In my own perspective, values and ethics refer to an action which results in mutual happiness between the person acting and the person receiving an action in the sense that both of them can willingly share the consequences of that action, as long as the action conforms to the established standards of the society in which it is taking place. Any action that leads to the happiness of the actor while compromising the happiness of the action receiver is deemed contrary to the principles of values and ethics. Similarly, if an action compromises the actor’s happiness and satisfies the action receiver’s happiness, such an action is still against my definition of values and ethics. In case an action is mutually satisfying on the sides of both the actor and the action receiver but compromises the societal constitution of morality, the action is still unethical and against the principles of values and ethics. Therefore, an action is only ethical if it satisfies the action doer, the action receiver and the societal context within which it is talking place in a mutually satisfactory manner. Values and morality therefore differ across human societies.
Universally, ethics is a constitution of generally acceptable set of moral principles while values describe personal or individual’s perception or understanding of what is valuable, important or mutually acceptable (Durie, 2013). Individuals are members of the society with varied backgrounds. However, human societies also have universal moral principles that guide behavior under different circumstances. Therefore, the main reason for the existence of values and ethics is to mainstream between individual motivation for various actions and expectations of the society, with all parties achieving satisfaction which is manifested through happiness as a basic sign, hence my definition of ethics and values.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
My definition of ethics and values relies widely on the principles of both utilitarianism and deontology. According to Rosenstand (2012), utilitarianism is the summation of all forms of pleasure that is experienced by both or all individuals and/or parties who are closely concerned with a certain action. On the other hand, deontology is a framework of ethics and values that judges the morality of an action in direct accordance to the predetermined rules and regulations within a particular context. If an action leads to the satisfaction of all parties concerned including the specific social context, then all individuals concerned with that action experiences pleasure (a subjective form of happiness). My definition of ethics and values is therefore a direct subordinate of utilitarianism. On the other hand, deontology concerns the extent to which an action abides by the existing rules. From a critical point of view, rules are established based on the context of every society or social organization. Additionally, some rules are unspoken and existent in terms of an individual’s judgment of what is in the best interest of the society. Such rules also vary depending on a number of factors such as age and personal relationship. According to Cherry (2014), different ages of individuals exist at three stages of morality which include pre-conventional morality, conventional morality, and post-conventional morality. At each of these stages, the rules of what is right or wrong vary. However, what matters is whether the actions make both the actor and the action receiver happy. This implies that my definition also uses deontology framework to describe ethics and values.
While there is a significant variation between utilitarianism and deontology, my perspective of ethics and values tries to view them in a rational manner, neither inclined towards utilitarianism nor deontology. Utilitarianism views ethics and values in terms of utility and mutually pleasurable results of an action. On the other hand, deontology views ethics and values in terms of totality of the rules. The aspect of socially acceptable rules implies that the consequences of an action are based on the established set of rules upon which they are judged as right or wrong, making them pleasurable or non-pleasurable. This directly relates to deontology which focuses on the pre-set rules. Without various social contexts, it would be difficult to judge the utility of an action and how pleasurable the impact of an action is. Similarly, without the social contexts, it would be difficult to judge the rules that are in the best interests of the people. Therefore, ethics and values are inseparable from the society.
My definition of values and ethics is greatly influenced by the two distinct parenting styles that were used to bring me up. As an elementary school child, I was nurtured through an authoritative style of parenting at home. Throughout my childhood, I had freedom to question the reasons for different actions especially those that seemed unpleasant to me. I also had freedom to ask for whatever I needed at all times without fear which in most cases, was accommodated by my parents. At school, the Montessori curriculum model used in the preschool and middle school level offered an opportunity to exercise my freedom of choice in terms of the subject I wanted to learn or activities I wanted to engage in. In the process, questioning was strongly encouraged and discussions dominated most of the classroom learning sessions. With freedom to manipulate objects and learning materials, I could make errors most of the time but such errors often taught important lessons to me. This was largely a utilitarianism framework which encouraged the feeling of pleasure and satisfaction. My parents and teachers also experienced pleasure whenever I gained new knowledge and understanding from exploration and discovery.
In my later classes as a high school student, I realized that things were not the same as in elementary school level. I was confronted with rules that were subject to strict adherence, failure to which would lead to unpleasant consequences such as punishment other forms of negative reinforcement I never wanted to experience. I was compelled to following these rules and also conditioned myself to do so at all time without questioning. Sometimes I could doubt my decision for certain actions in fear, often contemplating severe repercussions. At this stage, I had learnt of the existence of rules and regulations which were subject to no other alternative but unquestionable obedience. At home, parents had shifted their parenting style to authoritarian with a claim that it was the only way I could pass my twelfth grade examinations. This upbringing of was deontology in making, which emphasized on obedience to rules.
From the two forms of nurturing styles I went through, both utilitarianism and deontology frameworks were used to bring me up. The initial form of parenting during my early schooling years allowed me to enjoy and experience pleasure, with a goal of helping me acquire knowledge, skills and positive values in the most natural way, which reflects the utilitarianism framework (Rosenstand, 2012). Later in my high school, rules were established both at home and school to help provide the most favorable learning conditions and discouraged negative behavior which would have probably occurred at that stage of life. Such rules eventually brought happiness when I passed my final exams, which would have been difficult without reinforcement of strict rules to regulate my studies (Rosenstand, 2012). The decision undertaken by my parents and teachers at both levels to provide such conducive learning conditions were informed by behaviorist theories which emphasizes on reinforcement (Brown, 2015). However, the main goal of both nurturing and parenting styles was to help me achieve what was considered satisfactory to my parents, my teachers and me. The end result was positive and pleasurable, as required by both the school and the community (social context). Therefore, the basis of my definition of ethics and values is informed, to a greater extent, by my own upbringing.
Conclusion
Having grown up under the above described conditions, I am a strict person who strongly believes in mutually beneficial actions and behavior in all circumstances in accordance to the rules and regulations of a given social context. I am all-rounded in terms of interaction with people and I hold the view that people come from diverse backgrounds. I believe that the only way to uphold ethics and values is by considering the place, time and reason (context) of an action or event. I also believe in happiness as the only way to ascertain an individual’s satisfaction. My early childhood experiences have taught me to explore and find out reasons why things happen the way they do and if necessary, question to find out the underlying truths. I learn from mistakes and consider all challenges as opportunities for learning and understanding the world around me in a better way. In future, I would like to more strictly embrace values and ethics that that I hold in high esteem today. I am working on perfecting my ability to uphold these virtues, now that I have learnt and understood the origin of my personality. Perhaps, I am not the same person I wish to become in future because I had never understood how to uphold my ethics and values perfectly and confidently. I will achieve this through continuous practice.
References
Brown, J. (2015). Behaviourism as a Way of Learning. Clinical Communication in Medicine , 181.
Cherry, K. (2014). Kohlberg’s theory of moral development. About. com Psychology .
Durie, E. T. (2013). Ethics and values in Maori research. He pukenga korero , 4 (1).
Rosenstand, N. (2012). The moral of the story: An introduction to ethics . McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
Winter, B. W. (2001). After Paul left Corinth: The influence of secular ethics and social change . Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing.
