Ethics
Normative Ethics
Normative ethics is associated with how we collect groups of ideas to create different ethical codes. Normative ethics seeks to determine which actions to consider bad or good. There are four central theories of Normative ethics: Utilitarianism, Deontological Ethics, Ethical Intuitionism, and Virtue Ethics.
This "Philosoraptor" meme investigates normative ethics by presenting the idea that even doing the right thing can be unethical if it is for the wrong reasons. A utilitarianist would be more inclined to disagree, saying that due to the consequence being good, the motive is completely irrelevant. Whereas a Deontological thinker would see the nature of the human action as being more important than the consequence, and therefore be more inclined to say that the action is still wrong, even if the final result is positive. I would argue that the utilitarianism resembles more closely to Christian and Jewish doctrine, with the their respective commandments focusing on the results of actions (ex. Thou shalt not kill, and Do not murder).
Should Batman kill The Joker? Arguably one of the most timeless ethical debates of the current era. Batman is a vigilante who serves the citizens of Gotham City by putting an end to criminal actions with violence. However, Batman has a strict rule where he will not kill anybody. Batman's worst enemy is The Joker, a man who murders, tortures, and terrorizes citizens of Gotham City. Batman has arrested The Joker countless times, however he never fails to escape from the Gotham Asylum and continues to do more harm. Now, if Batman did kill The Joker he would be doing a great service as he would be unable to do any more harm. However, this breaks Batman's personal code of murderless vigilantism. Killing The Joker would align with utilitarianism as it would provide the most utility to the most people. However his own ethical intuitionism, and deontology would suggest that killing is always wrong no matter the circumstance. A Muslim person may be particularly opposed to the killing of The Joker due to commandment number 5 which specifically states that murder is okay but only through the proccess of law.
Metaethics
Metaethics is the branch of ethics concerned with where ethics derive themselves from and how they came to be. A primary theological methaethics question is: Did our ethical code come from a supreme being or did we make up our moral principals by ourselves. It is the most abstract area of ethical philosophy.
Saskatchewan has just released a new controversial set of laws called the Parent's Bill of Rights. One feature of these laws is restricting children under the age of 16 from changing their pronouns without parental consent. Transgenderism is a complicated topic that has sparked ethical debates with different groups of people around the world. Due to the wide variation of beliefs associated with this topic, it has prompted metaethical discussion topics such as why people can have such different opinions on transgenderism. I believe that the varying support for transgender individuals supports the metaethical idea that our moral principals are derived from within ourselves, and not necessarily given to us at birth. However, it is clear that people from different religions and cultural destinations on the planet tend to group their beliefs together and draw inspiration from local influence. An Anishinaabe person would be inclined to think that transgenderism is absolutely acceptable because of Minwaadendamowin, which is a belief that requires you to never look down upon anyone and Zaagidiwin which means that self-love is crucial to achieve prior to loving others.
This 2022 article speaks about how many US States have banned abortion since the overturning of Roe v. Wade. Abortion has always been a heavily debated topic as many believe fetuses are people too and to eliminate them would be murder. The opposing side believes that fetuses are simply a part of a Woman's body and therefore believe that she can choose her own bodily options with the fetus. The belief that killing a fetus is actually the murder of a human is often derived from religious beliefs that blatantly state that killing is wrong without further explanation (ex. Thou shalt not kill, and Do not murder in Christianity and Noachide laws) however some other religions would state specifically that killing a fetus is a sin. The biggest example of this is the Islam commandment three: Do not kill your children because of the fear of poverty. Muslims believe that Allah loves everyone equally and it would be unethical to take away that love from the child which would be born. Often non-religious thinkers support pro-choice options as they tend to focus on the actual effects that abortion has in society and how it can potentially save lives from being ruined by children. (Ex. a woman is forced to have a child, then does not care for the child well because they are unwanted, therefore the both have bad lives.)
Applied Ethics
Applied ethics is the branch of ethics that focuses on resolving conflicts, dilemmas, issues, etc. in real-world scenarios using normative ethics. It examines all issues from the most serious to the most mundane.
Robin Hood is a character in English folklore who's primary objective is serving the unfortunate people in society by stealing from the rich and giving to the poor. He is an outlaw because he is committing crime by stealing, however he is also considered to be a saviour by those in need of his charity. His actions resolve the issue of the struggle of the low-class but he also creates an issue by stealing the property of the high-class. Are his actions good? Depending on who you are speaking to the answer will differ. A Christian may argue that he is acting unethically due to breaking the commandment of "thou shalt not steal." While an Anishinaabe person may argue that he is acting ethically due to Zaagidiwin and Miigwe’aadiziwin (acting out of love and generosity). Applied ethics seeks to resolve such dilemmas such as Robin Hood's actions using normative ethics.
Fare beating on public transportation. Fare beating is when you attempt (often successfully) to ride public transportation without paying the fare. This is something that is commonly seen as unethical because it is breaking the rules of conduct. It is also seen as theft because you are keeping money that you are obligated to pay to the city. A proponent of virtue ethics may argue that beating the fare is unethical because it works against the common good (the city would supposedly use the fare money to contribute back into the transit system). While all of the cultural/religious codes listed in the content have some mention of condemning stealing or lying. One may still choose to beat the fair with the justification of need. If somebody is in desperate need of the fare money and the transportation then they may still choose to beat the fair. This poses the question of: Is somebody still acting unethically if they are only trying to preserve themselves? Many laws in the USA and Canada would suggest so, as laws regarding defending yourself and your property allow this type of unethical action.