Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Normative Theories, An example of act utilitarianism is a pharmaceutical…

- - - - Act utilitarianism looks at single actions and bases the moral judgment on the amount of
        pleasure and the amount of pain this single action causes.
      - Rule utilitarianism looks at classes of action and asks whether the underlying principles of
        action produce more pleasure than pain for society in the long run.
- - - - Categorical Imperative
        
        Maxim 1:
        Consistency
        
        An action can only be right if the rule guiding that behavior should be consistently followed by everyone in all cases, without contradiction. It checks if everyone can perform the action.
        
        Example: Murder is an immoral action because if people allow everybody to murder, there would be no possibility of human security on earth.
        
        Maxim 2:
        Human dignity
        
        Act so that you treat humanity, whether in your person or in that of another, always as an end and never as a means only. Humans deserve respect as autonomous, rational actors—this human dignity should never be ignored. People should not treat each other as a means to get what they want and forget about their own needs and goals in life.
        
        Maxim 3:
        Universality
        
        The rules guiding actions should be universally lawgiving. That is, people have to be acceptable to every rational human being. They have to be acceptable for every human being because they are rationally acceptable, not because they have been told to accept them.
        
        It tries to overcome the risk of subjectivity, which is present in the utilitarian analysis. Example: If one would be uncomfortable that one’s actions were reported in the press, it means that they believe others disagree with the rules guiding their actions
  - - - It is the simultaneously fair treatment of individuals in a given situation with the result that everybody gets what they deserve.
      - John Rawl
      - According to Beauchamp and Bowie, theories of justice typically see fairness in two ways:
        
        Fair procedures (procedural justice) – Fairness is determined according to whether everyone has been free to acquire rewards for their efforts.
        
        Fair outcomes (distributive justice) – Fairness is determined according to whether the consequences (positive and negative) are distributed in a just manner, according to some underlying principles such as need or merit.
      - Motto: “To choose under the ‘veil of ignorance’”: ignorant about one’s place in society, take the position
        of the least well-off member
      - Example: According to the research made by Kim et al. (2015), organizations and executives that want to build effective commitment and enhance their employees’ job satisfaction need to promote and highlight these positive changes to leverage their benefits on job attitudes. Undoubtedly, improving employees’ perceptions of fairness are significant, and these findings suggest this can be done by establishing fair procedures in allocating rewards, providing detailed and timely explanations for decision procedures and outcomes, and tailoring communication to meet employees’ specific needs.
      - John Rawls: A Theory of Justice
        
        Rawls suggests two criteria—two ‘tests’—to decide whether an action could be called just. According to John, justice is achieved when first, each person has an equal right to the most extensive total system of basic liberties compatible with a similar system of freedom for all. Second, social and economic inequalities are arranged so that they are both:
    - - John Locke
      - British philosopher John Locke conceptualized the notion of “natural rights” or moral claims that humans were entitled to and that should be respected and protected
        
        • Rights to life
        
        • Freedom
        
        • Property
        
        • Freedom of speech
        
        • Conscience
        
        • Consent
        
        • Privacy
        
        • Entitlement to a fair legal process