代写范文

留学资讯

写作技巧

论文代写专题

服务承诺

资金托管
原创保证
实力保障
24小时客服
使命必达

51Due提供Essay,Paper,Report,Assignment等学科作业的代写与辅导,同时涵盖Personal Statement,转学申请等留学文书代写。

51Due将让你达成学业目标
51Due将让你达成学业目标
51Due将让你达成学业目标
51Due将让你达成学业目标

私人订制你的未来职场 世界名企,高端行业岗位等 在新的起点上实现更高水平的发展

积累工作经验
多元化文化交流
专业实操技能
建立人际资源圈

留学生作业代写:Moral and emotional doctrine

2017-08-31 来源: 51due教员组 类别: Essay范文

下面为大家整理一篇优秀的essay代写范文- Moral and emotional doctrine,供大家参考学习,这篇论文讨论了道德情感主义。道德生活是人们社会生活中最重要的部分,它指导着我们的其他生活。道德理论的根本任务之一是指导人们去做正确的事情,它给我们提供一套道德标准,从而去引导和调节我们的行为。

Moral,道德情感主义,essay代写,paper代写,美国作业代写

By discussing the normative concept of Coles, this article briefly expounds the three conditions that she has to meet in order to successfully answer the normative question about a moral theory or doctrine. Then on this basis, through Slaughter's "moral sensibility" a book, briefly introduced Slaughter's moral emotion doctrine, further elaborated several to the slaughter emotion doctrine refutation, including the singer refutation, the obligation theory refutation and the Hume type "The fact not equals the value" the retort, Finally, it concludes that Slaughter's theory of moral emotion answers the normative question well.

Moral life is the most important part of people's social life, it guides our other life. The theory of Moral life is moral theory, and it can also be called ethics. One of the fundamental tasks of moral theory is to guide people to do the right thing, it gives us a set of moral standards to guide and regulate our behavior. Since moral standards are not merely descriptive, it also asks us to "command us, force us, or suggest us, guide us". This underlines the normative characteristics of ethical standards. Colsgod believes that the normative concept of ethics such as Justice, virtue, and so on, is to tell us what to do, what to do, and ultimately what kind of person. These ethical concepts are for us to legislate, and they are authoritative for us, which is the power of normative requirements of ethical standards.

As far as moral theory is concerned, there are two kinds of opposing ethics, emotional ethics and rationalism ethics in history. In this article, the author will first discuss the emotional doctrine in the contemporary representative ―― Michael slaughter thought, and briefly discuss various of his moral and emotional refutation, and finally on this basis, to examine whether Slaughter's theory can answer the normative issues raised by Coles. Because of the author's opinion, a series of objections to rationalism are related to the concept of normative, so the concept of normalization will be introduced first.

On the ethics of the concept of the normative, more than enough of the discussion is the Coles, in her "normative source" a book has been elaborated. Although she did not give a clear definition of the concept of normative, she raised the conditions for a successful answer to normative questions. That is, "first of all, the answer must be in fact successfully aimed at the actors in this position ... The second condition is derived from the first one. Because it is our own that raises and answers these normative questions, a qualified normative theory must meet the conditions sometimes called ' transparency ' ... At last...... The answer to normative questions must be resorted to in some profound way ... Our sense of identity. ”

Here I think it is necessary to explain why Coles's position in the first person is the perpetrator, and what is the condition of "transparency". The author thinks that emphasizing the first person first is to exclude a theory from the subjective point of view, and secondly, it can exclude the possibility of the second person position, because we have to identify a sincere and reasonable behavior, and the first person can be satisfied, because we will be honest to ourselves. The so-called transparency means that both the completeness of the interpretation and the completeness of the defence should be satisfied. That said, the answer to normative questions is not only to explain moral behavior, but also to give legitimate reasons to deal with the question of why I have to do so. Can Slaughter's theory of moral emotion answer this question? Can his answer be successful? will be discussed below. First of all, introduce slaughter's moral and emotional doctrine.

