One idea that stuck with me as I read was the notion that ethics focus on voluntary acts rather than involuntary acts. Ethics pertain to moral choices and do not apply to instances where the person is not actually making an ethical decision at that moment. This is highly significant when understanding if an event or an instance actually ties back to the person who performed the action. For example, when something happens by accident or by reflex, we need to understand that there were no moral or reasonable choices being made. When a question comes to hand, such as “why did he/she do that?”, the answer could be reasoned based on moral standards, but if there was no actual moral choice, it is important to note that ethics are not concerned with this situation. Although it’s important to note when ethics come into play (voluntary, moral choices) it is also incredibly important to understand if there was a reason for an “accident” or a “reflex”, or not. In an event such as texting and driving, someone will have to further investigate to find out the story behind the event to find that a voluntary action (texting) is actually what caused the car to swerve. If a moral choice reflects on something that may seem involuntary at the surface, then ethics become involved and the case can get complicated. Another part in the chapter that I felt was important was noting the flaw in subjective relativism. Stating that each person decides what is right and wrong his or herself is notably inaccurate as we each have our own moral compass, which we follow and thus steers us into a certain direction based on our thought process and morals. It is inaccurate to analyze a situation with this kind of theory. Although it may seem easy to view a scenario and just say “that person was wrong”, it becomes inaccurate when you base this decision purely on the idea that you came to the conclusion just because you think that it’s wrong yourself. For example, some people are pro-life and some people are pro-choice. We each think one is right and one is wrong based on our social viewpoints. There are many more variables to look into when analyzing an event or an occurrence, such as the other people affected and/or societal norms or laws. The significance of this idea is huge as it pertains to the way that we rationalize our own actions and other people’s actions. We must rationalize our thoughts in ways that can make sense to other people and not simply because it’s what we may believe. The chapter also talked about ethical egoism which is a philosophy that states that people should focus on what is best for them and what will benefit them the most in the long run. I always try to run with the idea that we each …show more content…
When making a decision, sometimes personal relationships are very much relevant, as noted in virtue ethics. We tend to act in ways that will benefit those around us, as we want to help them and care for them. This idea can help to explain some (but not all) decision-making. For example, understanding why personal relationships are important will help us to understand why a student had to miss school for their mother’s funeral. Personal relationships give us a significant viewpoint into the decisions made by other people and can sometimes be used to rationalize why something was done the way it was. The social aspect of our lives is a significant component to how we are raised and who we ultimately become. It is only fair to understand that the people closest to us are those that can affect our decisions the