A Moral Perspective: Identity as Self-Interpretation

2021 ◽  
pp. 101-119
Author(s):  
Svend Brinkmann
Keyword(s):  
Think India ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 535-546
Author(s):  
ABHISHEK CHOUDHARY

The paper analyses the concerns arising from a moral perspective in the context of a renewed arms race in South Asia. It challenges the idea that possession of nuclear power could in any way contribute to any sort of balance. The emulation of so-called great powers and expecting that balance would arrive as it did in the case of the US and the erstwhile-USSR during cold war is detrimental to the temporal and spatial uniqueness of South Asia. Deterrence, based on rational choice theory, does not apply to the South Asian context due to ambiguity owing to mutual mistrust especially in the case of India and Pakistan. Also, it no longer only sates that are sole actors in the international arena. One cannot expect the non-state actors to behave in a rational manner. Furthermore, the idea of ‘credible minimum deterrence’ itself is questionable as it is a flexible posture adjusted to relative prowess and ambiguity in policy further aggravates the situation. The paper argues from a consequentialist notion of ethics and argues that the principles of harm and equity ought be part of nuclear decision-making. Another aspect that the paper uncovers relates to the ‘reification’ of nuclear power. Using a neo-Marxist framework and concept of Lukács, the paper argues that it is no longer the state as a repository of power that decides the trajectory of nuclear development. Rather the nuclear technology has started to dictate the way states are looking at regional and international relations. This inverted relationship has been created due to neglect of any ethical toolkit. The paper thus proposes an ethical toolkit that focuses on the negative duties of not to harm and also the positive duties to create conditions that would avoid harm being done to people.


2016 ◽  
Vol 81 (1) ◽  
pp. 14-31
Author(s):  
Rochus-Antonin (Roman) Gruijters

This article argues that when globalization is accompanied by such problems as religious intolerance, social injustice, poverty, disrespect for the human dignity and oppression, Catholics should address these challenges on a social and an academic level. The Catholic social tradition, as the single bearer of reflection on the meaning of the common good, envisions the idea of this common good in particularly useful ways by linking it to concepts of solidarity and justice. Furthermore, the Catholic Social Doctrine offers a vision of humanity which rejects intolerance and violence and proclaims that human life is sacred and that the dignity of the human person should be the foundation of a moral vision for society. In short, this article will expand how – from a Catholic intellectual and moral perspective on a globalized world – the concept of bonum commune can address contemporary social, cultural and religious problems.


2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-49
Author(s):  
Claus-Christian Carbon

Abstract Our words shape our thinking, our thinking creates action. Scientific terms can be particularly influential when used in everyday language in terms of allegedly scientific arguments that back certain views or actions. Such use can be especially toxic when the terms refer to concepts that are ill-defined, outdated or questionable themselves. The term “good genes” represents an exemplary case in this regard. It refers to the belief system of eugenics and implies a moral perspective. The latest political debates demonstrate how easily such terms and concepts are employed to induce racist thinking and action; in the end it may even result in specific medication, selective investment in medical treatment, and so ultimately impacting the life and death of patients. Science has the obligation to explicitly opt-out from such lines of argument, and to routinely check and re-think its theories, concepts and vocabulary.


2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 64-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Verl Anderson ◽  
Riki Ichiho

Purpose The current criminal justice system is pledged to serve and protect society while preserving the rights of those who are accused. The purpose of this paper is to explore the premise of “innocent until proven guilty” and examine whether this assumption truly prevails under the current criminal justice system, or be modified to accommodate a sliding continuum of virtuosity. Design/methodology/approach This paper is a conceptual paper which relies heavily on the current literature about criminal justice and related ethical issues. Findings The paper argues that today’s criminal justice system fails to meet the standards of the virtuous continuum and that those who oversee that system need to rethink how the system operates and is perceived by the public if they wish the criminal justice system to be perceived as just, fair, and ethically responsible. Research limitations/implications Because this paper is a conceptual paper it does not present research hypotheses. Practical implications This paper suggests that “virtue” and “ethics” must be the foundation upon which the criminal justice system is evaluated, and criminal justice must incorporate an ethical standard which is virtuous and fair to all parties and leaders who oversee that system must meet the standards suggested by the virtuous continuum. Originality/value This paper is among the first to identify the viewpoint of the virtuous perspective, moral perspective, amoral perspective, and immoral perspective in the criminal justice system.


The Crayon ◽  
1857 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 33
Author(s):  
H. W. Bellows
Keyword(s):  

1971 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
pp. 42
Author(s):  
Charles G. S. Williams ◽  
Helen Kaps
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document