The Greatest Ethical Ideal That I Learned From This Subject

DS3009 – ETHICS AND SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY ASSIGNMENT 1 : INDIVIDUAL ESSAY HARIPREM A/L TAMILCHELVAN 111091 – 06227 – 010 Ethics can be defined as the reflective process by which individuals, social groups and social institutions evaluate their actions from the perspective of moral principles and values. For example in the Queen v. Dudley and Stephens case, in order to escape death from hunger, kills the innocent boy for the purpose of eating his flesh, is guilty of murder, although at the time of the act he is in such circumstances that he believes and has reasonable. However, this is unethical because every human has dignity to live a life no matter in any hard circumstances. Social Responsibility is an ethical ideology or theory that an entity, be it an organization or individual, has an obligation to act to benefit society at large. Social responsibility is a duty every individual or organization has to perform so as to maintain a balance between the economy and the ecosystem. There are many ideas and theories I learnt from this subject which have its own moral values. One of the greatest ethical ideal that impressed me is “utilitarianism”. The utilitarianism theory focuses on selecting the best act that offers the best consequences of an individual. Utilitarian‟s does not examine the differences in a chosen act that is based on moral issues. They instead focus on the specific individual who is performing the act. Utilitarianism will focus on morality only if the action is considered an ideal act but if the action is not a preferred act, then morality does not play a role. Likewise, in utilitarianism ethics is not viewed when making a decision because all decisions are based on the best result for an individual. Besides that, utilitarianism ethics emphasize that action should be morally beneficial to a group. This course of ethics is often known as “the greatest good for the greatest number” or simply put, “the greater good” . In other words, the consequence of any ethical action should be beneficial for all by mass appeal.

Utilitarianism impressed me because it is defined as putting the good of other people before you. A good example of this would be a footballer that has been playing for his university team and has an offer to go and play for a team that is much better, but realizes that if he was to leave that his team would be left for the wolves. A person that believes in the utilitarianism theory would stay and play for the team money aside, because they love the game and knows that the team needs them, therefore putting the good of the team before their own good. Utilitarianism theory suggests that an action is morally right when that an action produces more total utility for the group than any other alternative. Bentham proposed an equation which gave huge impact on utilitarianism which is “Happiness = Pleasure – Pain”. Bentham said that, “The principle of utility aims to promote happiness which is the supreme ethical value . Nature has placed us under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure . An act is „right‟ if it delivers more pleasure than pain and „wrong‟ if it brings about more pain than pleasure.” Actions are right in proportion when they tend to promote happiness, wrong when they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.” When Bentham talks about happiness, he refers to pleasure and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain and the privation of pleasure. According to Bentham's theory, the Rightness of an action entirely depends on the value of its consequences. That is why the theory is also described as consequentialist. Ulilitarianism may also apply in the medical field. There are many utilitarian arguments that seeks to justify such complicity on stem cell research. This kind of issue arises because of embryonic cell usage in the research. A neglected element in the current debate is that of moral complicity. If we assume the personhood of the embryo, and that killing an embryonic human being is a moral evil, then those who provide reason, circumstance, and means for the act share complicity with that evil. There are two major themes that lead to the debate. First is the sanctity of human life. Many object to the destruction of embryos to obtain human embryonic stem (hES) cells, since they believe that embryos are human persons, and thus have basic human rights. The second theme is the utilitarian rationale for the use of such embryos, since“they are going to be destroyed anyway.”. If one assumes that frozen embryos are going to be

discarded anyway, why not utilize them for research? Even if one is distressed by the destruction of an embryo, isn‟t it better if some good can come from it? The utilitarian argument seems to make some sense, and deserves a thoughtful response. After many debates, they stand with their argument saying that “the act of destroying embryos is a moral evil, because embryos are in fact human persons” (Dennis 2008). Many potential issues may arise apart from stem cell such as genetically modified organism, and eugenics or baby designing. Apart from the medical field, utilitarianism may apply for political background. There are few successful leaders which hold utilitarianism as their key of success such as Nelson Mandela. Nelson Mandela had strong ethical values through having a heart and soul of leadership by consistently advising his followers to adopt a peaceful course of action and to avoid all violence, Nelson Mandela as a lawyer, voluntarily represented many detainees under the ANC whilst he was volunteer-in-chief for the ANC, after he was released he showed Utilitarianism leadership through soldiering ahead to fight for apartheid and became the first black Democratic president in South Africa under the ANC, he had the morals to continue fighting against apartheid (Denenberg, 1995). From my above discussion, we can see how utilitarianism is actually holding a very strong position in different fields such as medicine, politics, even in business. Utilitarianism doesn‟t discriminate or encourage egoism. It is wrong to harm others to benefit yourself because everyone counts. That‟s the reason why people are opposing the stem cell research. Immanual Kant always stated that murder is always a murder even tough we are in a very hard situation. By killing an embryo is still considered murder and unethical. To conclude, my discussion, in order to know if something is morally preferable for a utilitarian, we must ask to ourself whether this will give us benefits or more negative impact? If the answer is more benefits, then it is morally preferable and ethical.

References 1. Cunningham PC. The Right to Patent a Human Being: Fact, Fiction, or Future Possibility? Retrieved from http://www.cbhd.org/resources/aps/cunningham_02-0603.html. Accessed February 5, 2007. The Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity, 2003. 2. Beckwith F. From Personhood to Bodily Autonomy: The Shifting Legal Focus in the Abortion Debate. In: Kilner J, Cameron N, Schiedermayer D (Eds). Bioethics and the Future of Medicine. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1995. 3. Complicity and Stem Cell Research : Countering the Utilitarianism Argument. Dennis M.Sulivan, Aaron Costerisan, Vol 24, 2008 4. Johnson, Robert. “Kant‟s Moral Philosophy.” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 17 May 2011. (Section 5, The Formula of the Universal Law of Nature.) Last updated 2008. 5. Baker, L (2002). The Heart and Soul of Leadership. Australian Institute of Management, Roseville, NSW, Australia: McGraw-Hill Australia Pty Ltd. 6. Ethical Realism : Moral Theories (Normative Theories of Ethics). JW Gray. August 2008. Retrieved from http://ethicalrealism.wordpress.com/2010/08/20/ethical-theories/ 7. Wise Geek : Stem Cell research. Retrieved from http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-stemcell-research.htm 8. The Ethics of Virtue and the Ethics of Right Action by Rachels. Page 157. 9. DS3009 Ethics and Social Responsibility Lecture notes Rahman Ab.Nilai University, Jan 2013.