Essay on Ethical Theory

The Ring of Gyges and My Morality

If I had the ring of Gyges, first of all, I would be invisible. I would have the power to manipulate people just like Gyges did. However, I would prevent myself from such acts. Even if it would be tempting to be a moral justice myself, I will not do that. I would use this power for good. For instance, I would find orphans around the world and make sure they are taken care of. I would indulge in Robbin Hood activities: stealing from the wealthy and giving it to the poor. But I would likely target corrupt individuals who enrich themselves at the expense of others. More importantly, I would work hard to establish an ideal society free from crime, hate, and all kind of social injustices.

My morality is based on justice and equality. It is important to note that societies based on fairness and justice are more likely to flourish (Perkiss & Moerman, 2020). Instances such as discrimination and failure to provide equal opportunities to hurt individuals and destroy families. Justice and fairness would ensure that everyone is treated with the respect they deserve. Homeless individuals in the United States would find cheap homes as capitalism, which often promotes inequality, would be tamed. Likewise, societies based on the principles of justice and fairness ensure that everyone gets adequate healthcare (Perkiss & Moerman, 2020). I would eliminate health insurance companies that discriminate against preexisting conditions as this is prejudice. Lastly, fairness and justice provide sustainability, especially in instances, including education. A good education would end the cycle of poverty and allow everyone to achieve their dreams. Social justice would ensure that people can learn in safe places that encourage and provide equal opportunities.

Branches of Ethical and President of the United States

The United States was established on the principles of freedom and justice. Justice and freedom are the core concepts in the United States constitution (Bowers & Robinson, 2011). Therefore, to effectively provide freedom and justice, a United States president must abide by the principle of virtual ethics. A virtuous president would abide by the law; they would ensure that citizens are provided and protected according to the constitution. This type of president would be courageous and respectful to all arms of government. He or she would ensure that they do the right thing, and more importantly, they would not bend to their impulses, urges, and desires, but they would act according to principles of virtue.

Historical United States presidents, including George Washington and Abraham Lincoln, are esteemed not because they were good leaders but because they were good men. They displayed not only political skills, but they had personal virtue. Virtue ethics are critical to leadership as they help leaders respond well to compromising situations (Cervas & Grofman, 2019). Importantly, political decisions that are not grounded in the right sort of ethical virtue may not respond well and might be frightening. A president should not just act and hope that their action will lead to an acceptable outcome, such as the principle of consequentialism suggests. But he or she should work confidently and with absolute assurance that the utmost good will be attained.

Moreover, the consequentialism theory suggests that an action is only good when it brings more benefits than harm, while it is bad when it triggers more harm (Tobia, 2012). In like manner, United States presidents should not adhere to the theory of non-consequentialism as those who align by this theory define their actions based on the outcome. Virtue ethics go beyond politics and narrow down to the core principles of humanity. An individual who displays integrity, fairness, self-control, and compassion can make a good United States president.

References

Bowers, J., & Robinson, P. (2011). Perceptions of fairness and justice: the shared aims & occasional conflicts of legitimacy and moral credibility. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1814006

Cervas, J., & Grofman, B. (2019). Are presidential inversions inevitable? Comparing eight counterfactual rules for electing the U.S. President. Social Science Quarterly, 100(4), 1322-1342. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12634

Perkiss, S., & Moerman, L. (2020). Hurricane Katrina: exploring justice and fairness as a sociology of common good(s). Critical Perspectives On Accounting, 67-68, 102022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2017.11.002

Tobia, K. (2012). Rule consequentialism and the problem of partial acceptance. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 16(3), 643-652. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-012-9382-3