Category: Moral

It could be argued that the relationship between law and moral values is a very debatable and hot topic. This is because moral rules and legal rights have numerous similarities but are surely not the same.

Firstly, I can tell you that the difference between the law and moral values is that laws are a set of fixed rules that are created by the authority which people must abide by, otherwise a punishment would be given. While Moral values, on the other hand, are the beliefs, values and principles that are agreed to by society or a section of society, which defines what is right and what is wrong. These rules are therefore informally implemented through social or domestic pressure and can be very easy and flexible to change or remove over time, to reflect the change in views and opinions. Whereas the Laws are what is known as codes of conduct which society has chosen should be compulsory such as not murdering people and not stealing peoples private properties which are fixed and cannot be easily changed.

Through the similarities between laws and moral values, we can observe that some laws mirror a large number of society’s moral views, such as that theft, murder and rape are immoral, whereas the introduction of other laws such as the legalisation of same-sex marriages has given more people freedom to be with their same-sex partner without being discriminated against. However, this is regarded by some people as morally wrong which therefore divides society as not everyone supports or agrees with the laws due to their personal beliefs and opinions.

The study of euthanasia has also raised many questions and debates about whether it should become legalised due to the different opinions about whether it is right or wrong to terminate human life to remove pain and suffering. In addition to this, the topic of stop and search is one that raises many concerns, as it allows the state the right to stop and search whoever they wanted, some people would say that this is a good method of protection, however this has made groups such as blacks and Asians feel targeted as they feel that they are the only people being searched, which further divides society. Should this, therefore, be stopped?

The problem we can see here is that it is very challenging for parliament to enforce laws that mirror the morals and beliefs of each individual in society, especially not in modern society where people have contrasting morals based on their income, social status, ethnicity and religion which is referred to as a pluralist society. This can be seen in 2001, Re A (conjoined twins) case whereby both of the parents were against the separation of their conjoined twins for religious purposes, which will however result in the death of both twins, the court of appeal went against the decision of the parents and stated that it is better to save one of the twins and therefore they had to be separated. This case, therefore, shows that not everyone in society can get what they want as the end decision is always given to the courts.

Finally, we can conclude that although the law tries to uphold moral values in numerous cases, however morals, views and opinions are continuously changing with each generation, therefore it becomes difficult to create laws that please everyone in society.

There are many criminals that roll the world for the advantage of themselves. There are many hedonists that believe that everything finished the simplest pleasure is ultimately the aim of life. However, i might wish to produce the case today for morality over immortality. although morality could also be a rather subjective subject, there are some principles that are universal across all cultures found “help your family, facilitate your cluster, come favours, be brave, defer to superiors, divide resources fairly, and respect others’ property”. the particular undeniable fact that these morals are found across sixty cultures from around the world demonstrates that morality, tho’ subjective, is that the cornerstone of keeping our societies on. Here are some reasons to be moral: whereas not morality, a social life is almost unattainable to maintain; having a good name and having a clear conscience is psychologically healthy; and most philosophies regard altruistic and principled behavior as necessary.

There is very little question that whereas not morals, a society cannot perform effectively. Chaos would reign. we tend to are social animals, and thus the actions we tend to tend to require — the things we do and therefore the things we don’t do — have consequences on our environments and on the others around USA. As a result, we’d wish to be able to govern our behavior within the on the brink of term thus on not injure ourselves or our community within the future. this method of dominant our actions and our thoughts therefore on management throughout a community is what we often see as morality. Therefore, we’d sort of a cluster of morals therefore on management among a social circle and a social surroundings. Acting immoral typically results in being excluded from social activities or being shunned by a society supported laws and cultural norms.

Besides acting moral having a scientific discipline would really like, it put together encompasses a psychological basis. the overall public are concerned to some extent regarding their name. So, the priority of one’s name being broken is sometimes a strong need to be moral. And if someone has been immoral, the overall public exit of their because of certify no one finds out, or to correct the behavior therefore on not be caught. This goes in line with conscience furthermore. people generally feel throughout a better condition if they feel that their conscience is clean. a unclean conscience might result throughout a scarcity of sleep, anxiety, internal stress, and even unhealthiness.

On the aspect of philosophy, the study of ethics comes into play. Most philosophers agree that one got to rationally choose a bunch of standards of behavior therefore on perform. tho’ there’s moral philosophical doctrine, there are universal scientific discipline morals, as mentioned among the introduction. By the character of our societies and cultures, we tend to elect what we tend to believe is correct and wrong. but surprising, this rational behavior involves a general accord on morals. So, there’s a fine line between moral philosophical doctrine and ethical absolutism. Morality is neither totally relative, and neither absolute. but the foremost issue to need faraway from this discussion is that philosophers generally believe that each individual has the right to rationally come up with a bunch of ethics to live by, that it’s healthy to do and do thus.

Being moral benefits USA in some ways that. Socially, it permits USA to suit into groups higher and to be in concord with others. Psychologically, acting moral keeps our name solid and maintains a clear conscience. Lastly, being moral is advocated by philosophy, that tells individuals to hunt to carve one’s own sense of ethics to manage throughout this world and to grasp oneself. Besides, it merely feels higher to be moral, overall.

Imagine having all freedoms in a person’s life quarantined, people not allowed to have any free thoughts or actions, in the novel, Anthem, by Ayn Rand a collectivist society is portrayed in which people have no individuality in order for society to live in fair community. Personal names have been removed, and life is extremely regulated to make sure that no one thinks they are different or superior. . However, the main character, Equality 7-2521, always feels different and struggles to fit in with the rest of society. He breaks laws trying to learn things that he thinks will help his community. Eventually, his transgressions are discovered by the leaders, and he is cast out from his community. Finally he finds peace in himself without having to please others. Equality’s conflict with his community is shown with his repeated transgressions of preference, Ayn Rand uses his transgressions to show how people should not let others control their moral compass, thoughts, or actions.

The main character, Equality has many transgressions, he breaks laws many times but the transgression he is most guilty of is the great transgression of preference. Equality is looking back at his school years and he remembers what they said to him, “‘Dare not choose in your minds the work you would like to do’” , now sitting in his hole he confesses his great transgression, “We were guilty of the great transgression of preference. We preferred some work and some lessons to others. We did not listen well to the history of all the councils… but we loved the science of things.” (Rand 22-23). During school, Equality breaks another law by preferring to learn about science over history. He had no interest in the history of his society but he was very curious about the science of things. Ayn Rand includes this passage to show how Equality is different from the other people in his society and how he broke a law at a young age. Equality is in conflict with himself because he loves to learn about science but he does not want to seem different from his brothers. He tries to act like his brothers, but he cannot help but be more curious about science over other subjects. Equality feels guilty because he does not want people to notice him as different. In the world people try to fit in with the most popular people or do the things that seem cool when in actuality they like other things or activities but are just doing what society makes them think is in style. Equality loves science but he does not want to stand out amongst his brothers. He is in conflict with his moral compass because he does not want to be different from his brothers but he cannot help his love for science.

Throughout the novel, collectivism is shown in society but Equality often times breaks free from what society wants him to do. International 4-8818 and Equality are friends but “ This is an evil thing to say, for it is a transgression, the great Transgression of Preference, to love any among men better than the others” because, “we must love all men and all men are our friends” (Rand 33). In this society men cannot like anyone more than others, for this is a transgression of preference. This society focuses on collectivism and not individuality that people cannot be themselves, have their own thoughts, or personality. Equality does not think much of this transgression because he thinks it is okay to be friends with someone as long as neither speaks of it. He is slowly becoming more free in his thoughts. Ayn Rand wanted readers to understand that people are not meant to be put in a collectivist society because everybody will eventually have their own thoughts and ideas.

