Pluralistic Approach to Moral Theory Assignment Sample

No-One Has The Right To Intervene When They See Someone Else Has Done Something Morally Wrong

Case Study 1: Michael

Michael could not understand one of the units taught by his lecturer and he decided not to clear his doubts regarding the chapter as he thought that it would depict that Michael is not an intelligent student. Michael thought that raising questions will create a bad impression on the lecturer and will make the lecturer think that Michael has low grasping power. Michael thought that his asking query from his lecturer would make him look weak in the eyes of the lecturer. Michael possessed ego due to which he didn't raise his doubts making it difficult for him to solve the assignment and failure to solve the assignment had repercussion in the form of getting failed in the whole examination which would have resulted in the failure of Michael to attain his degree as well as also lose the golden opportunity of the job as he was in his final year. Michael knowing such repercussions of not completing the assignment went to his girlfriend Maria and asked her to help him in his assignment. She agreed to the same. The psychological egoism theory led Michael to justify his action of asking for help in his assignment from her girlfriend as if he secured good marks in the assignment then he would have got a better job. For getting passed in the assignment and a good job he took the entire help from her girlfriend and secured good marks in the assignment. The psychological egoism theory states that a person always engages in the work which is in his own self -interest and here Michael possessed such self-interest as it was his assignment in which he wanted to score good marks and for that purpose he used Maria. Michael was only concerned about his assignment and his university grades due to which he made her girlfriend Maria work on behalf of him. Such selfishness of Michael clearly attracts the theory of Psychological egoism (Hinman, 2007 p. 101). If Michael would have considered the theory of utilitarianism then the conclusion would have been different as the utilitarianism theory states that the consequences coming out of the decision being right or wrong shall be considered and then the execution be done on that basis, that is to say, if the consequences are morally not right then it shouldn't be done (Hinman, 2007 p. 160). Michael didn't even read the assignment which was made by her girlfriend Maria and therefore such an act of Michael has repercussions as his previous assignments were also made by Maria. Michael can any day be caught as he has a lack of knowledge regarding his subjects by which in his future job he can be fired (Hinman, 2007 p. 101 & 160).

Case Study 2: Maria

When Maria was approached by her boyfriend Michael to help him out with his assignment so that he can pass and get a good job. Maria on such request waited for some time and later agreed to help her boyfriend in his assignment by way of completing the whole assignment work which was assigned to Michael. Maria justified her actions to work for the assignment of her boyfriend Michael by way of the ethical theory of duty as it was the moral duty of her to save her boyfriend from getting failed and losing the job opportunity and therefore she worked for his boyfriend to save him from future consequences of him failing the examination and such was the justification of Maria to do the work of her boyfriend, Michael. Maria didn’t help Michael for any self-centered motive (Hinman, 2007 p. 167). Maria knew that if she didn’t help Michael in his work then he will definitely fail and anything which affects him will also affect her in the same manner as she was quite devoted to her boyfriend Michael and wanted the best for him. Maria loved Michael a lot and hence for him, she could have done whatever Michael wanted her to. Therefore, Maria's justified her action and acted in such a manner to protect Michael from failing. If Maria would have acted on the theory of psychological egoism then the result would have been different as in that case she would have chosen to not help her boyfriend as the psychological egoism theory states that self-own interest shall be considered while acting on any situation (Hinman, 2007 p. 101). Here, the self-interest is not present as Maria is not getting anything in return out of her work as she is writing her boyfriend’s assignment. Therefore, if Maria would have rejected the request of her boyfriend then Michael would have failed in the examination and would have lost the job opportunity. But she accepted his request and hence Michael was passed with a high score and was placed in a good company. Unfortunately, Michael used Maria to get his work done, and later as soon as his work was over, he ended his relationship with Maria by breaking up with her. Michael used Maria just to get her work done. Hence, if the psychological egoism theory would have been adopted instead of the ethical theory of duty then exploitation of Maria would not have occurred (Hinman, 2007 p. 101 & 167).

Case Study 3: Julia

Julia even after knowing that his classmate, Michael has deceitfully passed the exam and also scored more than her then also she didn’t inform about Michael scoring such marks by way of deceitful means either to the college or the lecturer. Michael’s unethical practice adopted by him to pass the examination was kept as a secret by Julia, as, if she would have revealed the practice adopted by Michael to pass the examination then such revelation would have troubled her close friend Maria as she wrote Michael's assignment. Julia justified her actions as stated above by way of utilitarianism theory which wishes people well and aims for the well-being of all creating a better world altogether (Hinman, 2007 p. 160). Julia thought that her friend Maria should not get troubled and also Michael should not get trapped in his course and eventually be debarred from the examination of his graduate degree. If Julia would have acted on the theory of ethical egoism then she would have acted on her own self- interest and she would have not considered anybody else's interest over her personal interest. She would have revealed to the Lecturer and to the University if ethical egoism theory would have been adopted by Julia. The theory states that every person shall act on his own self-interest (Hinman, 2007 p. 113) and if Julia would have acted on her own self-interest by applying the theory of ethical egoism then she would have scored better marks than his classmate Michael and would also have got the job which Michael got on the sole basis of his academic credentials which were not scored by his hard work. The situation would have changed if Julia would have not adopted the utilitarianism ethical approach and would have adopted the ethical egoism theory as in such a case Julia would have secured better marks then Michael and would have been selected by the Company for the job. Utilitarianism theory states that everybody's suffering (assuming it is of equal intensity) is of equal weight. It ensures that when uprooted, the misery of a disadvantaged person of color experiences is of comparable importance to the misery of a wealthy, white business executive experiences when displaced, again believing that both will have similarly strong feelings for being displaced (Hinman, 2007 p. 113 & 160).

