Simone de Beauvoir warns against “ethical recipes,” suggesting instead that life and ethics are both inherently ambiguous. Choose one of the ethical “recipes” or “methods” offered by Manning, Kant, Mill.
What ambiguities remain even after the proper application of the ethical standard in question? (Be sure you are using “ambiguous” in the manner that Simone de Beauvoir uses the term.)
In your opinion, is any non-ambiguous ethical standard possible? Why or why not?
Please note that no one here will do your work for you. However, we will be happy to read over what YOU THINK and make suggestions and/or corrections.
Please post what you think.
So if I choose Mill, he believes that we should weigh all the consequences and that the good of the many outweighs the good of the few. Would that be considered as his "recipe" or "methods"??
For the second part, is the teacher talking about the ambiguity of the terms good and bad or am i just confusing that with nietzsche and wittgenstein?
I also don't understand what the ethical standard is!
Can someone please clarify?!
Again, I haven't studied these men and their philosophies, but I'd say that what you wrote about Mill sounds more like a "recipe" than "methods." The recipe should be broader in meaning; the methods should be very specific, providing the HOW-TO in order to follow the recipe.
Work on your other question first ... and apply the same process with Mill and his ideas ... list them, in detail. Then you'll be able to deal with them less generally. Also, by comparing him with others, you should be able to clarify what you think about Mill.
I don't understand, what other question? the second one? But for that one I don't quite understand what it's asking! Again, what is the ethical standard?
Principles that when followed, promote values such as trust, good behavior, fairness, and/or kindness.
found this for ethical standards, is that it?
Mary/David ~ It's crystal clear you are posting from the same computer. Whenever this happens (switching names, but VERY similar questions), it's clear it's the same student posting, but trying to seem as if he/she isn't.
Read "David's" post and my reply above. Follow directions.
I agree with your definition of ethical standards. Nice.
A town Y is 200km from town X in adirection 040 , how far is Y east of X ?
To understand the ambiguities in ethical standards, let's first look at the concept of "ethical recipes" and Simone de Beauvoir's perspective. Simone de Beauvoir, a prominent existentialist philosopher, argued against adopting fixed or rigid ethical systems, referred to as "ethical recipes." She believed that life and ethics are inherently ambiguous and cannot be reduced to a single set of rules or principles.
In this context, we can examine the ethical standards offered by three other influential philosophers: Christine M. Korsgaard (Manning), Immanuel Kant, and John Stuart Mill. These philosophers proposed different ethical approaches that provide guidance on moral decision-making.
Manning's ethical standard emphasizes the importance of care and compassion towards others, while Kant's ethical theory centers around the concept of moral duty and universal principles. Mill's approach, known as utilitarianism, focuses on maximizing overall happiness or well-being.
Even when these ethical standards are properly applied, ambiguities can still remain in Beauvoir's sense. The term "ambiguous" in Beauvoir's context refers to the inherent uncertainty, complexity, and subjectivity that exists within ethical situations. Ethical dilemmas often involve conflicting values, interests, and perspectives, making it challenging to arrive at definitive answers or solutions.
For example, in Manning's care ethics, dilemmas may arise when one has to weigh the care and well-being of one person against another. In Kant's theory, conflicts can arise when universal principles clash or when determining the moral worth of an action. Similarly, utilitarianism faces ambiguities when calculating and comparing happiness or well-being in various situations.
In Beauvoir's view, ethics can never completely escape ambiguity because human existence itself is complex and variable. Even the most well-defined ethical standards cannot anticipate every moral dilemma or provide a single correct answer applicable to all situations.
Considering non-ambiguous ethical standards, it is debated whether such standards are possible or not. From Beauvoir's philosophy, it is unlikely that a completely non-ambiguous ethical standard exists. Humans experience different perspectives, values, and cultural backgrounds, leading to diverse interpretations of ethical principles and disagreements on what constitutes the morally right action.
However, it is worth noting that while complete non-ambiguity may be unattainable, ethical standards can still provide useful frameworks and guidance for ethical decision-making. These standards may not eliminate ambiguity but can help individuals navigate complex ethical dilemmas with conscious reflection, empathy, and critical thinking.
Ultimately, the presence of ambiguity in ethics reinforces the need for ongoing dialogue, critical examination of values, and a willingness to engage in ethical deliberation in order to make more informed ethical decisions.