Equality struggles with his moral compass frequently, as he tries to not stray far from what society wants him to do but he cannot help but have his own feelings. The women who have been assigned to work the soil, work next to where Equality sweeps the streets. Equality has been “[thinking] of one among women, they whose name is Liberty 5-3000, and [he] thinks of no others” (Rand 47). Equality is guilty of the transgression of preference once again because he has been putting Liberty above other women in the society. He is viewing Liberty with more eagerness than he should be. Men cannot think of women in this society and Equality is doing exactly that. Equality knows that he should not be thinking about Liberty but he cannot control himself from his own thoughts. He cannot stop his desire to want to talk to Liberty. At this point he does not care if he is transgressing because he has come to control his moral compass. In the modern world, there are times when people say one should not have a relationship with another person but sometimes people cannot help themselves from wanting it. Ayn Rand is trying to have readers understand that you should not let other people control who you can or cannot have a relationship with.

Equality could not be one with his society because he has his own thoughts and ideas for his community. Equality took control of his moral compass and made decisions on his own. Equality breaks the shackles that are holding him down to this society and would not allow him to learn and better himself. He realizes that what he is doing is for himself and not for the society that holds him back. He breaks free from his collectivist society and is able to be his own person.

​Ghandi once said ‘morality is the basis of all things and truth is the substance of all morality’ (‘Mahatma Gandhi Quotes’ 2019). Among the beliefs of man is the inclination toward certain fixed, unalterable moral truths. These absolute moral truths, as they are known, are meant to dictate the actions of people. These truths have been posited by way of natural law, divine command, or (less likely) contractarianism. Natural law would dictate that there are basic unconditional moral principles that exist for human conduct. Divine command would suggest that these principles are God given commandments. Contractarianism suggests a social contract is responsible for these truths (through active government or political authority). Regardless, knowing these moral truths should cause a person to act in accordance with concepts such as do no steal, do not lieand do not kill. These are immutable facts which have no leniency regardless of circumstance. The human condition, however, does not appear to follow these facts. While it is within human nature to understand these concepts, fallibility often precludes them. Even knowing what is right, humans tend to act towards their own ends. Simply put, people are inclined to understand these truths to an extent though they do not always act in such a manner or follow them. Often, humans act out of self interest leading to the degradation of these principles. One doesn’t have to look far to see the violation of these principles. Officials put in powerful positions in public office often get there through deceit. This has been common practice throughout history in political and religious realms. Even when evidence isprovided to divulge such indiscretions, it is often discounted.Yet, these are the people in which we place our trust and set the standards for human interaction. ​

​Sometimes, the human condition denies these truths in manners of law as well. Though we know through these standards it is not right to kill, laws are created for lethal injection and abortion. Stealing is considered illegal, yet certain standards in the legal system are placed upon this concept providing leeway. Even lying (defamation and slander) has certain circumstances where it can be deemed legal or illegal.These truths may be absolute, but the laws made regarding these standards are often flexible.

​Where absolute moral truths are concerned, humans cannot perfectly fulfill the stringent conditions set within them. This is because they are imperfectly fallible. People err in judgment and action. However, these truths can and are guidelines that provide people with a direction which they should be following. They are a way to strive for ultimate happiness even if it cannot ever be attained. Thomas Aquinas suggested that with intellectual and moral values we could achieve happiness. However, Aquinas believed that this would never be fully possible or actualized in this life (‘Thomas Aquinas: Moral Philosophy’). He may be right in his proposal. Plato provides a similar description to Aquinas with an allegory. In this Plato details a life where man is shackled in a cave where a fire is burning casting shadows from statues on the wall. What the men believe they are seeing is reality but when let of the cave they understand that these statues were pale imitations of the reality. Looking at the sun they begin to understand this and can see real truth. According to Plato, man must now go back to the cave to help spread this truth and good to other citizens (‘Plato’s Allegory’). In this allegory Plato suggests that the human condition is forever bound by our own senses and we probably will never break free from it. There is truth ,but it is unlikely that a person can ever come out of the sun and fully escape their conditions to arrive at these truths.

​​Moral Relativists go as far as to suggest that there are no absolute moral truths and that they are subjective based upon a person’s standpoint. Such people would state that morals may be subjective and based upon cultural differences, preference, or differing views. Just as Greek philosopher Protagoras proclaimed that everything is relative to individual experience and judgment, relativists base the understanding of beliefs upon the individual person instead of set universal standards.Existentialists like Soren Kierkegaard also suggest that each individual is solely responsible for giving meaning to life and living it sincerely. To the existentialist there are no set standards which encompass the whole for people to follow. Philosopher Paul Feyerabend stated that ‘The only absolute truth is that there are no absolute truths’ (‘Top 25 Quotes’). This, however, fails to understand basic precepts which all humans understand to be true. If there were no absolute standards which humans were to live by, then people would act upon the ideas to steal, lie and kill on any such given occasion that they choose. Laws which violate these truths would not be created and enforced to seek judgment. These truths are transcendent. These standards are ingrained in human nature. This can be evidenced throughsimilar laws and customs found across a vast majority of cultures which seek to make people adhere to the values of these truths. People understand these to be truths even if they do not always act in accordance with them.

​Some justification can be found in not following fixed moral truths. Even St. Augustine admitted that under some circumstances there must be some latitude. Augustine understood the theory of just war in which it was necessary to kill others in defense of innocents. He also alluded to times under severe circumstance where lying may be necessary, such as if a person was hiding another from persecution (Heyking, 2018). A fairly recent example of this being the hiding of Jewish people during the Holocaust. Similarly, there are times when stealing may be necessary in an act of desperation. For instance, if a person is starving and destitute they may steal food. Moral truth would suggest that stealing even for good reason is wrong and the laws which surround this argument may agree. However, in an imperfect world it is hardly unimaginable and unjustifiably immoral.

​There is little doubt that absolute truths exist regardless of certain schools of thought. However, people will never be able to fully adhere to the standards provided by absolute moral truths. Humans are pliable and inconsistent in their actions. Such is the human condition. There is virtue in striving to attain these truths. There is substance in laws created to adhere to these standards. Given certain circumstances there is good in the inconsistency of humans when it comes to these absolute truths. These Moral standards should guide the basic moral compass of humanity. However, adherence to these absolutes is not logically suited for human nature. Much like Plato and Thomas Aquinas suggested, absolute moral truths will fully never be actualized.

Man himself is one who seeks survival, approval, and a sense of belonging. The man will go to great lengths to ensure his role in society. We as men have our rooted primal instinct of survival, which plays an immeasurable role in the actions we take to fill our roles in society. We set a goal and we strive to achieve it, and the achievement or failure of that goal is the essence of our lives. Yet, we fail to ever ultimately succeed at our goal, as man himself is never satisfied. Since we are never satisfied with our ultimate goal, we must turn to the face of morality and the effect we have on the world and those around us. Plato wrote “Man is declared to be that creature who is constantly in search of himself, a creature who at every moment of his existence must examine and scrutinize the conditions of his existence. He is a being in search of meaning”. The savage man is one who unaccompanied by any external forces, can recognize his enemies and distinguish what he can and can not defeat. Although, as Rousseau said “The body of a savage man being the only instrument he understands” (Rousseau, 11). Since a man who understands nothing other than his physical presence, the current state of his being, and disregards subsequent events in relations to his actions, the savage man is not moral.

To first view what makes the savage man immoral we must look at that separates man from and animal driven by instinct. Men are the only being that has freedom of decision on their side. Since man has the ability to be free and make decisions, he also has the ability to fail. Failure is derived from the goal of perfection, which ultimately man can not achieve, therefor leading to the daily pressures man faces. An animal unlike man desires nothing, the animals drive is driven by instinct, and nothing else. Man is filled with desire, and is driven by goals and the promise of nothing, which is perfection. An animal requires no life supplements, as life is a prescribed set of events, and they will live that life with the goal of survival. Man on the other hand requires more than a prescribed life, such as the prolonging of life in the pursuit of their goal. The savage man would act as the animal, and not expect or require anything more from life in the face of death, as death to a man with no morals has no meaning other than for their existence to cease. A moral man, when nearing death will behave in what we as a society consider a “moral” way to handle death. He will think of family, how his passing will affect others, and reflect on the life he lived. While the savage man will consider nothing but the nearing death and hold no morality. Rousseau explains this when he states “If the savage, when he is sick and left to himself, has nothing to hope but from nature, he has, on the other hand, nothing to fear but from his disease; which renders his situation often preferable to our own” (Rousseau, 12). Where morality falters is the sense of fear that it creates within the mind.

