Moral absolutist believe that certain actions are absolutely right or wrong, no matter what the consequences or the intentions behind them. We must also keep in mind that there is a definite difference between moral absalutism and consequentialism. Consequentialism, once again, is the deontological perspective according to which the “rightness” of an action is determined by the consequences that follow. There are deontologists who are also moral absolutists and they consider it to be true that some actions are wrong no matter what consequences follow from them. For example, Immanual Kant, he believes that the only definite good thing is a good will, and so the only determining factor of whether an act is ethically right is the will, or reason of the person doing it. If the person is acting on a bad maxim, like “ I will lie to this woman,” then the act they commit is wrong, even if some good consequences come of it.
Moral absolutist are hard to figure out. They believe that certain actions are wrong not matter what the consequences (good or bad). To my best knowledge I believe that moral absolutists would find HIV Alliances program to be morally wrong. Moral absolutists most likely find the injection of illegal drugs to be morally wrong and would find that giving these people clean needles, even if it is for a good cause, is also morally wrong.
No comments:
Post a Comment