诺丁汉代写assignment:道德义务

2017-04-24 00:15

关于人的道德义务的问题在现代与以前任何时候都是一样的。第二十和第二十一世纪已经看到战争和野蛮继续以大致相同的方式和现代技术已经看到道德义务的问题，在其他国家作为一个更紧迫的问题。如果有意愿，其他国家的公民可以迅速安排援助。技术也意味着少数人的决定可能意味着成百上千甚至数百万人的死亡和恐惧，在回答这个问题时需要一些道德上的定义。JDB Miller写道：“道德正确的行为。这是我们认为我们应该表现的方式，甚至当我们不观察它（P36的道德要求在世界事务中，佩特曼1979），指出道德只有部分是观察社会，因此，如警察和法院机构的需要。道德是社会的产物，是习惯也得益于更有力的促使像爱一个简单的正义感的发展。道德的忠诚是首要的组特定的个人。这一事实阻碍了一个国家的公民的道德义务，一个超越的可能性，但它被接受为常态。佩特曼正确得出证明集团为世界事务的道德忠诚转移是几乎不可想象”的道德准则，这样的群体实践和维护服务的集团利益，道德冲突是不可避免的群体冲突。”（P19佩特曼1979）。群体道德优先于普遍道德的观念根深蒂固。从最初的家庭群体开始，一个群体的成员赋予生命意义，并提供最低水平的保护和道德。群体的本质是它与局外人的区别--这个群体有自己的道德，这比在它之外发现的任何道德都更为真实。在最基本的层面上，对群体的忠诚源于一种感觉：拥抱普世的道德和寻找他人的福祉几乎没有什么可获得的。Miller认为，总的原则是“小组第一，使得自己的道德，并且，如果别人受苦，那真是太糟糕了。”（P36佩特曼1979）。
诺丁汉代写assignment:道德义务
The question about moral duties to others is as relevant in modern times as in any before. The twentieth and twenty-first century have seen war and barbarism continue in much the same way as before and indeed modern technology has seen the question of moral duty to those in other states as a more pressing issue. Assistance to citizens in other states can be arranged quickly if there is the will to do so. Technology also means that the decisions of a relatively few people can mean death and horror for hundreds of thousands even millions of people elsewhere.Some definition of morals is required in answering this question. JDB Miller writes: “Morality is right conduct. It is the way we think we ought to behave, even when we do not observe it” (p36 Moral Claims in World Affairs, Pettman 1979) and points to the fact that morals are only partly observed in society, hence the need for bodies such as the police and the courts. Moral are largely social products, developed partly from habit but also motivated in part by more emphatic urges like love a simple sense of what is right.Moral allegiances are first and foremost to the group or groups to which a particular individual belongs. This fact hinders the possibility of citizens of one state having moral duties to those of one beyond, yet it is accepted as the norm. Pettman correctly concludes that transferring of the moral loyalty shown to the group into world affairs is barely conceivable “the moral codes that such groups practice and defend serve group interests, and moral conflicts are inevitably group conflicts as well.” (p19 Pettman 1979). The idea that group morality takes precedence over a universal morality is deeply ingrained. From the initial family group onwards, membership of a group gives meaning to life and offers minimum levels of both protection and morality. The essence of the groups is its difference from outsiders – the group has its own morality, which is truer than any morality found outside of it. At the most basic level, the loyalty to the group stems from a feeling that there is little to be gained from embracing a universal morality and looking out for the well-being of others. Miller suggests that the general rule is “that the group comes first, that it makes its own morality, and that, if others suffer, that is too bad.” (p36 Pettman 1979).

如果您想立即订购论文代写服务可点击至：英国论文代写