It would be necessary to next evaluate the desires of societal men as opposed to those of savage men in a natural state. This area is where we can view some of the benefits of the savage mans simplistic reality and lack of desires. While we can observe the lack of societal issues with the savage man, we must understand how the operations of men differ. A savage man does not think rationally or in regards of what may happen, as in a natural world the implications of his actions would not be prevalent in his mind. A savage man lives in the instinctive moment acting on what is necessary to be done at that exact moment. A savage man does not need anything but requires three essential things which are sleep, sexual reproduction, and food. With no desires the man has no inclination to benefit or harm others and has no moral standpoint. A man encumbered by society is filled with needs and desires that require collaboration with other men in order to fill his desires. Modern men need friendship, wealth, happiness, and the feeling of being wanted. “The passions, again, originate in our wants, and their progress depends on that of our knowledge; for we cannot desire or fear anything, except from the idea we have of it, or from the simple impulse of nature” (Rousseau,14). The social interpretation of what we need in this modern age is what fuels our worst desires as explained by Rousseau. In modern society the overwhelming amount of additives a man requires in the search of perfection, has created the morality of modern men.

Appearance is what has created the morality of modern man as opposed to the savage man. When man desires friendship and so many other things, he is forced to look at himself. In a society where appearance is such a prevalent factor, we have developed the mask of man. With the need of having an appearance that is adequate to society, we must consider what is actually right and wrong. We must look at our primal instinct of what we want to reactively do, and think of the implications of it on our appearance. This furthers the question to modern man of what we are actually required to do versus what is socially required for us to do. With the idea of morality and appearance we have become superficial, often putting on the mask of man, hiding what lies beneath, and adhering to the confinements of moral law. Rousseau explains “The moderns, understanding, by the term law, merely a rule prescribed to a moral being, that is to say intelligent, free and considered in his relations to other beings, consequently confine the jurisdiction of natural law to man” (Rousseau,7). Where the modern man may feel free he is actually a slave to the standards of society, as opposed to the savage man who is free of standards. We as men seek the approval of our morals by society, often performing questionable actions to gain this approval. Rousseau explains this when he states “The difference between good and bad men is determined by public esteem; the magistrate being strictly a judge of right alone; whereas the public is the truest judge of morals, and is of such integrity and penetration on this head, that although it may be sometimes deceived, it can never be corrupted” (Rousseau, 42). The savage man desired nothing among others, no friendship, or a need of being wanted. Therefor his appearance to those surrounding him did not matter as they did not affect what he required. Where the savage man failed to consider societal approval, he also could be considered genuine in the fact that he did not shelter what he actually was with the mask of modern man. So what a savage man did actually held no moral standards to others, and he held no other man to the same moral standard. What one did in the eyes of the savage man was required, meaning that he should not be questioned or be forced to look at his actions. There is no good, bad, or evil to the savage man; there is only what was necessary.

Rousseau believes that the creation and notion of private property is what led to deception and the artificial face of man. The first savage man held no moral standard for what we now consider family and they had baseless intercourse practically at random when the time arose. Savage man did not confine himself to one location or set of people with a home or family. He would often move from place to place and interact with new people constantly. Man eventually built shelter to protect themselves, therefor creating a place where others could confine themselves and leading to families. Rousseau states “This was the epoch of a first revolution, which established and distinguished families, and introduced a kind of property, in itself the source of a thousand quarrels and conflicts” (Rousseau, 25). With families and homes came the idea of what is one mans and not another mans. This led to the idea of property and the ownership that modern man dictates over others. The morality of one when being compared to ones neighbor was formed. Savage man were not dictated by the thoughts of those surrounding them, as a person they see on one occasion they will likely not see again. The savage man also held no relationships or ties to property or other beings. With no attachment or mental tie to something as with the modern man, the savage men fail to consider morality from the perspective of others.

Consideration is what has become the main consideration in the mind of modern moral man. Savage men eventually began to gather in social settings; which is what led to the development of leisure, needs, consideration, and inequality. Rousseau speaks of how singing and dancing in groups became prevalent and began to take interest in the leisure of spending time with others. He speaks of the beginning of consideration when he says “Each one began to consider the rest, and to wish to be considered in turn; and thus a value came to be attached to public esteem” (Rousseau, 26). The value of connectivity and morality between man started to become observable between them. Where as savage men never functioned by cooperation or with the need for others, modern man had developed a society that required others. Rousseau recognizes the value that men placed among one another and stated “As soon as men began to value one another, and the idea of consideration had got a footing in the mind, every one put in his claim to it, and it became impossible to refuse it to any with impunity. Hence arose the first obligations of civility even among savages; and every intended injury became an affront” (Rousseau, 26). With such close relations to one another man began to look at himself in comparison to others, which was the beginning of contempt, revenge, and inequality. Man began to look at what he had compared to others, and with the differences of abilities in society now comparable among men, led to certain men being considered over others. What men considered of others led to contempt and inequality and created the distance between natural men and modern men. Rousseau states “Thus, as every man punished the contempt shown him by others, in proportion to his opinion of himself, revenge became terrible, and men bloody and cruel” (Rousseau, 26). Consideration where it holds moral value led to what could be considered our most savage state, where modern men seek revenge for the considerations of others.

As modern society developed, the single mindedness that the naturalistic savage men derived from started to disappear. The savage men were content men with independent thoughts and actions. They led lives based purely of what was necessary to survive. They held no thought of it being advantageous to work along side of other men. They were immoral men with thoughts and actions that they only took in regards of themselves. As soon as man started to develop relationships, considerations, and the need for others they required moral standards. Without morality between interconnected men there would be purely haste and controversy between them. The formation of morality in our modern society has also led to the deterioration of the peace savage men found in their most natural state of no need. Modern society has hence created a man enslaved by his needs constantly being provoked by his morality. We can not return to our original state of nature but must instead understand its essence to maintain civility among men. “But from the moment one man began to stand in need of the help of another; from the moment it appeared advantageous to any one man to have enough provisions for two, equality disappeared, property was introduced, work became indispensable, and vast forests became smiling fields, which man had to water with the sweat of his brow, and where slavery and misery were soon seen to germinate and grow up with the crops” (Rousseau, 27).

Introduction

Confucianism is a term that emanates from the Chinese culture that nurtured towards maintaining certain aspects of traditions. Confucianism presents a philosophy that creates its bases on kindness and mutual respect towards other people. The development of the philosophy aimed to create society’s stability and peace where people could coexist with good actions towards each other’s that included right and desirable morals.

Those who reasoned in different aspects that contributed to the Confucian theory became well known as Confucian. The origin of the theory emanated from one man by the name Confucius who played a crucial role in the creation and spread of the theory. In this case, Confucius founded theory based on the reflection of the traditions. More importantly, he made a great reflection on the Han dynasty. With the focus and operations of the Confucius took a different path of reasoning that differed from the arguments and concepts of other leaders and founders of religious traditions in China.

Confucian moral theory and practice

Yao considers the Confucian moral theory and practices through ethical system lenses. The central morality position creates the importance of ethics in society. The dimensions of ethics could be addressed about Confucian thinking. In a more in-depth analysis of the Confucianism, the moral systems are well demonstrated through it. The theory finds the confusion morality having its basis on the family connections in regards to relations between the elder and younger members (Yao & Yao, 2000). In this case, an example of the parent to child or husband to wife relationship represents good examples.

The moral theory revolves in the aspects of the Confucianism that includes many features and characterizations that could come along. For instance, the virtues of humaneness and self-cultivation enrich the realities of the moral theory that has a high expectation of ethical practices (Yao & Yao, 2000). Generally, Confucian ethics are connected with religion and politics that characterizes it. With its ability to create and advocate of better and moral human beings, it is right to equate Confucianism with the definition of a moral system.

