Morals include the generally accepted codes of right and wrong that are practiced by people within a given society. A certain group of people such as professionals may abide by certain regulations that guide them in their work. The intended ethical behaviors may be contained in a prescribed code of the professional conducts. The abstract principles that are developed to show how professionals are expected to relate to their clients, and the way they are anticipated to act while carrying out their duties, refer to the ethical conducts. The various moral theories relate to the consistency of morality that should be exercised by all people as they go about the different issues relating to their daily endeavors. Therefore, moral theories systematically link all beliefs that are associated with morality embraced by individuals. The element of linkage is enhanced by the presence of coherent principles which are also backed by the definite theories.
Analysis and comparison of three moral theories
The three moral theories discussed in this analysis include: Individual ethical egoism, personal ethical and universal ethical egoism. The implications and the viewpoints that are associated with each of the different elements of the ethical egoism have a certain extent of difference and relationship. They all formulate a different argument as far as the ethical egoism is concerned. In its simplest definition, ethical egoism refers to the normative ethical situation that motivators and enhancers of morality are required to do (Millgram, 2005).
In a comparative analysis of the three elements ethical egoism, the analysis is based on responsibilities that individual persons have towards the maintenance and adherence to the different morals. As a result, individual moral egoism capitalizes on the fact that people are charged with the responsibility of determining what benefits them and do it. On the other hand, personal egoism is basically concerned with the one is expected to be have and act in the best self-interests. This is in the total disregard of what the feelings of other people are as far as self-interest is concerned. Therefore, there is no claim of what other people are expected to do. Finally, the issue of universal ethical egoism maintains that anyone is expected to act in accordance to the collective interests (Tännsjö, 2009).
Of the three moral theories I would best align with the universal ethical egoism. The main reason for the choice of this moral theory is basically the undertone of the theory. It is preferably better to embrace what is likely to hold people more together than acting while totally disregarding what other people are expected to do or what actually affects them. The two extremes of ethical thinking have varied implication. My support of the relativism is based on the fact that it supports the absence of a universal standard of right and wrong; regarding an individual or society’s view. On the other hand my opposition to the absolutism is basically due to the argument there are globally-accepted code of rights and wrong, thereby disregarding what an individual or society views are. In a nutshell, individuals and society’s have very diverse values and morals (Rae, 2000).
Moral theories are successful in communicating the basic requirements of people within a society or as individuals relating to others. The emphasis of the various ethical egoism approaches relates to the influence that meaningful people have as far as morality is concerned. Different viewpoints of the extreme ethical thinking: absolutism and relativism embody miscellaneous arguments. However, relativism is better as it associates morality to a personal or societal point of view, unlike absolutism which generalizes morality claiming it to be universal.
Millgram, E., (2005), Ethics done right: practical reasoning as a foundation for moral theory, Cambridge University Press.
Tännsjö, T., (2009), Understanding Ethics: An Introduction to Moral Theory, Edinburgh University Press.
Rae, S.C., (2000), Moral Choices: An Introduction to Ethics, Zondervan Publishers.