The validity of an ethical theory is determined by its correctness in explaining its views. It is not allowed to object to the opinions of other approaches. It should have facts that are visible and can be gauged to establish whether it is valid and if not so, another method should be launched.
A theory may not be correct throughout its existence but should not be misleading. Some of the most famous methods are perfect either because changes in the future may cause the views of a theory to be objected. Theories aim to give a detailed explanation about something.
Melden argues that one thing can be explained differently, but the views provided have a common goal just like there are several ways of greeting someone. Theories are founded by different people who give their opinions concerning a particular subject by explaining why something happened (3).
The terms good and bad are explained by philosophers to conflict with each other. The good is expressed as the correctness in a logic which is acceptable by the majority because doing something correctly is perceived to bring happiness and illustrates one’s responsibility. On the other hand, the bad term is used to explain how something is incorrect.
Philosophers argue that the good is enhanced by strong feelings towards something and also being properly informed or knowledgeable about the outcome of the good.
Both the bad and the good are optional in such a way that one chooses according to self desires. Good is said to promote success and increase tolerance.
The bad is thought to be caused by a lack of information about the outcome. Some people choose to do wrong because they don’t care about themselves.
The bad is also linked to the wrong information about the outcome of good. When something is said to be bad, it is not preferred by many. Bad is mostly driven by hatred (Melden 4).
For instance, one can not kill another human being if he/she truly loves that person and the act of killing can not be done in an open place; hence it’s done in privacy.
Perhaps the offended person does not know of any other possible way of solving conflicts. People do bad things to create evenness in situations where they feel they don’t deserve what they got (Garcia 13).
The society at large appreciates the good because it benefits all while the bad is rejected because it brings undesired emotions. Good add worthiness in one’s life because its thought to conform to the instructions of the Creator of mankind.
According to Hume, Norton, and Norton (2000), the Creator appreciates the good by making life easier for people who do good things while He punishes the people who do bad things by creating more problems into their lives (23).
If people knew the rewards of both the good and bad, there would be no conflicts among humans. Most theories that explain the origin of good and bad are incomplete, and their views are not perfect. The good and the bad are used to evaluate someone’s conduct.
Utilitarianism is expressed as the moral cost of a deed which is dependent on the efficiency to exploit the possibility of benefits. This idea states that the cost of a deed is affected by the outcome expected from that particular deed. Bentham defines the above idea as the greatest joy and felicity principle.
Bentham’s version is incomplete because happiness is not necessarily enhanced by the outcome of a deed, but it is accelerated by one’s desires and priorities which result in contentment.
Mill makes Bentham’s theory complete by stating that people should engage in deeds that bring excitement to one’s self.
Philosophers who are opposed to Mill’s ideas state that all deeds are not caused by the demand for excitement but by other achievements that are considered important and yet they don’t bring excitement.
Second, deontology is an approach in ethics that gauges the correctness of a deed by observing the compliance of that deed to the set regulations.
This theory has been objected by other methods which assess the correctness of an act by the outcome. This theory states that there is no correct way of doing a bad thing regardless of the objective of the doer of the deed (Melden 371).
This is because a wrong deed may be done to bring a good outcome. For instance, an employee may lie to keep his job while he knows to lie is not acceptable in any organization but the outcome of his deed is good because he does not lose his job.
Although the intention of the employee is good, his deed is incorrect thus this theory is inconsistent.
Third, virtue theory concentrates on the personality of the doer of a given deed. This theory insists that people do what they do regardless of the outcome or the correctness of that deed, but they are directed by their personality.
Some people are said to do incorrect things because they don’t have qualities that would make them think otherwise. For instance, those who cheat do so because honesty does not exist in their personality.
This theory is inconsistent because personality is acquired through one’s experience and may be hereditary.
Thus, combining the three theories is still not valid but helps us to continue with our lives. It is also difficult to prove the validity of any choices made, but it depends on the context of the application.
Works Cited
Garcia, John. The Moral Society-Rational Alternative to Death. Pittsburgh: Whitmore Publishing, 2005. Print.
Hume, David, David Norton and Mary Norton. A Treatise of Human nature. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. Print.
Melden, A.I. Ethical Theories. New York: Prentice-Hall, 2008. Print.