In Mencius’ thinking, it is possible to question the costs of doing well. Typically, action taken by a human depends on the decision they make. Thus, most of what happens to a person are in their control. The reflection motivated Mencius’ declaration as naturally right on the rulers where they did to govern the people without the use of implicit knowledge and consent (Kim, 2015). Mencius argues, in the real and expected manner of being human, a person would have to owe a mid that is does bear the pains of the others.

Five constant virtues

The concept of Confucius is based on five constant virtues of the humans that include humaneness, righteousness, propriety, wisdom, and faithfulness. Each of the virtue must be present in a person’s acts for them to have a perfect treatment of others and live in the expectation of Confucianism. Even though the Confucianism theories emanated from many years from the past, a truth that they are constant and unchanged, even modern reasoning that reflects their meanings.

Humanness is observed through the relations of the person top the others. In this case, it’s viewed from any level of the society that includes the family, society and the nation at large (Yao & Yao, 2000). Generally, the concept is believed to come with the compassion and love that happens to all persons we live among. With human nature, one is expected to treat others with a reasonable degree of how they would also like to be treated.

Righteousness considers how people think and act about their point of view. This allows the ability of persons to remain ok in acting in the right ways rather than in ways is that it would not make the peasant to others. Generally, Confucian thoughts are geared towards resistance to temptations that may come along and interfere with one’s righteousness values. Again, attending to one’s duty is motivated by the aspects of righteousness. In this case, having a good righteousness value will, promote the integrity values of a person as well as enable them to remain on the right path. Yao considers righteousness as a fundamental aspect of Confucian thinking (Yao & Yao, 2000).

According to Mencius thinking, humanness and Righteousness are two aspects that serve as core objects of confusion thinking. In this case, humaneness presents the human heart and its desire in the case of acting good to others. Then, righteousness is regarded as a path one takes to have a high level of humaneness nature. Ideally, Mencius considers the heart as the root of humaneness and thus, one would not allow others to endure suffering under his or her watch. The view of the two virtues is connected with human nature understanding. This can be elaborated and extended to the governance where Yao considers those in power; taking the two aspects would act in a better way to their subjects. In this case, the interest of others becomes their concerns (Yao & Yao, 2000). To Mencius, humanness is equated to humanity, and it is the expectation that all people act in that way leading to peace among all people.

With Xunzi thinking, humans are born evil and can only be changed to be suitable depending on various issues (Baek, 2017). In this case, Xunzi offers a contrast to the arguments Mencius that considers humans as naturally good even though they do deviate from it. For Mencius, a backslide comes as a result of the person’s change of behaviours from the original good nature.

Wisdom is considered as an innate knowledge that equips people to make the right judgment. In this case, making judgments would either presume aspects such as right or wrong. This would also include the consideration of actions as either good or evil. Yao considers that, for persons to have the right virtues, they need to have the wisdom that will serve to control them. Interestingly, one would not have the ability to hold onto the rest of the virtues if they are not wise. In this case, they would lack ethics and human virtues.

The show of fidelity and honesty depicts faithfulness. According to Xunzi views, the self-cultivation as a guide towards the change of behaviour from the evil nature to a better state (Baek, 2017). The process considered to follow a way that equips them with the ability to overcome selfish desires. Yao claims that remaining faithful allows the persons to develop good order in all aspects of their behaviours.

Propriety is considered a significant part of the Confucian in that it includes aspects such as loyalty, respect, chastity, and filial piety. In this case, the humans’ behavioural norms are considered, and it does not matter whether they reflect on the ancient or current times. Yao considers that the values presented through propriety are considerably crucial in any setup. This includes respect that is a must. Yao claims that some of the society’s behaviours seem to include abuse of propriety values. This creates the need for society to create rules that enforce the propriety.

Yao explains that the ancient rulers had actual practice the virtues including wisdom, faithfulness, and propriety. In this case, rulers are exported to live and carry on with the five virtues that make them serve the people in a better way.

Concept of Ren

The concept of ren is based on the show of the good experiences and feelings that are focused on human experiences. Ren Confucian virtue is understood through inward expressions. It generally relies on the connection between one people to another. It is generally a concept that innate naturally where all are born with its senses (Yao & Yao, 2000). Therefore, it is not learned but naturally exists within a person. With the reflection of the world and the confusion concepts, there is a high correlation between Ren to grow with the changing aspects of the world at a fast rate. Changes to the world take a rapid pace.

In reflection on the concept of Ren, there is an intense depiction of absolute values of the Confucian thinking; Ren could easily be translated to the attributes of benevolence, perfect virtue, goodness, and the human heartedness. Generally, Ren attributes are accorded to those with sound reasoning and nature that is unique to all. In this case, the perfect beings would be considered in the lines of how the persons are (Yao & Yao, 2000). Humans being cooperating in perfection, manners are not a simple achievement as they tend to have a mix of ethical values. However, following the reasoning of Mencius, it is possible that ren can be a fact possible to humans’ nature. Mencius argues that human nature is generally good and only comes to deviate from their changing characters. In this form, of reasoning, the people have a different form of understanding that makes them change through their selfish means. Ren could be translated as a form of perfect human being that behaves in an ideal way.

In reflection to the leaders and society. Acting with hearted human nature would allow them to have a good sense of human behaviour. With the positive views of the confusion theories, humans are fundamentally good and perfectible. This means they can live in a morality organized manner. Developing the concept of ren would require reawakening of its aspects as it is inborn within the humans.

With the concept, persons are believed to have the ability and will to do the right actions. In this case, they have a caring aspect as they will only tend to act in ways that consider others (Yao & Yao, 2000). Reflecting on leadership, it should only be under the hands of persons with the values considered in the concept of Ren.

According to the Confucians such as the Mencius, the kings lacked aspects of Ren. In this case, they have lousy nature towards other humans where they subject them to oppression and live selfishly with no regard to the people they lead. The humanness virtues are observed and evaluated by the persons. Confucius finds persons lacking humanness, not respectful and do not deserve any chance in leading others in any way. In this case, even the aspects of leading talents such as music would be discouraged if it comes from those with low levels of humanness.

Conclusion

Therefore, wisdom, righteousness, humanness and propriety act as the four standing pillars of the humans. Humanness is a show of compassion and pity, propriety is a show of the person’s compliance, and modesty and the wisdom are characterized by the acts of a person’s on whether they fall on good or bad impacts of others. Concept of Ren, there is an intense depiction of absolute values of the Confucian thinking; Ren could easily be translated to the attributes of benevolence, perfect virtue, goodness, and the human heartedness. Human nature is generally good and only comes to deviate from their changing characters to live in a morality organized manner. Developing the concept of ren would require reawakening of its aspects as it is inborn within the humans.

Reference

1. Baek, J. J. (2017). Hobbes and Xunzi on Human Nature: the Fixed and the Changing.
2. Kim, R. T. (2015). The Role of Human Nature in Moral Inquiry: Macintyre, Mencius, and Xunzi. History of Philosophy Quarterly, 32(4), 313-333.
3. Yao, H. C., & Yao, X. (2000). An introduction to Confucianism. Cambridge University Press.

Introduction to Concepts of Liberty: Natural and Moral

Liberty is a multi-faceted concept, which has many definitions offered by lots of philosophers, each of them adopting a unique approach and thus providing a peculiar interpretation of liberty. The Genevan philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau, who left a significant legacy, influencing the minds of future generations and providing his own answers to the enmeshed questions of all times, also discussed the types of liberties in his treatises, describing natural liberty and moral liberty.

