'Ethical Decision Making Essay\r'

'Abstract\r\n moral philosophy is the branch of philosophy that examines questions of morality, or right and wrong. In this paper we leave behind discuss the philosophic firees recitation in honourable decision fashioning. The 2 approaches that give be elaborated on are the functional approach and the common approach. Several questions will be addressed, (1) what is the useful and universal approach? (2) How do we use them in the good decision making answer and (3) ex axerophtholles of how it relate in the field of Criminal justness? When conflict arises it’s not always contingent to decide who is right or wrong; even so our moral responsibility is to resolve problems to the best of our ability. The functional and universal theories are two of several philosophical approaches or methods that privy be implemented when making these types of decisions (Zalta & adenylic acid; Geoff, 2008).\r\nThe Utilitarian Approach:\r\nUtilitarianism is one of the intimately powerful and persuasive approaches to normative ethics in the history of philosophy. The useful approach to ethical decision making focuses on taking the act that will effect in the superior good for the greatest issuance of people. It to a fault focuses on the consequences of the course of work and policy, as well as the affects it has on the public assistance of the people directly or indirectly squeeze by that meet or policy. This approach is employ to promote the welfare of anybody by maximizing benefits and minimizing defame (Zalta & adenosine monophosphate; Geoff, 2008). For instance, when faced with a situation your eldest thought or question is what should you do?\r\n at once you assess the situation then you would admit which ethical decision is the best trans legal action to construct. If you implement the utilitarian approach you did so with the intent of producing the greatest agreement over harm. Utilitarianism offers a relatively straightforward metho d for deciding the morally right course of action for any particular situation we may think ourselves in. In the criminal justice field this approach can be widely used. To discover what we ought to do in any situation, we first identify the versatile courses of action that we could per run. Second, we square up all of the foreseeable benefits and harms that would result from each course of action for everyone affected by the action. And third, we choose the course of action that provides the greatest benefits by and by the costs concord been taken into account (Velasquez, Claire, Shanks, & adenine; S.J).\r\nThe Universal Approach:\r\nThe universal approach to ethical decision making is similar to the Golden Rule. The booming rule is best interpreted as â€Å" shell out others as you want to be treated”. Universalism argues that companionship can and should be applied to everyone in every similar situation (Williams & Arrigo, 2008). This approach can be taken in tw o steps. First, determine whether or not a particular action should be applied to all people infra all circumstances. Second, decide if you would be ordain to fill that analogous rule to you. This approach claims that ethical principles bind for all and not for some, it is for everybody without exception (Williams & Arrigo, 2008). In other words if you act a certain way towards another and are not willing to be treated in that same affection than you are in violation of the universal rule.\r\nTo apply the universal approach correctly we need to take into consideration the effects our decision making have on other people’s lives. We also have to be able to imagine ourselves in the other person’s shoes on the receiving end of the action. Imagine you are a law of nature officer in pursuit of what seems to be a inebriate driver, while in pursuit the inebriated driver hits a pregnant woman point of intersection the street. What do you do, do you stop for her a nd leave a drunk driver on the road, or do you remember the accident in and continue to rent the drunk driver to keep him from potentially cleaning himself and others. The utilitarian approach would more likely call for back up and continue after the drunk driver, but if we use this same example and study it to the universal approach, the question then becomes what would you want through to you.\r\nBoth philosophical approaches are infused with flaws, the use of â€Å"utilitarian” thinking is not always clear of what form of action should be taken or if the action you took will have a favorable yield for the majority. It is difficult to judge what decision will submit the best way to respond to a situation. The universal approach unlike the utilitarian bases its decisions on the facts that the action taken is best for everyone regardless of the situation or the difference in people. My choice between the two is somewhat tossed, because my belief is that you should do unt o other as you would want done to you, but at the same time my desire to ensure the greatest number of success is important to me as well. Within the discriminatory system decisions are made with or without the enter of others; however it is our moral obligation to ensure that we manufacture the best ethical decisions that we can, because every decision someway directly or indirectly affects someone else.\r\nReferences\r\nVelasquez, M., Claire, A., Shanks, M. M., & S.J. (n.d.). Markula Center for Applied Ethics. Retrieved from Santa Clara University: http://www.scu.edu/ethics/practicing/decision/thinking.html Williams, C. R., & Arrigo, B. A. (2008). Is Morality Relative? The variability of Norms and Values. In C. R. Williams, & B. A. Arrigo, Ethics, Crime and Criminal Justice (p. 77). Upper institutionalize River: Pearson Prentice Hall. Zalta, E. N., & Geoff, S.-M. (2008). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosphy : http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/metaethics/\r\n'