Skepticism Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Skepticism - Essay Example In addition, some people decide to moral because they respond to moral choices and dilemmas in the manner they have witnessed or seen their friends, parents, and role respond. Therefore, some of the time some people chose what is moral because they have learned that doing that sort of thing is right and good. People are moral because our reinforcement comes from instinct for self-preservation; briefly, self-interest is the cause of being moral. On the other hand, some people choose to be immoral due to the fact they desire to attain certain things for less efforts. For instance, a person may decide to steal in order to get money because they know working is tedious - so stealing is an easier way of obtaining money than working. Â  Morality is about both obeying the set rules and evaluating the consequences. There are certain rules and regulations that set out by society that must be respected in order to live in harmony with other people, therefore people will tend to be moral by ob eying the set standards in society. People maintain their moral status because they assess the result of their actions. For instance, a person is fond of telling lies and s/he will think of what happens when the truth will finally be realized (Kurtz 56). Therefore, people will choose to be moral in order to live harmoniously and avoid harming oneself. For instance, Descartes was skeptical about everything he did in that his life was characterized by constant thinking and questioning. He doubted everything, and it is only through this he claimed search for true knowledge. Descartes doubted his own existence in order to establish reflective thinking and questioning. Socially, Descartes relation with the society was not that of an outgoing person. He spent most of his time improving his previous writings or coming up with new ideas. The Discourse on method is one of his notable publications among others. In his work, Structure of the Meditations, Descartes gives preeminence to meditati on as one of the best ways to find what is true (Descartes 45). For somebody to suggest meditation, it means that he has meditated before. Meditation, according to him, is focused on ignoring every truth and belief of this world. At the end, he was able to establish true knowledge of what is right and wrong in society. Every person develops his own original position on which he or she decided principles of justice behind the veil of ignorance (Sinnott-Armstrong 79-82). The basis of this strategy is that no one knows his/her place or social status in society nor does anyone know his/her fate in the distribution of social goods since all are under the veil of ignorance. The veil of ignorance limits people from knowing what justice entails. Putting in mind everybody is morally upright, it will be rational to consider all the social primary goods, which includes opportunity and liberty, wealth and income and the grounds of self-respect. With this in mind, these will form the basis of th e policy whereby programs put in place will ensure that all these things are distributed equally; unless under special and justifiable circumstances, unequal distribution of these goods is to the benefit of the least favored. In addition, person will be entitled to have an equal right to all the goods available. The office in charge will be transparent and fair to all under conditions to ensure

Revising this paper Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Revising this paper - Essay Example People rely more on the consequences being in their favor, even when the decision or the incentive that spurs the decision is morally wrong; in essence, it is somewhat like the ends justify the means. However, it will be wrong for us to assume that just because their thought processes and their incentives are different from our own, they are wrong. People are different from one another, with different morals and different points of views, so much so that their happiness also lies in different things; as in they pursue different forms of happiness, what is happiness to one may not be so to the other. Thus the question arises: Can we judge people based on their incentives? In the example I liked the most, Levitt and Dubner analyze schoolteachers and sumo wrestlers. In the case of schoolteachers the incentive to cheat derives from possible pay raises, or at least job security, if their students score well on standardized tests. Levitt uses 700,000 sets of test answers from Chicago public school students. With the aid of his computer, Levitt searches for patterns in the answers to identify teachers who were changing their students answers, thus cheating to obtain their goal. He even includes a few sample answer sheets and invites the reader to detect the cheating. At the same time, the book describes Levitts clever strategy for examining the win-loss records of sumo wrestlers; an examination that points to especially important matches being â€Å"thrown†, with the â€Å"winners† later reciprocating in less important matches, thus ensuring that top wrestlers maintain their status. Levitt says there are three types of incentives: economic, social and moral. We juggle with all types of them, and it is clear that incentives are used widely and related closely to people’s daily life. The story of an Israeli daycare center that decided to fine parents who picked up their children late is pertinent in this regard. This action of theirs resulted in more