Ethical Theory

Introduction

When we use the word “Ethical theory” we mean by theories which sets the criteria for what is right and what is wrong. If someone is ethical that doesn't mean that he is law abiding as well. Lawfulness and ethical is not the same thing. For example smoking at public place like hospital is not unlawful but unethical. Ethics is same as being moral; the only difference between these two terms is their origin. Both these two words have come from different origins.

Moral functionalism, so characterized, endorses cognitivism and suggests a distinctive semantics for moral predicates. Moral predications are truth-conditional, under this account, and the predicates they deploy pick out certain properties as their semantic values insofar as those properties satisfy the usage specifications given by the features listed, or some subset. Depending on exactly which subset is valorized, of course, the moral functionalism embraced may take one or another specific form; in that sense, it directs us to a family of met ethical views rather than any particular position. And as moral functionalism gives us a moral semantics, so too it will provide us with a moral epistemology. According to the implied epistemology, we will know when to make one predication or another, depending on the usage specifications that appear to be fulfilled.

Discussion

Moral Objectivism and Moral absolutism

Moral absolutism and ethical relativism as two extremes, as some actions are always right or wrong. It depends on what the “culture”. Moral Objectivism is a middle ground that says there are principles that can be absolute, but interpreting the implementation of that principle in a given situation (time, place, and cultural values) requires work. (Note that consequentialist moral reasoning says that situations “determine” the rightness and wrongness of actions.

More absolutism means that any act is strictly right or wrong. If ...