Sounds easy enough, right?
Work not for a reward; but never cease to do thy work. The Bhagavad Gita2: This view can of course be expressed with varying degrees of consistency. The radical version says that whatever a sovereign or ruling power has established is indeed just: But this compels us to accept the inconvenient conclusion that norms which contradict each other may be equally legitimate and equally just.
Advocates of this view, therefore, usually try to circumvent the problem by arguing that the value-laden concept of justice has no discernible meaning if it is taken to suggest a supreme paradigm according to which we can measure and assess existing legislation; if, on the other hand, 'justice' means nothing except positive law, i.
Selected Essays [Basic Books,pp. Most fundamental is whether morality is a matter of rational knowledge or not. If it is a matter of rational knowledge, then our doctrine would be objectivism, which implies that morality is "out there," in the objects, and so is independent of personal preferences or sentiments.
If it is not a matter of rational knowledge, then we could subscribe to subjectivism, that morality is indeed a matter of personal preferences or sentiments, in the subject, i.
David Humeis very properly often cited as the classic representative of subjectivism, as in the ethics textbook Moral Reasoning, by Victor Grassian, which I used to use in my ethics class. To Hume, morality depends on our own sentiments or feelings, as there is no matter of fact to determine moral truth [ note ].
Nor does this reasoning only prove, that morality consists not in any relations, that are the objects of science; but if examin'd, will prove with equal certainty, that it consists not in any matter of fact, which can be discover'd by the understanding. This is the second part of our argument; and if it can be made evident, we may conclude, that morality is not an object of reason Take any action allow'd to be vicious: Wilful murder, for instance.
Examine it in all lights, and see if you can find that matter of fact, or real existence, which you call vice. In which-ever way you take it, you find only certain passions, motives, volitions and thoughts.
There is no other matter of fact in the case. The vice entirely escapes you, as long as you consider the object.
You never can find it, till you turn your reflexion into your own breast, and find a sentiment of disapprobation, which arises in you, towards this action. Here is a matter of fact; but 'tis the object of feeling, not of reason. It lies in yourself, not in the object. So that when you pronounce any action or character to be vicious, you mean nothing, but that from the constitution of your nature you have a feeling or sentiment of blame from the contemplation of it.
I have my feelings and you have yours. It is not uncommon, however, for people to think that others disagree with them on moral issues, not because of different feelings, but because of a lack of feeling. We see this in an example given by Victor Grassian, who recalls responding at the time to a speech by Secretary of State Dean Rusk on the war in Vietnam.
At that moment, it appeared to me that the Secretary of State simply did not feel sufficient sympathy for the vast suffering of human beings who were being sacrificed for unclear ideals of American security.
As I listened to Rusk, my predominant reaction was not to argue with him rationally, but in some sense to shake him into an emotional realization of the enormity of human suffering we as a nation were creating in Vietnam.
There are no "unclear ideals of American security" involved. As it happens, more people were murdered in Indo-China after the Communist takeovers than had died in the wars there that involved France and the United States [cf. Death by Government, by R.
Many Vietnamese and Cambodian refugees live in the United States after fleeing the terror often as "boat people" of the new regimes. Richard Nixon's prediction that there would be a "bloodbath" after a Communist victory, greeted with smug derision at the time, was fully born out by events -- to the horror of some former supporters e.
Joan Baez but with compacency by others e. Basing a moral argument, with an appeal to feeling, on only part of a story of suffering, has also occurred in relation to the invasion of Iraq by the United States in Many antiwar protesters express outrage over the suffering to the Iraqi people caused by the United States in military actions in Iraq.
She asked to talk to them about why it is important to topple Hussein. The protesters thanked her, turned and walked away. But Saddam is an Arab leader who has killed more Arabs than Israel ever has.
They are supposed to be for human rights, but the suffering of the Iraqi people just doesn't exist for them. They deny us our stories. As a matter of fact, examined elsewherefeeling cannot be morally commanded; and so the approach of insufficient feeling for moral correctness is barking up the wrong tree [ note ].
If morality is not just a matter of feeling, but of rational knowledge, we then must face the question of how that works.The Value Structure of Action. The distinctions between means and ends, and between being and doing, result in the following structure of action, from beginning to middle to end, upon which much ethical terminology, and the basic forms of ethical theory (ethics of .
The Emotional Health Centre, is based in St. Leonards on Sea (near Hastings), East Sussex, grupobittia.com assist our clients in resolving their issues safely and support our students in their self-development. We empower both our students and clients by providing them with a wealth of resources and effective processes to reclaim their power and be free to grow.
Play is essential to development because it contributes to the cognitive, physical, social, and emotional well-being of children and youth. Play also offers an ideal opportunity for parents to engage fully with their children.
Despite the benefits derived from play for both children and parents, time for free play has been markedly reduced for some children. Feb 06, · To begin our examination of emotional intelligence, let’s imagine an iceberg.
The visible part of the iceberg, which we know is just the small upper tip of it, represents your cognitive. Certain pairs of these values are inherently conflicting. For example, the stability of conformity conflicts with the spontaneity of stimulation. For example, having higher social-emotional skills in kindergarten is related to important outcomes at age 25 (Jones, Greenberg, & Crowley, ).
These outcomes include: Educational success.