In his “Discourse on Inequality” Jean-Jacques Rousseau depicted the transition from state of nature to the civil state. And although one can doubt the existence of a pure state of nature, its description helps to analyse liberty and inequality from a distanced perspective, tracking the development of civil society and studying its underlying principles. In the state of nature there is no such thing as ownership or supreme power, people are not interdependent, they are guided by their natural needs and possess all the instincts, necessary for leading their lives. Rousseau ascribes to men the ability to be compassionate, unlike Hobbes, whose description of the state of nature is very different from the one, offered by Rousseau. He disagrees on the supposition that men are naturally evil or cruel and claims that compassion prevents people from harming each other. They led “free, healthy, honest and happy lives ”, but everything changed the moment people stopped confining themselves to activities they could undertake themselves. Equality disappeared, when people were no longer able to manage on their own, without the help of others. Liberty and equality are intertwined and both highly dependent on property. Mutual needs united people, but civil society came into existence, when the land was enclosed by an individual. He called it his own thus contributing to the eventual demise of the natural state. With a view to securing the property these people came up with idea of supreme power, thus legalizing their actions and getting rid of the risk of losing anything. So these laws “bound new fetters on the poor, and gave new powers to the rich; which irretrievably destroyed natural liberty, eternally fixed the law of property and inequality ”.

Natural Liberty: Definition and Characteristics

In this case people relinquish their natural liberty by social contract, without getting anything in return. And after that surprisingly enough the need for equality increased exponentially. Having discussed all the obstacles, problems and challenges of this state, Jean-Jacques Rousseau introduced the ways of facing them. All people are different and yet they have to reach a consensus somehow. In his book “The Social Contract” Rousseau described the prerequisites of a beneficial transfer from one state to another. Moral liberty and the social contract compensate the loss of natural liberty. The transition from natural liberty to moral is accompanied by the transition from absolute freedom to a more complete and fundamental one, from a vague concept of belongings to property and ownership, from individual will to general will, all of which are beneficial to men, that is why they are willing to lose natural liberty.

One of the most vital differences between natural liberty and moral liberty lies in their interpretation of the concept of freedom. Natural liberty according to Rousseau is “limited only by the individual’s powers” and he gives it away the moment he accepts the social contract. A man then acquires moral liberty, “which alone makes him truly master of himself ”. So in the first case freedom spreads to the extent of person’s physical abilities, while moral liberty limits freedom through laws. It is important to mention that by saying freedom, one understands the absolute freedom of doing whatever one wants, which is not possible in both states.

Nature gives people physical strength to stand to the challenges of wildlife. In its nascent stage of development human beings lived in relative isolation doing everything their own way. They were able to overcome the impediments without the help of someone else. Afterwards when the notion of property appeared in their life, people deeply felt their physical inequality. Although people theoretically had freedom, they could not enjoy it. They were free to eat the animals in the forest, but sometimes they could not catch them. They were free to lay claim on anything, but that does not mean that they were able to take it. So natural liberty bestows upon people freedom of actions, but does not grant them with sufficient physical strength to carry them out, moreover forcing them to compete with one another.

Natural liberty evaporates in the civil state, as a person no longer has the right to be the master of his own fate and belongings, because now he is dependent on the rules of the society. But what happens to freedom? Can people be considered to be free if they have to follow rules? Do those rules restrict freedom? People do not sacrifice their freedom for their lives in society. It is preserved in a slightly modified form. This transformation is more than beneficial otherwise people would not adopt a new lifestyle. The essential prerequisite of moral liberty is obedience to the law. The rights of all individuals are restricted in the same way. This does not erase the physical differences between people, but it does make them inessential. The unimportance of differences and the universal obedience to laws create a new form of freedom. Although now people do not enjoy the freedom of the abovementioned type, they can do more, because the unequal natural conditions have been equalized by the laws of society.

So, absolute liberty cannot exist in any form of human life, as there are always some limitations, either natural or conventional. Moral liberty has been chosen by men over natural liberty, as the freedom people gain is more than the one they actually had before.

Losing the “unrestricted right to anything he wants and can get” an individual acquires “the ownership of everything that he possesses ”. Although losing his natural liberty and the right to anything he desires, including the property of other people, a person gains a far more complete liberty, which is expressed through peace, security and lack of constant fear of losing everything. It sounds paradoxical, but liberty is achieved through obedience. Security and equality are at the heart of moral liberty, making it more valuable than inequity of natural state. Rousseau distinguished two types of inequality: natural or physical and moral or political.

Physical inequality is established by nature, it does not depend on people. The one who is physically stronger, faster, that is possesses the skills to hunt and survive in wildlife, has a significant advantage over others. Due to his power he can take something from those, who are weaker and who are not able to fight back and win. And yet security and ownership are temporary, as someone else can come any minute and take everything away, devaluing all the preceding efforts and battles. Endless struggle, constant fear of losing everything and the permanent necessity of asserting one’s rights to the land and other possessions by fighting are components of what we call natural liberty. As we can see, the other side of the coin is not that good and bright. Natural liberty does not fall within the framework of the concepts of liberty or justice, as nowadays people assign a different meaning to these words. Natural liberty is not limited by a group of people. However good and advantageous the rights may be, one is willing to relinquish them the moment he realises, that his enemy enjoys the same right of lawlessness. That is why obedience is more precious than this kind of liberty.

Transition from Natural to Moral Liberty

Political inequality exists, as there are poor and rich people, those, who are powerful and those, who are not. One may consider that there is no such thing as justice and security in view of the fact the power of ruling over people goes from nature to rich people, who pursue only the aim of reinforcing their power. This does not correspond to the definition of moral liberty, because liberty is “obedience to a law that we prescribe to ourselves ”. People have the moral right to go against the existing system, if it encroaches on the liberty of the members of a society.

So, all people in society undertake the obligations under the same conditions and all of them have the same rights. This type of equality is considered to be fair, as it gives equal rights, regardless of physical power, bestowed upon people by nature. Conviction of everybody’s obligatory obedience is a step towards man’s confidence in his future. This guarantees development, because when the never-ending struggle for property remains in the past, people finally get around to expanding and multiplying their property and to contributing to its prosperity. So advantages of the social contract preponderate over the losses, and people are ready to obey in order to be free.

Natural instincts are replaced with sense of justice and moral aspects accompany people’s actions due to the social contract that is why people are inclined to lose natural liberty with a view to having property that others cannot take away by force.

Transition from natural liberty to moral liberty is accompanied by transition from individual will to general will. General will refers to all the members of society. Putting aside his own desires, an individual starts taking into account the will of others, realizing that his own well-being depends on that. And after sorting out their priorities people see that this transition is beneficial for everybody. One can call this into question, claiming that general will is connected with civil liberty, but its principles affect moral liberty as well.

Natural liberty does not presuppose the existence of general will, as it does not correspond to its nature. Every man is guided by his own wishes, without paying attention to the desires of other people. Social contract, on the other hand, ties up individuals the moment there are born to the society. An infant does not sign anything, he is not a party to that treaty, he is not acquainted with the subject matter and yet he is forced to follow the rules. Why should any person obey, if he has not given consent to those rules? Why should not he act in accordance with his own wishes? Why, for example, should he follow traffic rules? The list of these questions can be endless, but there is only one and distinct answer to all of them. Because all the decisions have been made in his favour and that is why he should abide all these laws, even the ones that punish him in case he breaks them. When someone breaks a law, the liberty of other people is under threat of being violated. “The constant will of all the members of the state is the general will; by virtue of it they are citizens and free ”. So, according to Jean-Jacques Rousseau, if the agreement is legitimate, equitable, useful and stable, the person does not obey a particular person or group of people, he obeys his own will. And he silently follows the rules of the social contract, because the clauses of the social contract are aimed at providing his security and well-being.

Moral Liberty: Obedience to Law and Self-Mastery

Moral liberty can be reached through obedience and by understanding the importance of punishments and limitations, as well as by considering “the body of the nation ” to be one whole rather than an amalgamation of individuals. From this point of view these two perspectives can somehow resemble holism and individualism. Putting major emphasis on the importance of the whole, one can see that together people are stronger. As it has already been mentioned, the principles of freedom are built on the obedience to the rules that people prescribe to themselves. But what if those rules start violating people’s rights? What if a person stops prescribing them to himself? What happens to his moral liberty? If the laws no longer serve their ultimate goal, a person or a group of people can change them. Changing the clauses of the social contract is possible, they are subject to amendment. The system would not work the other way around. There are different types of government and no one can say which one is better. The choice of the most suitable government for the given country depends on its inhabitants, on the climate, on the historical circumstances etc. We can conclude that the type of government can change, adjusting to the changeable circumstances.