In Slaughter's theory of ethics, the most important concept is empathy, or a common feeling, he thought that as the concept of cause and effect is the glue of nature, "empathy" is the glue of people's moral universe, he attempted to explain all moral phenomena through empathy and empathy mechanism. The mechanism for how empathy works in moral attitudes ―― moral approval and disapproval, as well as the role of empathy in the formation of moral judgments, will be described below.

Slaughter that empathy is different from compassion, that compassion is the feeling of a bystander in a person in distress, such as compassion, sadness, and hope that this person is well, and empathy is a feeling of empathy, that when someone is sad, another feels the pain and sadness, The sufferings of others infect another person like a disease, and the happiness of others can infect another. Of course, we can see that even compassion must go through the process of empathy, because without feeling the pain of others, there is obviously no compassion for others. But empathy does not necessarily bring compassion, such as the warring parties on the battlefield, where one of the soldiers sees a soldier shot in the chest, and his heart may also have a painful feeling, but he may not be able to pity or hope that he is good, but is applaud. In a word, compassion presupposes empathy, and empathy does not necessarily lead to compassion.

Empathy is an involuntary state, it cannot be canceled, it is a relatively stable thing. Slaughter that involuntary empathy is the basis for other empathy, such as empathy for imagination or virtual state, empathy is an irrational emotional response, and therefore belongs to human emotional ability. Although empathy is a kind of emotional ability that we are born with, he still needs the nurture of the nurture to reach the stage of maturation.

And in Slaughter's view, the transference is subject to the constraints of time, space and causality, showing a degree of difference. He believes that through psychological research, we have a stronger empathy response to the pain we see than just hearing about other people's suffering, our response to the pain of the present is more intense than the pain of the distant future, and our response to the immediate damage and pain is more intense than just seeing the pain on television. Because of the different intensity of empathy, it also causes our intuitive moral obligation and moral evaluation of different, such as our obligations to relatives far more than the obligations of strangers, a not to save their loved ones than a person who does not save the behavior of strangers to be more condemned and so on. Therefore, Slaughter thinks he is better at explaining the moral intuition of common sense, and he is satisfied with it. When it comes to moral evaluation, he does not ask for a neutral and impartial bystander.

So how does a moral obligation relate to empathy? Slaughter is explained by the empathic altruism hypothesis. The stronger the empathy, the greater the desire and willingness to care for others and to help others, and the stronger the moral obligation to produce. Faced with a variety of moral obligations, we only need to look at the greater the intensity of which empathy means that the more important is the moral obligation.

So how does empathy lead to moral evaluation? Slaughter believes that this is formed by the following mechanisms. He first elaborated the moral attitude, then explained the formation mechanism of moral judgment. In his view, moral assent and disapproval are not synonymous with moral judgments, but this moral attitude is the basis of moral judgment. When we have a moral attitude about whether the actors are empathetic and caring, if we observe that the perpetrator expresses empathy to the recipient of the behavior, the reviewers will have a warm glow in the inner heart; Conversely, if the perpetrator lacks empathy for the recipient, we will have a chilling effect in our hearts. However, the reviewers ' empathy is not a direct transference to the recipient of the behavior, but a transference of the state of empathy, that is, a second-order transference, which includes the feelings, desires, and emotional tendencies of the actors. If the reviewers are feeling warm in their hearts, that is, a certain emotion, this not only shows that the evaluators are positive about the behavior and character of the actor, but it also makes the evaluation subject more inclined to do such behavior in the face of similar situations, thus making a positive moral judgment on the behavior and character of the subject. Similarly, the evaluation subject will be cruel and ruthless behavior of the behavior of the acts of a chilling, so this negative emotion will encourage the evaluation subject to make a negative moral judgment. A certain moral judgment can lead to affirmative action, such as "benevolence is morally good and should be done", whereas negative moral judgments can lead to inhibition of the behavior, such as "Cruel behavior is wrong". such as "Cruel behavior is wrong". Therefore, Slaughter also explains how empathy plays a role in moral attitudes ―― moral approval and disapproval, as well as the role of empathy in the formation of moral judgments.

