By Zakir Ullah Khan
Everyone is forced to make decisions on a regular basis, whether in their personal or professional lives. This is something that cannot be avoided. They will frequently provide a selection of other alternatives for the customer to select from. Because of this, they are forced to make the challenging choice of which alternative to pursue. The objective is to choose the best, yet the best has a subjective meaning that can be interpreted differently by different individuals, communities, and countries.
A fundamental example of an ethical riddle is a scenario in which one must determine, a certain choice, whether it is positive or negative, right or wrong, moral or immoral (ED). Those who are actively involved in the decision-making process are referred to as agents, those who are in need of a decision are referred to as principals, and the largest number of people who do not take part in decision-making but are influenced by them are referred to as the majority.
All of these groups have a perspective from which they arrive at their conclusions (the common good or the general interest). As a result of the fact that various manifestations of EDs require distinct methods for their treatment, expertise in both is quite beneficial. The complexity and importance of the ED, on the other hand, demand that the solution be arrived at through a series of steps rather than just a single action.
The study of what makes certain kinds of behaviour good and others bad, right and wrong, moral and immoral is referred to as ethics. The term “ethics” refers to the study of morality because “good” and “right” are essentially interchangeable terms for “morality.” Morality is judged in terms of the common good, individual interests, and the interest of others. When we say that the acts of an individual contribute to the common good, we are implying that such actions are in the best interest of society as a whole. When a person’s personal self-interest is taken from the equation, that person changes into an altruist, caring only for the well-being of people who are in their immediate environment. Because practising pure altruism is impossible, the only way to satisfy the moral requirement to be generally good is to behave in a way that is considerate of the requirements of other people. This is the only method to satisfy the obligation. It is impossible for anyone to live in complete isolation from the rest of the world since doing so would lead them to develop egotism, which is the most extreme kind of unethical behaviour. The acts of an individual or society are morally desirable if they help not only themselves but also the vast majority of those in their immediate environment (individuals and groups).
A person or thing is said to have “worth” if it is either significant to an individual or organization or if it contributes to the overall well-being of society (e.g. peace in the world, a decent life for all people, freedom – of movement, choice, expression, etc.). The response to the question “why?” can shed light on a person’s core beliefs. When an individual is content with the prior response and has no need for anything else, they have arrived at the essence of worth. When it comes to determining the value thresholds, however, the answers may be different depending on the place, and even within the same location, the answers may change over time. In the first case, we have geographical relativism, while in the second scenario, we have temporal relativism. Ethical relativism lays the groundwork for the formation of a moral conundrum by establishing the necessary conditions. The idea of a right is essential to the study of ethics because it outlines the freedom that individuals and societies have to pursue their own standards of right and wrong. The right must not only identify the values at a specific time and location, but it must also specify how those values can be obtained at that time and location.
Keeping in mind Rossouw and Van’s essential principles of ethics, the only way an ethical choice can be made is if egoism and altruism do not play a part in determining how to accomplish one’s values. Otherwise, there is no ethical choice that can be made. As a consequence of this, one could argue that the right to obtain desired values is bound by the rights of others or by the common good. This is because of the previous sentence. The fulfilment of responsibilities invariably places limitations on the enjoyment of rights. It is the moral responsibility of a person or group to seek out ethical means of bringing its values into the world.
The rights and obligations of individuals and groups are governed, both directly and indirectly, by moral standards. Moral standards do this by defining the nature of important goals and the ways by which those goals might be attained. Maintaining the integrity of one’s word is essential to human dignity.