Case Study 4: Madeleine

When Julia told Madeleine about Michael’s unfair means to score good marks in the exam and not to tell any other person regarding the same Madeleine agreed to keep this as a secret as she didn't know who Michael was but as soon as she was confronted with Michael being a manager of him she was in a dilemma to choose to whether expose Michael’s false academic record to the CEO of the company Mr. Omar or report this to the University from where Michael attended his graduation. Firstly, when Madeleine was informed about the wrong practices adopted by Michael to pass the examination she kept it as a secret by justifying her act through ethical relativism which emphasizes about the live and let live attitude that is to say that one must be tolerant about other person’s actions (Hinman, 2007 p. 31). But as soon as she got to know about the same person being appointed under her she now decides to complain it either to his boss that is to the CEO of the company Mr. Omar or to Michael’s university and here she is justifying her action by way of the ethics of duty by way of doing the right thing for the right reason that is saving the company from letting go of a person who cannot be trusted, which in long run could affect companies prospect and companies performance (Hinman, 2007 p. 167). Previously, Madeleine was not much concerned regarding the way Michael secured high marks as she didn’t even know who he was. But now, she wishes to report the issue with either the CEO of the company or to the University as she is now directly affected by him. Madelaine is being made the boss of Michael and Madelaine doesn’t want Michael to work in his company as she doesn’t want that the company shall recruit such people as they lack competence for the job for which they were hired. Hence, the application of ethical duty compels Madeleine to reveal the secret of Michael to the CEO as it is her moral duty. The true value of an act relies on the purpose it is performed for. It is not enough for an act to adhere to obligation; for the sake of service, it must also be performed. It must be done not out of a self-serving purpose, but out of respect about what is morally right. It is exactly this that makes the situation of true-life greater than the fictional one. The act is done only because it is the proper thing to do; that is, for the sake of service, it is done (Hinman, 2007 p. 31 & 167).

Conclusion on Pluralistic Approach to Moral Theory

In light of the above, it can be concluded that all the people had different ethical responsibilities. Michael had the ethical responsibility to act in good faith and clear his doubt from his lecturer and make his own assignment. Maria had the ethical responsibility to not make the assignment of Michael and should only aid Michael in case of any discrepancies and genuine problems. Julia had the responsibility to inform the Lecturer as well as to the University as such activities hamper the prospects of other students. Madeleine had the responsibility to reveal the secret of Michael in his company to the CEO of the company to protect the interest of the company, its colleagues, and candidates.

The ethical theory which shall be most suitable to the following 4 people are as under:

For Michael, the ethical theory of utilitarianism shall be considered as the utilitarianism theory states that the consequences coming out of the decision being right or wrong shall be considered and then the execution be done on that basis, that is to say, if the consequences are morally not right then it shouldn't be done.

For Maria, the ethical theory of psychological egoism will be suitable as through this theory she would choose to not help her boyfriend as the psychological egoism theory states that self-own interest shall be considered while acting on any situation.

For Julia, the best suitable theory will be ethical egoism. As to this theory, she would have acted on her own self- interest and she would have not considered anybody else's interest over her personal interest. She would have revealed to the Lecturer and to the University if ethical egoism theory would have been adopted by Julia.

For Madeleine ethics of duty is suitable as she should do the right thing for the right reason that is saving the company from Michael who is not a person to be trusted and doesn't deserve the job.

I have chosen such theories because all the people have not acted in the way in which they should have during the given situation. If they would have acted as per the theories mentioned by me then all the issues regarding the deceitful means would have come to an end.

I do not agree with this statement that " no-one has the right to intervene when they see someone else has done something morally wrong" as such an approach is disastrous in nature. It shall be the duty of everyone to ensure that proper conduct related to morality is achieved. If everyone will keep a blind eye and does not intervene in the situation where it is required to intervene then morality will not be able to grow. It shall be the duty of everyone that whenever something morally wrong occurs then one should deter it in the best possible way in which a reasonable person would have deterred. Considering the case studies it is argued that it was the duty of Maria to intervene and stop Michael from engaging in unfair means, it was the duty of Julia to complain about Michael and Maria’s assignment work, it was the duty of Madelaine being at a higher position to inform the university of such violations of rules as well as her company.

Therefore, intervention is a significant aspect related to the fulfillment of moral obligation and efficient conduct of ethical standards as it helps in preventing and deterring any harm caused to the ethical standards. It is recommended that everyone shall intervene whenever they are encountered with a situation where they find any person infringing the moral obligation and in this manner reduction of immorality will occur which will directly uphold the morality and ethics in the society leading the society to become a welfare state which will work in an effective and efficient manner with the prominence of necessary code of conduct.

References for Pluralistic Approach to Moral Theory

Hinman, Lawrence. (2007). Ethics: A pluralistic approach to moral theory. USA: Cengage Learning.

Remember, at the center of any academic work, lies clarity and evidence. Should you need further assistance, do look up to our Arts Assignment Help