People use a variety of approaches in making ethical decisions. Such approaches are however chosen unconsciously. From my point of view, the best way to approach ethics is through virtue/character approach. In this approach, it is assumed that when a person has good character, they are more likely to do good things throughout their lives. It also recognizes the fact that by knowing what the right thing to do does not necessarily mean that one will do the right thing. This method makes a person ask themselves whether a given action reflects the kind of person they really are or would wish to be. It enhances virtues such as honesty, loyalty, fairness, courage and generosity.
What makes an action moral or immoral is the objective, the goal and the intention behind the action (Grisez, Boyle & Finnis, 1987) . A morally upright individual is expected to have good objectives in their actions. Wrong acts go against the fundamental human rights that should not be compromised in any manner. Immoral acts such as torture and killing are wrong despite the fact that they might be committed under unavoidable circumstances. Intention of the act can help individuals determine whether the act is moral or immoral. A person must have good intention to make his act be a moral act. If an individual has bad intention to carry out an act even if the act is good, then the action is still considered as morally evil. Good intentions cannot result from bad actions. An individual cannot do something evil to bring about good results. The third element of a moral or immoral action is the circumstances under which such actions were performed. An act is considered moral if it contributes to increasing the goodness of the act and an immoral act decreases the goodness of the act.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The theory of virtue/ character is an ethical philosophy that continues to gain much attention from the public. The philosophy, which originates from Aristotle, is based on the virtues behind a person’s decision. The concept behind this theory is the concern of what makes a morally upright person. It requires an individual to determine what virtues are good for the society and the decisions made should be towards such virtues. For instance, if a good pubic professional is expected to have the virtue of honesty, then decisions which are made must ensure that honesty is preserved.
Despite the fact that the theory is becoming more popular, it is met with several objections. The focus on virtues of the individual professionals in terms of public relations professions does not contain the significance and role of obligations to customers and people in the public. The industry is focused on the impact of the theory to society. Character has to go hand in hand with a person’s traits which entails their attitude, sensibility and beliefs and affects their actions and lives. Such traits give an understanding on the reason that caused a person to act in the manner that they acted and also, why they can be held responsible for such actions. The theory mainly consists of descent ways to live and socialize as human beings.
I think the theory of character is the best approach because it shapes people’s characters as an individual’s actions are determined by their character. People consider doing good acts as bad acts prove them to have bad character. Goodness goes hand in hand with righteousness (Leal, 2008). Before a person makes a wrong or right action, they must have an understanding of what virtue leads to such character. The fact that an individual classifies a trait as a virtue, then they are in a position to determine whether the action they are about to take is right or wrong. The advantage of this theory over other theories is that it protects individuals from becoming victims of moral schizophrenia because it does not compromise an individual’s motivations. It requires people to do what is morally upright as an obligation no matter the kind of motive the person has for the action.
References
Grisez, G., Boyle, J., & Finnis, J. (1987). Practical principles, moral truth, and ultimate ends. Am. J. Juris. , 32 , 99.
Leal, F. (2008). Ethics is fragile, goodness is not. In Cognition, Communication and Interaction (pp. 567-580). Springer, London.