Comparative Analysis of Natural and Moral Liberties

Moral liberty provides the ground for general will, which as we can see does not presuppose encroachment by others. So, after weighing the pros and cons one can see that individual will is not desirable for any member, whoever he might be, as it results in constant struggle and injustice.

So in his book “The Social Contract” Jean-Jacques Rousseau described natural and moral liberties, their differences and the process of transition from one to another, accompanied by losses that people are ready to accept and profits that are far more beneficial for individuals. Natural liberty makes a person free to do whatever he wants, to go wherever he wants and to take whatever he desires. But the fact that this seemingly total freedom is confined to one’s physical strength, which is unfairly bestowed upon people by nature, devalues that freedom, as it presupposes constant struggle, fear and injustice. Unequal physical strength does not allow one to have property, as it can be taken away any minute by someone else. There is no such thing as ownership and there are no laws, so there are no punishments. Individual’s concerns are confined to his main necessities and everybody lives on his own.

Moral liberty, on the other hand, limits freedom in its abovementioned meaning and adopts a different approach to it. On balance, this makes people more free than before, as theoretically unlimited freedom is replaced with a greater one in reality. This creates equality, regardless of physical differences. People are to be independent from one another, and yet all dependent on the law, which makes them equal. New system, equality, laws and rights beget confidence and a desire to multiply what one already has. Prosperity and development come into existence, as punishments and laws affect everybody and create relative security, stability and certainty for people. However, now one is forced to sacrifice his individual will to some extent and think about general will. Besides people born to a society with already firmly established laws cannot possibly be considered to be parties to that treaty, as they did not give their consent to them. But they are forced to follow all these rules, and this may seem unfair. However after realizing that all the laws seemingly limiting the freedom and violating people’s rights in reality serve the goal of making their lives safe and just, individuals start following these rules. The paradox of moral liberty is in fact the interconnection of freedom and obedience.

Conclusion: The Evolution of Liberty in Human Society

Social contract is the combination of obligatory concessions that make life of society possible, as liberty is not lawlessness and impunity, which people call the right to do everything. Liberty is reached through codes of laws, which punish offenders and create conditions for safe and peaceful life, as long as the laws contribute to the preservation of moral liberty.

The definition of drug and alcohol is the most of drugs and alcohols are very useful. Unhappily, the drugs and alcohols as a result of aging population is an increasingly serious problem and also teenagers tend to try the drug and alcohol abuse. For example, after the observation close friends they may want to try drinking or smoking and they will think alcohol and drug consumption make them calm and maintain a popular with friends. This situation parents and teachers always encourage teenager to become addicted to drug because an overdose can cause to serious complications. (SAHA, 2019)

The definition of lying is adoption, seems to be impossible to escape a lie because of the self-deception instance or because our role of social construction. (Borghini, 2019) As an example, teenagers frequently lay about their own shortcomings such as don’t like to go to school, drug or hidden pornographic materials and also, they lie it is because they never disappointed or hurt to their closest friend. Whenever they worry about their friends it is because their studies that may show an exaggerated or scolding them. (SAHA, 2019)

The definition of truancy is used to describe the term purpose unlawful compulsory education and the absence of compulsory. The term also will be disabling the students in their own free choices and doesn’t generally refer to the “forgive” absence of the legitimate. (K12 academics, 2014) For example, truancy can lead to bully, catching thieves, looting, cigarettes, drugs and crime but will turning to block one’s ears and not listen. (StudyMoose, 2016)

The definition of bullying is when a group of people or a person has greater power, again and again and deliberately injury or damages to another person has felt helpless. Bullying also can continue with the passage of time from adults are often veiled and likely to continue, if do not take action. (Alannah & Madeline Foundation, 2019) There are types of bullying and the teenagers may be considered to the physical attacks that establish the bullying such as relationship violence, sexual violence, cyber bullying and verbal bullying. An example, Bullying is the best choices to find for bullying of the most three part of commons such as control imbalances, reduplicative movements, voluntary behaviour. (Gordon, 2018)

The common factor of the moral issues that happen among teenagers is lack of communication with parents. Most of the teenagers in school when facing the problems, they do not know how to solve the problem and communicate to whom. This is because almost all of the parents are busy with their job and normally did not have time to communicate with their children. Thus, this cause the teenagers involve in the moral issues such as gangsterism, bullying and others. As an example, when the teenager has some conflict with his or her friends, they do not know how to solve the problem. But at the same time, parents are busy with the jobs and did not have time to communicate with their children. So, this will directly cause the teenager to involve in the social problem to reduce their stress.

Furthermore, peer influence also one of the factors of moral issues that happen among teenagers. This can be understood because all of the teenagers are having most of the time with their friends and thus their attitude will easily influence by their friends. A good friend can lead them to become a good person with the good attitude and behaviour meanwhile a bad friend can bring them to become a person who do not have moral and directly the image of that person will also be affected. For an example of such situation is that when the teenager is feeling that their friends are closer and understanding them than their parents, they will simply follow what their friends do. If their friends are smoking, then they will feel like smoking can help them to reduce the stress and can improve the relationship with their friends. (Perrone, 2017)

Besides, mass media influence also bring factor to the moral issues in which happen among teenagers. The reason why mass media can bring factor to the issues which happen among teenagers is because electronic media such as television sometimes display the TV show which contains the cigarette directly will affect or attract teenager to try it. But nowadays there are a lot of advertisement that anti-smoking in the movies or television. The advertisement sometimes will attract the teenagers in which they feel curious about the things and they never try it before. This show that mass media have played important role to ensure that they show a true and moral information to public not only the teenager. (Chakravarty, 2019)

Apart from that, lack of education can simply bring the factors of moral issues that happen among teenagers. Not only teenagers, public also need education to improve knowledge. So, people without a proper education skills and knowledge can lead them to social problems such as vandalism and others. All of the school especially kindergarten is lacking of giving the information about the social issues to the children. Since children are no receive the information in the stage of kindergarten, so they will not really understand about the social issues. Thus, the secondary school’s education is very important in order to make sure that all the student is received the information in the right way and ensure they are understanding about the social issues that should be avoided.

Generally, moral issues bring a lot of impacts to our society and it negatively influences teenagers. There are a lot of the impact of the moral issues that directly affect teenagers.

Image of teenager will definitely damage if teenagers have involving in the moral issues such as vandalism and others. This will cause their image damage as they have included in the activity that is harmful to them. Other than themselves but their family’s image will get the same effect too. Teenagers will be bewildered and scorned by the communities in the surroundings and next they will have trauma in themselves. Thus, the moral issues that teenager involved in will leave a deep impression on themselves. They will start suffering as their image been damage and they might think that why they still live in the world because of nobody will care about them and always to scorn them.

Furthermore, teenager will loss the chance to study. When student was involved in some moral issue which more serious such as teenager pregnancy, they cannot continue their education as well as they can. Without a good education and knowledge, they cannot get a good job in the future. This situation not only affect the teenager but also their next generation. Their children may grow in a family that have a low morale and also low education. When a person does not have knowledge, they will discriminate by other people. Thus, this will cause their children be underestimate by his friend or other people due to his parent problems.

Following by the next, teenager will be immatures to do everything. According to the above situation, if teenager pregnant when adolescence period, they can’t to overcome the problem as what an adult will doing. They are lack of knowledge and experience to overcome the problem because it was the time for them to learn but not become a parent. Besides, it will be more difficult for them to find a suitable solution to solve the problem. They may easy to do immature things like abortion or abandon the baby after birth.

