Ethics Awareness Inventory AnalysisEssay Preview: Ethics Awareness Inventory AnalysisReport this essayEthics Awareness Inventory AnalysisAfter taking the assigned ethics awareness inventory, it became clear that my own ethical perspective was based for the most part on obligation. This was not really surprising to me and by the looks of the class results overall, it appears that obligation is the dominant motivating factor for ethics in many of us.
The description reads that people who base their ethics on obligation focus on peoples duty to do what is morally right. I can certainly identify with this statement. I have a tendency to judge people based on their actions when it comes to morality. I think everyone has a fair concept of what is right and what is wrong. When a person actually chooses something that is morally wrong or has negative effects on others, I tend to hold them accountable and usually do not hesitate to confront the decision. In short, it is not acceptable under any circumstances, to help your self at the expense of the team or any member of that team. On the other hand, it is not okay to deny an individual the basic respect and opportunity based on a “for the team” mentality either. There must be a balance. The individuals work for the team and for themselves and the team supports those individuals who put in the true effort.
The definition of ‘moral obligation’ is given in a different way. In other words, the person making a statement can make mistakes in that statement and not fully understand why.
The idea of morality (or moral obligation) as moral agency is now being questioned.
A group of people who believe a moral judgment must go with their own moral principles or should not make statements as morally right are questioning the legitimacy of a set of moral principles that the group feels they are doing.
Some individuals are in the minority or “wrong” about the truth of what they believe and want.
Others don’t think it is true and are simply making a statement.
It is important to not allow these individuals’ opinions to become part of an existing social order by giving them the power to change a decision on a matter that they want to change. It is important that they do this to a group as a whole. These people will not do the work of changing the current social system. Rather, they will not stop the change and the community will be able to grow and develop towards higher, better, socially beneficial levels of happiness and fulfillment.
There is a moral debate going on in the world around this issue from these people.
They cite:
[i] See the recent controversy over the American Psychological Association’s decision to withdraw from support for the controversial “Affirmative Action for Men.”
[ii] See Dr. Jeffrey Rosenblatt’s (1995) book Defcon: When it Comes to Beliefs and Behavior: What Is Good or Bad .
The inventory also explains that one with this particular ethical style cannot support traditions or policies that are aimed at “the best interests of society as a whole” if those practices deny any individual of the opportunities that they are entitled to as a human being. This is a bit tricky for me. I agree to an extent. I do think that in some circumstances, “society as a whole” must come first. The needs of 100 certainly outweigh the needs of one but there is a fine line somewhere therein. If ten people are starving to death in the mountains, is it okay to vote to single out the least helpful member and kill them to eat them? Of course, it would not be okay. It may occur but it would likely be out of desperation rather than moral decision.
My educational experience has led me to a better understanding of ethics and how people interpret them in many different ways but my own ethical perspectives have been set in place for quite some time. I do not think that the education that I have recently received has had a major impact on my ethical perspectives. The largest contributor of my ethical perspective is most