The main objective of this research paper is to conceptualize a satisfactory model based on James Rachel’s definition in his work, “The Elements of Moral Philosophy” (Rachels & Rachels, 2012). In particular, Rachel offers three tenets that characterize the true meaning of a satisfactory moral theory: impartiality, adherence to rules that serve the universal interests of others and the people’s natural inclination to care for others to a modest degree (Rachels & Rachels, 2012). The concept of morality has been extensively researched in extant literature, indicating the diversity of perspectives in which different people view the meaning of this theory. For instance, the research conducted by Mavis Sevim (2021) suggests that teachers often view morality as actions generally accepted by society, mainly grounded on nature. In particular, Mavis Sevim (2021) noted that many teachers considered the concept of morality as being both nature- and society-centred, in which human beings engage in behaviours generally accepted by other community members. In this context, this essay agrees with Rachels’ assertion that a satisfactory moral theory would typically involve actions guided by impartiality, adherence to the rules and norms that serves universal societal interests, and an individual’s inclination to care for other people, at least to a modest level.
Conceptualizing a Satisfactory Moral Theory
A satisfactory moral theory generally involves practising impartiality for all people. Specifically, according to Rachels and Rachels (2012), an acceptable ethical model would include treating others with impartiality. In this context, the author implies that people should be treated equally by ensuring the interests of every person are promoted similarly (Rachels & Rachels, 2012). However, opponents of this argument, especially adversaries from the political realm, contend that impartiality is irrelevant because some people may attempt to rig the election or act in a manner that advances another person’s interests. However, in refuting this contention, it is essential to observe Rachels and Rachels’ (2012) description of impartiality in the context of morality. Specifically, Rachels contends that impartiality is a natural phenomenon in which people who innately live in groups require each other’s cooperation since they are naturally inclined to ensure their significant others receive the same treatment as they would desire. Moreover, impartiality is essential in promoting a morally upright society because it defines morality in the context of personhood instead of partiality, which treats morality in the context of accommodating favouritism that could result in biases or prejudices (Molefe, 2021).
A satisfactory moral theory would constitute the requirement of social living in which people adhere to the rules that serve all people in a universal setting. In this context, Rachels and Rachels (2012) argue that morality should emphasize rules and regulations respected and adhered to by all members of society when fairly applied. This contention is especially true in a democratic society where people who show a significant level of responsibility to their roles and unto others are often rewarded. However, opponents of this contention may argue that universality does not apply to morality because some people may engage in negative actions based on their psychological perceptions that those wicked actions are morally right. However, in refuting this argument, Rachels and Rachels’ (2012) work presents an essential contention that in a moral society, people often respond to others or treat them as responsible agents not based on their importance in society. In the contemporary social world, most organizations establish ethical codes of conduct to which people working within those organizations should adhere. These moral codes of conduct are tailored to promote morality by ensuring everyone is treated equally and fairly. Social injustices, especially those associated with systemic racism, are often associated with a lack of observing the universal ethical codes of conduct established to guide the practice of professionals like police officers. Without following these ethical principles and norms, issues such as systemic racism and racial disparities in healthcare systems will often result in the uprising of movements such as the Black Lives Matter organization devoted to the struggle for social and racial equality.
Another important conceptualization of a satisfactory moral theory involves people’s natural inclination to care about others. Specifically, Rachels and Rachels (2012) demonstrated that nature is at the core of morality; most research has also shown that character plays a significant role in promoting morality. For instance, Mavis Sevim’s (2021) study showed that many research respondents associated morality with innate characteristics, emphasizing human nature that is often inclined to do the right thing. However, most human beings, especially those who engage in criminal activities, often harm others since they believe their actions are morally justified. However, morality involves the natural inclination to do good unto others through impartiality.
Aquinas observed that morality involves a set of universal wrongs and rights shared across diverse cultures. In this context, Aquinas delineated two fundamental human inclinations: preserving the human species and their lives. These assumptions are grounded on what Aquinas termed the natural law of organisms. This law views the world as being created by a supreme being and that humans are naturally rational beings who can use their intellectual ability to understand their natural surroundings. However, according to Rachels and Rachels (2012), a desert creates a boundary between people inclined to treat others morally upright and those inclined to engage in harming others. This desert signifies a departure from equality, closely associated with caring for others. Caring for others in society involves virtues such as friendship, love, and loyalty. Indeed, Rachels and Rachels (2012) contend that only a fool would wish to stay immoral by eliminating the virtues of loyalty and love, among others, from his acknowledgement of the meaning of moral life. Therefore, virtues such as love, loyalty and friendship are essential in promoting optimal general care and welfare of others, which define the concept of satisfactory moral theory as opposed to the personal deservingness and interest that establishes a desert characterized by social injustices.
Conclusion
This essay agrees with Rachels’ contention that a satisfactory moral theory involves actions guided by impartiality, adherence to the rules and norms that serve universal societal interests, and an individual’s inclination to care for others. Specifically, impartiality plays an essential role in defining a satisfactory moral theory since a natural phenomenon in which people who innately live in groups require each other’s cooperation since they are naturally inclined to ensure their significant others receive the same treatment as they would desire while emphasizing the importance of personhood instead of partiality that promotes biases and prejudices. A satisfactory moral theory would involve a social setting where people adhere to the rules that serve everyone in a universal environment, such as the ethical codes of conduct that guide the practice, actions and behaviours towards others. These behaviours are further grounded on pre-emptive action and what Rachels refers to as taking responsibility for their actions while treating others equitably and fairly. Finally, this essay demonstrates that a satisfactory moral theory involves people’s natural inclination to care about others. In this context, ethical behaviour is grounded on doing good unto others through impartiality through such virtues as friendship and loyalty instead of personal deservingness and interest that establishes a desert of social inequities.
References
Mavis Sevim, Ö. (2021). Hat Is Morality?: The Concept of Morality from Prospective Teachers’ Perspective. Bulletin of Education and Research, 43(1), 135-154.
Rachels, J., & Rachels, S. (2012). The Elements of Moral Philosophy 7e. McGraw Hill.
Molefe, M. (2021). Partiality and impartiality in African philosophy. Rowman & Littlefield.
write