothing that might be associated with any wrongdoing. The opinions of others do not matter, since they derive from peoples emotionalism, even though that these opinions are always backed up with the mean of logic. Yet, they have exactly the same ontological value as Joannes opinion. Why should she regard the opinions of others as more plausible than her own? According to the theory of Ethical Subjectivism, there is nothing wrong with Joannes decision to have sex with her friend.
Only the reason why people might think of her as selfish is because she is deprived of sentimentalism. But this makes her point even more valid, since her decision is less affected by the emotionalism than the opinions of her critics. What if instead of having sex with her friend, Joanne decided to jump in the bed with a terrorist and gave him AIDS? Would it be still considered as morally unacceptable?
But what if this terrorist had died of AIDS, in a couple of days, prior to blowing up the plane? There is no doubt that in this case, Joanne would not be criticized quite as harshly. In fact, she would be praised for saving lives of many innocent people. Thus, we see that transmitting an incurable disease to another human being can be thought of in negative and positive connotation.
Everything depends on how we feel about it. But the irrational feeling cannot serve as the foundation for the morality, which is meant to be applied universally. (1) We can say the same when people base their morality on religious dogma. It does not matter whether we deal with Christians, Muslims or Video practitioners. Peoples emotional sensitivity defines their religious choice. Nevertheless, we cannot say that Joannes position cannot be questioned. If we assume that Joannes point of view is absolutely valid, then we will also need to admit that those who consider passing AIDS to another person as morally wrong have a point as well.
This creates situation when two opposite opinions are considered to be equally true, which cannot be. Obviously enough, the opinion in itself, cannot be considered as truly objective, because its value is diminished by its own reflection upon itself. The moral judgment can never be regarded as factual judgment. But the fact that we can distinguish between factual and moral judgments indirectly points out that the objectivity is possible, in principle. Thus, we came to the conclusion that, according to Ethical Subjectivism, Joannes decision to engage in sex with her friend can be thought of as absolutely right thing to do. Yet, we cannot consider her moral position as being above any possible criticism.
In order for us to come closer to discovering what would constitute the best advice for Joanne, we will need to apply Utilitarianism. (2) Utilitarianism is the philosophical concept, which emphasizes the superiority of utilitarian value over any other aspects of human existence. Basically, its proponents suggest that the true moral value consists of everything that increases the amount of happiness, for as many people as possible. Still, since the essence of happiness is perceived differently by different people, there always going to be a lot of controversy surrounding utilitarianism, as ethical teaching. There are two main schools, within the Utilitarianism, which offer different approaches, while suggesting what kind of principle needs to be used, in order to achieve the best results rule utilitarianism and act Utilitarianism. The proponents of the first one are in favor of sticking up to the certain set of rules, while defying conventional morality, so that things will not get out of hand. The rule Utilitarianism overlooks the immediate effects of its own application, as the criteria for decision making.
Because in the long run, such effects might become associated with something different, from what they originally meant stand for. That is why; the rule Utilitarianism is about applying some abstract rules, in order to bring happiness for the people. The act Utilitarianism, on the other hand, suggests that people must make their decisions, according to the directly consequential model. Its apologists rightly suggest that if we make too many provisions and follow too many rules, the hedonist principle, which defines the Utilitarianism as the concept, will cease to remain the decisive factor, when it comes to decision making, since we can never fully predict all possible consequences of our actions.
Act Utilitarianism suggests many innovative approaches of how to increase the amount of happiness by decreasing the amount of suffering, which are being referred to as immoral. But those who declare this cannot defend their point logically and always descent to the emotional level of argumentation, while making their statements. (2) Let us analyze Joannes case from the act Utilitarian point of view. Can we truly suggest that the amount of happiness will increase, because of her desire to have sex with Doug? The answer is going to affirmative, only when we talk about Joannes own happiness, which will be limited by the time and circumstances.
Yet, because of having slept with Joanne, Doug will also become incurably ill, which is going cause a huge amount of suffering, on his part. Thus, we see that Joannes temporary happiness cannot be justified, as it comes as the result of somebody elses suffering. Also, it will take some time for Doug to realize that he has AIDS, but in the mean while, he is very likely to transmit disease to others. This will increase the overall amount of suffering even more.
Therefore, act utilitarianism leaves no doubt that Joannes decision to have sex with Doug is morally wrong. This is because, the amount of happiness, which would be produced as the result, cannot be compared to all the suffering that will inevitably descend upon those, who had the misfortune to have sexual contacts with Joanne or Doug. Nevertheless, according to the negative Utilitarianism, the intensity of pleasure relates to the amount of suffering in geometrical proportion. Lets say that, as the result of having sex with Doug, Joanne will experience an intense and lengthy orgasm, which she is going to associate with happiness, for the rest of her life.
Lets also suggest that Joanne is an exceptional writer, who needed to have a sexual intercourse, in order to get inspired. What if this inspiration would enable her to write a literary masterpiece, which will spiritually enrich people for generations to come? On the other hand, lets suggest that Doug is a loser, who also subjected to the suicidal depression. If he dies, nobody will even notice. In this case, we might reconsider Joannes case, while using the same Utilitarian methodology. Everything depends on specific circumstances.
Let us analyze what would be the position of rule Utilitarianism, in this regard. We all know that people who have been identified as HIV positive, are supposed to get registered with local police, every time they move. This is because they are rightly considered to be posing threat to the society. As a matter of fact, they are held to be criminally responsible for knowingly transmitting the HIV, by engaging in sex with other people. This corresponds to the position of rule Utilitarianism, according to which, it is also morally wrong to transmit diseases, disregarding of circumstances. The rule Utilitarianism is concerned more about every particular mode of behavior becoming a rule than about its immediate consequences.
For example, if Joanne gives AIDS to Doug it might be considered as wrong, but the effects of her action are going to be localized. Therefore, if we only think of it from the consequential point of view, we will not be able to see the full picture. If Joannes decision to engage in sex is not being claimed as immoral, it will result in creating legal precedent, which would allow other terminally ill people to transmit their illness to others. If Joannes behavior gets to be morally justified, than why shouldnt be others allowed to do the same? But it is not too hard to imagine that this will result in creating social chaos, in the long run. Therefore, Joannes intention not to reveal the truth to Doug is not only morally repugnant; it is socially dangerous and should be considered as the act of social transgression. (3) Deontology is the ethical concept, which agrees with the fact that our moral principles need to be based on something that is totally deprived of emotionalism, something that can be regarded as truly objective.
Its proponents suggest that it is sense of ones duty, which is to be used as ethical measure. There are two types of Deontology. The first one is based on the...
Free research essays on topics related to: terminally ill, rule utilitarianism, point of view, moral judgments, conventional morality
Research essay sample on Point Of View Rule Utilitarianism