Slaughter believes that it is precisely because the empathy response is affected by various factors such as time, space and cause and effect, so we will evaluate it according to these factors in the form of moral judgment and moral evaluation. According to Slaughter, if your family and a stranger are drowning in need of help, we have more obligation to our loved ones than to another stranger. But Singer believes that we are all in need of help, the duty of a person in poverty is the same, and he does not think that helping a beggar you just met is more respectable and commendable than the act of donating money to a refugee through thrift, and he considers the moral values of the two acts to be the same, Because we are completely equal to their obligations. So singer thinks that the extravagant behavior of the rich is immoral even when we usually buy clothes. So he argues that slaughter's empathy preference should require a better defense.

I think slaughter will respond this way, first, all I have to do is explain our common moral intuition, which can be defended by the interpretation of ordinary moral intuitions, but singer is against our common moral intuition, which he argues is that our common moral intuition needs to be defended by better reasons. Second, singer's moral requirements are too strict and harsh, we cannot have such a high moral intuition, we always think that our obligations to our loved ones far outweigh the strangers or refugees we meet on a road. But the author thinks that the judge of moral judgment should be a neutral bystander, as Hume said, and should have a sober and firm judgment. Hume believes that even in the face of the music of the enemy, "a person with a fine sense of hearing and self-control can distinguish between different emotions, will praise the commendable", "a calm and the person who has the opinion may make himself from various illusions to maintain their own judgment" and so on.

Slaughter believes that his moral sensibility can explain the viewpoint of obligation theory well, he believes that the empathic response that we see directly from a miserable, painful act is more intense than the empathic response to merely sitting and watching a painful act, which is enough to explain the difference between taking the initiative to do something and making some kind of injury, e.g. take the initiative to kill someone to get someone to die. The theory of obligation says no lies, no killing. This is a negative obligation of people, at any time can not be done, so their own initiative to kill someone is a complete violation of their obligations, is not to do, it is obvious that they can see the initiative to kill and see a person died of the difference. But it is hard to see how the theory of empathy can explain the problem.

Slaughter's response may be that, as we grew up in the process of empathy, our parents would use a variety of role-playing examples to induce children to empathize and empathize with others. and Slaughter believes that our empathy response to others is far greater than the intensity of empathy for ourselves, which is enough to cause children to think that they are totally incapable of hurting others.

Slaughter's moral sensibility only describes a series of moral facts, but it cannot be inferred from what we should do. This is Hume's question, Hume believes that the interpretation of a moral theory of how complete can not be introduced from the facts should. Explain and describe a series of moral facts and moral phenomena, and we can't just say that we should do it, deduce the value from the facts this is a false inference, because such a theory only satisfies the completeness of an explanation, but does not give a further explanation of the completeness of the defense, after all, we can also ask "the fact is this, Is that what I should do? "That's what it is, that's what it is." These issues involve normative issues. The following is an examination of whether Slaughter's moral sensibility answers normative questions.

We have seen that good and proper action in Slaughter's theory comes from the motives of duty. When we want to do injustice, compassion for others arouses our inner chill, thus arousing our dislike of it, and trying to induce us to circumvent it, which is, of course, the result of a mature empathic ability. Slaughter believes that a righteous social system is just like a righteous act, and if an act reflects the motives and qualities of empathy, it is justice. When a person makes a righteous act, he is praised by the society, and it further stimulates his empathic response to do justice. So empathic moral sensibility is enough to make a person do justice. Therefore, the author thinks that the theory's answer to the normative question is quite satisfying.

51due留学教育原创版权郑重声明:原创essay代写范文源自编辑创作,未经官方许可,网站谢绝转载。对于侵权行为,未经同意的情况下,51Due有权追究法律责任。主要业务有essay代写、assignment代写、paper代写服务。

51due为留学生提供最好的essay代写服务,亲们可以进入主页了解和获取更多essay代写范文 提供美国作业代写服务,详情可以咨询我们的客服QQ:800020041。-ZR

上一篇:美国作业代写:The management function 下一篇:留学生作业代写:Money Market Fund