Moreover, teenagers will feel stress. They will be feeling stressful to survive in the society. This is because they have been discriminating by the society after they involve in the moral issues. Society may think that such people cause the image of country damage and also image of the citizen in the eye of other country will also affected. So, when the time the society start to push aside those teenagers who take place in moral issues, they will feel stress because of nobody are respect to them and difficult to find the job. Without a job, teenager is difficult to survive.

Solutions for moral issues that faced by teenager should be conduct by two main parties: school, parents.

Parents are the closest people to the teenagers in their lives. In order to overcome the moral issues, parents need to take care about their child’s mental health. Nowadays, teen suicide is common issues for the teenagers because they are too stress in their studies. Then, teen suicide also may happen because of bullying. Thus, the teenager’s mental health needs to concern to ensure they are thinking in positive way. As an example, parents should conduct an effective communication with their child to know the problems that faced by him and help to solve the problems as well as having a family meeting per week. (Preston Ni, 2015)

Then, parents should also limit the time of their child to play online games to prevent online gaming addiction. This is important to ensure the teenagers achieve balance between online and offline activities. The teenagers can do other useful activities during the time that cannot play games, such as gardening and playing football. However, the teenagers may not agree the time limits, so parents try to discuss with them via dialogue rather than enforce the unilateral limits. (Zur, 2019)

As the parents, we should teach the teen speak up on behalf of those who are being bullied. Parents needs to train their child to become brave person to face bullying.

Moreover, parents need to know their child’s interpersonal relationship through communication or social media that the teenagers always use. It is a good solution to avoid the hook-up activities and bullying. If the parent found that their child always chats with the strangers by using social media, they need to know that what are they talked. In addition, their child’s friends also need to be concern by the parents to ensure the friends have good attitudes. Then, parents should know that where their child go and with who when their child leave the home. This action can help the parents to find their child if they did not come back home at midnight to avoid hook-up activities.

School should hold the campaign that concern anti-smoking, sex awareness and other moral issues. This is important to raise the awareness of the teenagers about the disadvantages of smoking, hook-up activities and others dangerous actions.

Furthermore, school also needs to provide the professional counsellor to help the teenagers control their emotion and find the best way to reduce their stress, better than they decide to commit suicide. The counsellor can give guidance to the teenagers for tackling the problems which they might face in their school life.

In addition, schools need to conduct spot check to the students to avoid they bring cigarette, drugs or other prohibited items to school. After spot check, the students who bring the prohibited items will be concern of teachers to ensure they will not do it again. For these students, teachers need to be taken attention to them to ensure them aware about the disadvantages of drugs and cigarette.

Finally, school should allow the teachers to do home visits to build a strong relationship with the parents. Through home visit, teacher can know the student’s behaviour at home and the relationship between the students and their parents. As an example, the teacher found that the students had signs of being abused by his parents, teacher need to do home visit to communicate with the parents to know the reasons and try to avoid domestic abuse.

References

1. Alannah & Madeline Foundation. (2019). Retrieved from https://www.ncab.org.au/bullying-advice/bullying-for-parents/definition-of-bullying/.
2. Amy Morin, L. (2018, September 8). verywell family. Retrieved from https://www.verywellfamily.com/how-to-help-when-your-teen-falls-behind-in-school-4047447.
3. Borghini, A. (2019, May 25). ThoughtCo. Retrieved from https://www.thoughtco.com/the-ethics-of-lying-2670509.
4. Chakravarty, C. (2019, March 13). Positive And Negative Influences of Media On Teenagers. Retrieved from Mom Junction: https://www.momjunction.com/articles/positive-and-negative-influences-of-media-on-teenagers_00107975/#gref
5. Collins. (2017, December 12). Retrieved from https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/academic.
6. Gordon, S. (2018, February 5). verywell family. Retrieved from https://www.verywellfamily.com/bullying-4157339.
7. Jcruzad1@ccp.edu. (2011). lawandsocietyweek. Retrieved from http://lawandsocietyweek.pbworks.com/w/page/15386289/The%20Snitching%20Study.
8. K12 academics. (2014, February 6). Retrieved from https://www.k12academics.com/educational-psychology/truancy.
9. Perrone, L. (2017, February 05). Peer pressure influence students. Retrieved from SCOT SCOOP: https://scotscoop.com/peer-pressure-influences-students/
10. Preston Ni, M. (2015, july 19). 7 Keys to handling diffcult teenagers. Retrieved from Phychology Today: https://www.phychologytoday.com/intl/blog/communiciation-success/201507/7-keys-handling-diffcult-teenagers?amp
11. SAHA, R. (2019, March 19). MomJunction. Retrieved from https://www.momjunction.com/articles/ethical-and-moral-dilemmas-for-teenagers_00389571/.
12. Steinberg, J. (2010, January-February). Scouting . Retrieved from https://scoutingmagazine.org/2010/01/to-snitch-or-not-to-snitch/.
13. StudyMoose. (2016, April 1). Retrieved from https://studymoose.com/truant-in-school-essay.
14. Zur, O. (2019, – -). major issues facing teenagers. Retrieved from Zur Institute: https://www.zurinstitute.com/issues-facing-teenagers/

Introduction to the Moral Debate on Wealth and Poverty

By reading the newspapers and following the news in media, we see that the issue of wealth and poverty is ubiquitous. The divide between poor and rich is getting wider in the whole world. Tak-ing account of the social and economic situation, the climate issue and different political factors of countries, which severely restraint their development, one can see that poverty is rising. The world needs an action plan to fight poverty and to ensure the survival of millions of people. When we drive past poor areas and see people without housing, without food and without any basic necessities, should we help them? Is there a moral obligation or should we think that those people are lazy and should work harder and be more proactive and so they would not be in that situation? And what about people in other countries? People in the developing countries? Should those people suffer from hunger and disease because of political instability and the global warm-ing? Is this their fault that they are not born into advanced societies? The discussion about help-ing poor people and especially that wealthy people should help the disadvantaged population is a question that I have been dealing with since a long time. “Do wealthy people have moral obliga-tion to help the poor?” is the key question of this essay. I believe I have a moral obligation to help the poor because I have been blessed with more than I effectively need in life. I see it as a duty to share what I have been blessed with. In my opinion, poverty is not a choice. All persons have a moral obligation to prevent suffering and that is why I think wealthy people have moral obligation to help the poor. In the following, I will briefly define the terms poverty and wealth, and I will argue why wealthy people have the moral obligation to help.

Defining Poverty and Wealth in Today’s Society

The UNESCO (United Nations, Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) defines poverty as the lack or the scarcity of money and material possessions due to different economic, political and social factors. Today it is widely that one cannot consider only the economic part of poverty. Moreover, it is considered to undermine human rights (UNESCO, 2018). In my mind, poverty exists on many levels. It is not merely the lack of financial resources, rather, the imposition of barriers. Barriers to healthcare, barriers to choices, barriers to education. It is a deprivation of possibilities and the inability to live a safe and healthy life. Poverty means to me also to have less than the basic needs. I associate the term with the failure of society to distribute wealth equally. People are dying and suffering because they are not able to cover their basic needs while others live in abundance.

Living in abundance means to me being wealthy. Peter Singer a renowned utilitarian defines wealthy and thus wealthy people as persons with greater income than the need to cover the basic necessities. After satisfying the basic needs, such as food, housing options, and healthcare, wealthy people have sufficient income to meet other expenses (e.g. luxury articles and long-distance travels) (Singer, 2013a, p. 343). When people talk about being wealthy, they often focus on the high income level. Also for me, wealth means having a high income, which allows to en-sure the basic needs and have more possibilities and perspectives in life.

The Growing Divide Between Rich and Poor

The difference in wealth, between the rich and the poor is a big issue in the present time. For me it is the case that if wealth were more equally distributed, a lot of suffering and death could be avoided. But does that mean that the wealthy people should help the poor? My answer is: Yes.

