W.D. Ross and his pluralistic theory of duty states that “duties are relative to the individual situation. There are often several duties one should do. You must decide which of these duties takes precedence over the others. This will be the ‘right’ thing to do" (1). There is not one duty that is right for all situations but rather multiple ones that one must be decided upon every situation that one encounters. There is also not one right action for every situation but is rather one right action for every individual.
Suppose you are in a situation where a masked gunman approaches you and another person, one you do not know. Now suppose the gunman turns to you and tells you to choose between your life and that and the other person. Unlike other theories that may suggest that there is only one choice; the right one, the pluralistic theory suggests that in certain situations much like this one, there are multiple options; the person can choose to preserve themselves or they can follow the duty of nonmaleficence, to not injure others. Ross states that to determine what choose to make, you have to evaluate the situation and once reason is applied to the situation, then the answer, or duty that is right for you, will be apparent. Perhaps you choose to save the life of the other person because you believe that to be right, does this mean that because you assessed the situation and came to the decision that you found was right, is indeed right?
The relativism belief accepts that in a moral dilemma there will be more than one "right" answer in a situation and that ethical judgments reflect the values of individuals (1). There is not one universally right answer but rather a collection of answers that may be right for the individual person. Is nonmaleficence actually ranked higher than self-preservation just because you value the life of others highly and decide to act accordingly? No. But because you value nonmaleficence greater means it is right for you.
References
- HZT 4U (n.d.) Content - Duty Ethics. Retrieved from: http://tvdsb.elearningontario.ca/d2l/lms/content/viewer/main_frame.d2l?ou=63893&tId=5986730
I agree with what you've said. The right thing to do can vary vastly in different situations and contexts. What is right for others might not be right for some, which is evident, otherwise there would not be so much conflict around the world. Individuals' opinions and personalities will decide what is right for them, as it would be impossible to pick what would be right for everybody, as not everybody would agree.
ReplyDeleteI agree with both of you. Every person will react differently to any given situation, and how they react does not necessarily make them any less right than someone who acted differently. Of course, there are decisions that could be seen as right by the majority of people, but what is right for you is the right decision for you to make. Just as Andrew said, if everyone's opinion on right and wrong was the same, then we could potentially be living in a communist utopia or a capitalist dystopia right now, depending on what everyone had deemed to be 'right.'
ReplyDelete