Parable from the sadhu analysis from three general

techniques.

The Parable of the Sadhu presents a fancy situation which action

instant action was necessary. Sadhu, an Of india holy guy, was found out

naked and barely surviving by a number of multicultural climber during

their journey. Each ethnic group did a bit to help the Sadhu, nevertheless none

presumed full responsibility. Their concern was in hiking the hill

rather than transporting Sadhu to the village exactly where other people could help

him. Although the conditions in the trip were so that after the mountaineers

happened to the village they might not have been able to go back up, the

author of the essay nonetheless feels accountable for what has not been done intended for the Sadhu

(Donaldson 280). There are 3 general strategies in examining a ethical

issue and making a decision, individuals being consequentialism, deontology and

virtue ethics. The article does not evidently indicate which usually method utilized to

measure the situation. In my opinion, the best method will be Kantian

deontology.

Let us discuss consequentialism first. Consequentialism concentrates on

consequences as the most important factor inside the decision making process

(Donaldson 3). For consequentialists the causes of an action are not because

important as what comes out of it. Utilitarianism is among the branches of

consequentialism. Utilitarianism believes in the highest good for the

number (Donaldson 3). This method along with egoist consequentialism was

most likely the one that was used subconsciously by the mountaineers. Giving

the Sadhu was good because ultimately the greater volume of people will

have reached their goal and this would have produced them cheerful. Egoist

consequentialists who think that the greatest great is their particular would

have done the same, satisfying their wants before aiding someone else

(Donaldson 4). This method, however , is definitely not the very best for this situation.

A single proving element is that McCoy still feels guilty concerning this incident.

Therefore , this method did not produce one of the most ethical response.

Virtue ethics, in contrast to consequentialism, give attention to the kind of person each

one of us should be. They will focus on augmenting certain attributes and

take a look at every situation in terms of the potential effect on the well-being

of the person (Donaldson 10). This method, although much more helpful than

utilitarianism, still produces an unclear response. On one hand, kindness

and compassion are both virtues that might be cultivated if the

mountaineers decided to help the Sadhu and bring him to the village. For the

other hand, in the event mountaineers continue their journey virtues just like courage

and determination would flourish. It is difficult to decide which will virtues

are definitely more important than others and for that reason, this method is actually ambiguous

being applied to this example.

Finally, there exists deontology, also called non-consequentialism. Deontology

in general, focuses on the purposes of the take action and the notion of

duty(Camenisch 2). Kantian deontology assesses there is a

Specific Imperative the greatest moral rule that should control all

human actions. This kind of universal law is set by two ways:

1) act in a way that one would action with any person in the same situation, and

so that 1 does not produce an undesirable globe and 2) interact with

persons as people with privileges and dignity rather than way to an end

(Camenisch 2). This kind of moral basic principle would be the many fair and useful in

the Sadhu scenario. McCoys good friend mentions in the essay that the

mountaineers might have probably served differently in case the Sadhu had been a

part of their ethnic group (Donaldson 281). In the event they employed the Kantian

deontology technique, its initial statement would forbid them from dealing with

Sadhu differently than they would take care of any other person in this condition.

Also, if it was a second the mountaineers deemed that they can be

creating a community in which they would not want youngsters to live, that they

would have served differently. Simply by creating this world I mean that they can

would not desire people to take action this way to themselves or their descendants.

And finally, in the event they were dealing with Sadhu being a worthy man, they

may have understood that human life is more useful than achieving a

goal. In this case, they can carry the Sadhu to the village and make sure

that he is looked after.

One could imagine I find the Kantian deontology approach best simply

because that is certainly what I think I would personally use. This, however , is definitely not totally

true. A lot of this discussion is based on the simple fact that McCoy still misgivings

the way this individual acted with the Sadhu. Based on this, I assume that in the event he were in

the same situation again he would support Sadhu even more. Kantian deontology seems

to be the most obvious method that would generate this decision. Personally

I do believe that all of the methods are too everlasting and therefore none of

all of them can be said as the method for decision making in every type of

situation. The question then is usually how does 1 know which method must be

used?

Copyright 1999 2004 OPPapers. com