One reason for my position is a religious one. As a Muslim woman, I’ve grew up with the Five Pillars of Islam. These pillars are considered as five basic acts in the religion and consist of Sha-hada (Faith), Salah (Prayer), Zakat (Charity), Sawm (Fasting) and Hajj (pilgrimage). My father always taught me that in his eyes the most important pillar is the Zakat, the charity. Being a good, empathic and generous person is the aim. Although I am not very religious, the Zakat is im-portant to me. Feeding the poor, donating and helping the unfortunate is a moral and religious obligation to me. Also in Christianity and in other religions, charity is an important aspect. Help-ing the poor should be natural and morally obligated.

Peter Singer’s Ethical Argument for Assisting the Impoverished

That statement corresponds to the thoughts of Peter Singer. In his book “The Life You Can Save: Acting Now to End World Poverty”, Singer (2013b, pp. 15–16) presents his argument why peo-ple are in fact morally obligated to help the world’s poor. He also mentions religious aspects and underlies that putting itself in the place of others, is what thinking ethically is all about. “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” is the Golden Rule from the words of Jesus and is remarkably universal and being found in all other world religions. To illustrate his argument, he uses the example of a child drowning in a pond. He maintains that if you saw a child drowning and you were in a position to save this child, you should do so because it is morally obligated. A child halfway across the world is no different to a child drowning or dying in front of you, just because you cannot see it.

The Visibility of Poverty in the Media Age

In my view, the pretext of not seeing the misery all over the world is no longer valid. Today, in the wake of the increasing opening of image worlds through media and internet, no one can ig-nore the terrible situation of humanitarian crisis. Through the media, people can see what is hap-pening and how poverty increases. Wealthy people may realize that there is poverty, but I think that a lot of them do not see a reason to help. Why helping the poor? I repeat that poverty gener-ally is not a choice. We are all born not knowing where our social standing will be. We could born poor, or we could be born wealthy and in industrialized countries and every one should be aware of this.

Global Income Disparity and Its Implications

If we take a look at the map “The World by Income” provided by the World Bank, we can realize that income is not equally distributed in the world and the poorest countries (if high income means wealth) are located in the southern hemisphere (The World Bank, 2017). Large areas of Africa and parts of southern Asia and the Middle East are affected by low income effects. From my point of view it is not only about the low income level, but also other factors play a crucial role.

The Role of Climate Change and Historical Factors in Poverty

Therefore I have to deal with the climate change or more precise the global warming. Around the world, people are experiencing with the effect of climate change. The impacts affect every coun-try on every continent, but people living in the world’s poorest areas are the most vulnerable. Many people living in poverty rely on natural and agricultural resources. These resources ensure their survival. The effects of global warming like for instance limited water resources are a real matter of life and death. Moreover, the climate change increases competition which often intensi-fies conflicts over resources. Because of the lack of food, undernutrition is an impact of climate change and people die or move away from their home countries. Some wealthy people may won-der how the climate change and the resulting impacts concern them. In my opinion they are not directly responsible, but we all have an influence on the climate situation. Wealthy people can afford to travel all over the world. The environmental impact of aviation is well known. Emis-sions are changing our climate and damaging the environment. Therefore wealthy people should help the poor because through frequent flights, what lives depend on, gets destroyed. Helping them by being more aware of the climate change, which for instance could mean that a millionaire in New York has to forgo truffle from Italy and consume more regional products.

Another reason in my eyes is a historical one. Enslavement and colonisation had also their im-pact on poverty. Nunn (2008) explored empirically whether the effects of the slave trades can explain part of Africa’s underdevelopment. He combined data of the number of slave shipped from each port or region in Africa with data from historical documents, which deal with the eth-nic identities of slaves taken from the continent. He found out that the parts of Africa that are the poorest today are also the regions from which the largest number of slaves were taken in the past. According to Nunn these findings cannot be taken as conclusive evidence, but there is a correlation between enslavement and poverty in Africa. These findings show me that the wealthy people in the developed countries have a moral obligation to help the poor. They should see that poverty is influenced by several factors and that perhaps their ancestors were involved in this sad chapter of human history.

I agree somehow that a lot of people think it is the duty of the government to combat poverty. However, it is up to all people and especially to people who are more prosperous to fight against poverty. A good example for helping the poor is “The Giving Pledge”, created by Bill and Melinda Gates and Warren Buffet. The Giving Pledge is an arrangement by the world’s wealthiest individuals and families to dedicate the majority of their wealth to give back. It invites and in-spires billionaires to commit to giving more than half of their wealth to philanthropy or other charitable causes in their will or during lifetime. The aim is to benefit society and each person who pledges makes an individual decision which particular causes they wish to support (The Giving Pledge, 2019). Why do I believe that this is a good idea? I think that this arrangement in-spire the HNWIs (High Net Worth Individuals) also to think about helping the poor and giving something back to society. Also the next generations of HNWIs will imitate their parents and could generate an impact on moral thinking. The kind of this extreme giving is needed in our society because the rich have been getting so much richer and the poor vice versa. For the bil-lionaires the wealth they have has no real utility to them because they are not able to spend their whole money for themselves. But that wealth has incredible utility and impact to other people and especially to poor people. It can build schools, hospitals and infrastructure in the Third World and consequently help fight world poverty.

Character education is an umbrella term loosely used to describe the teaching of children in a manner that will help them develop variously as moral, civic, good, mannered, behaved, non-bullying, healthy, critical, successful, traditional, compliant or socially acceptable beings.

Character and Ethical quality

The character and ethical quality educational modules is based on building up every understudy as legitimate, tolerant, flexible and continuing on people, who ponder inwards and fabricate an individual feeling of profound quality dependent on close to home viewpoints. The Moral Training subject is a complete way to deal with continuing the general public’s noteworthy highlights of resistance, transparency, acknowledgment and admiration of the other, which have created in the course of recent decades.

The Individual and the Network

A genuine resident is one that deals with themselves not withstanding thinking about the benefit of society and taking an interest effectively to improve things. The Individual and Network educational modules is centred around building up a person who can flourish in various social circumstances and make a little change towards a major distinction. Expanding upon the centre abilities learned all through the Character and Ethical quality courses, understudies will plunge further into network mindfulness and how they can wind up dynamic individuals from their locale, through network administration subjects and finding out about the significance and benefit of serving others.

Municipal Investigations

Regardless of whether an understudy was conceived with their family, it is basic to comprehend the essentials of how today is represented. The City Concentrates courses are centred around building up the understudy’s learning of their rights as a native or inhabitant of the UAE and their obligation as an individual from Emirati society. The educational programs will likewise concentrate on the government’s structure and legal processes. The Moral Training subject means to fortify the unmistakable and immaterial legacy and culture of the nation. It readies the cutting edge as dependable, dynamic and mindful residents, with a worldwide point of view. It urges them to find out about authorizing rights and obligations as occupants of an associated and evolving world.

Social Examinations

Culture is an inmate piece of a general public and the ethical training needs to feature shared human culture that embodies the customs and images that assistance characterize our identity. Teaching method on culture in principle and practice, makes another dialect that multiplies the comprehension of local information, qualities and aggregate personalities. Social Examinations will be centred on cultivating a comprehension around culture and legacy just as what a bigger worldwide culture implies. Courses will start when understudies are in Evaluation 1 and proceed all through their Essential and Auxiliary instruction until Graduation.

EXAMPLES OF MORAL EDUCATION

A lot of things we learn from the school and education makes us to notice ethics around us it can be at home, School, Church anywhere, and makes us aware of everything that motivates or demoralise us as human.

Sporting environment you noticing when a teammate is cheating or the opponent and a coach condone or motivates that kind of a behaviour in front of everyone around.

When you your blamed/punished of something you didn’t do, or get blamed for something you can’t change that has already happened like a penalty last minutes of the game and the other team or opponents score out of that and coach shouts at you for that.

When competing in a team sport and you don’t like playing or passing your teammates, and every time when a teammate loss a ball one shout at her/him but when one has a ball they don’t pass teammates and expect the teammates not to correct her/him or coach to guide him/her