Normative ethics refers to an extensive study of the ethical action of an individual, entity or national discourse. Not only is normative ethics limited to these three areas, but it is also inclusive of the complete moral behavior of society. Therefore, it is a branch of ethics which pertains to philosophy. More to this, it is investigative of the sets of questions that arise in judging a person’s moral behavior. Normative ethics is inherently dissimilar to meta-ethics in that it examines the rightness and wrongness of an action taken in relation to its standards. In addition, it is distinct from descriptive ethics since the latter refers to an investigation of the beliefs of people with regard to empirical findings. To place this into perspective, descriptive ethics considers and concerns itself based on determining the number of individuals who hold on to a particular belief like killing is wrong. Consequently, it ascertains to a particular moral discourse, while normative ethics concerns itself on the premise that if holding such a belief in the first place is right. Nearly all of the traditional theories of morality base their argument on whether an action is right or wrong. Theories that uphold this principle include utilitarianism, forms of contractarianism and Kantianism. Such theories provide a comprehensive or an all-embracing explanation or principle that is normally used to resolve a wide array of moral decisions that face individuals. Normative theories include virtue ethics advocated incalculably by Aristotle, deontology, consequentialism, ethics of care and pragmatic ethics.
As stated above, virtue ethics was advocated by Aristotle and entails the focusing of the characteristic oddity of an individual rather than concentrating on the person’s actions. Over the past several years, virtue ethics has seen a revival when it comes to philosophical interpretations of moral conduct. Through various philosophers such as Philippa Foot, virtue ethics saw a rebirth of both meaning and application (Schroeder, 2011). Consider an ethical dilemma case in which a person named Moses has several friends who include Michael and John. Now, Michael recently met a beautiful woman by the name Jane, and they started dating. Along the way, Michael has the conviction that the relationship he is developing with Jane may last a while and eventually evolve a long lasting relationship. Unknowingly to Michael, Moses observed Jane at a restaurant a number of days ago and found out that she was indeed the wife of his other friend John. This kind of dilemma worries Moses and is making him keenly decide on whether to tell Michael that Jane has a husband. While he is thinking of his next move, John calls him and starts to explain to him how he is suspecting that his wife is having an affair, and asks Moses if he knows anything since they both share a vast amount of contacts and friends. Now, the dilemma here remains to be whether Moses owes great friendship to John or Michael. The result is the loss of either one of the friendships or both if he does not tell them and they end up finding for themselves. Such a conundrum is a common ethical dilemma that borders on personal friendships and is pertinent in the society. Through the implementation of normative theories, the employment of certain moral discourses may be put to use to ensure this dilemma is solved.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
In light of this dilemma, the implementation of virtue ethics becomes highly applicable and significant. There is a number of criticism offered by philosophers with a bearing on traditional moral ethics such as utilitarianism and deontology that virtue ethics offers no particular guidance for action. On the contrary, Hursthouse (1999), a champion on virtue ethics responded to such criticism by providing a premise to the absolute version of virtue ethics. In it, the response was that an action is considered right if and only if it is what a person who upholds a particular set of virtuous characteristics would actually do if he or she were in that particular circumstance (Hursthouse, 1999). In such claims, Hursthouse premises efficiently that virtue ethics has more to say about taking and implementing the right action. Therefore, in such a normative theory, a moral decision comes from an innate characteristic act of the person practicing virtue. Consequently, the virtuous person always acts in the right way. Ultimately, what makes virtue ethics foolproof is the fact that by acting in the normal way that a virtuous agent would act, the definitions of right and wrong becomes clear without any ambiguity. What makes this form of normative theory effective is the fact that it is defined by actions ingrained through constant practice of moral ethics and overall habitual behaviors. Therefore, in the case of the aforementioned behavior, Moses would come to a decision based on his virtue ethics. If his virtue is honesty and transparency, he will confess his knowledge to both his friends and they would find a way to resolve the situation. On the other hand, if his virtue is ingrained in discretion and subtlety, he will evade the problems the case will bring about and let time take its course in revealing the true nature of the situation. However, since morality is in question here, the former will be a wise choice.
In conclusion, using the normative theories, other inferences may be drawn in regards to the dilemma mentioned. Since deontology considers the factors of the duty of an individual and their rights, Moses may review the friendship ties he has with both Michael and John and make a moral stance out of rational assertions; this is also similar to consequentialism. Through ethics of care, Moses may consider empathy and compassion in making an ethical decision. Such diversity of normative theories makes them interesting to learn and implement. Overall, every situation begs for different approaches to solving ethical dilemmas, and normative theories present a promising future of moral evaluations (Hurka, 2004).
References
Hurka, T. (2004). Normative Ethics: Back to the Future (1st ed.). Oxford University Press.
Hursthouse, R. (1999). On Virtue Ethics (1st ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Schroeder, N. (2011). Moral Dilemmas in Contemporary Virtue Ethics (Master of Arts). Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College.
