Morality in choice

Is making a moral choice really that easy? How people perspective morality varies in terms of social setting, location and even on personality. In addition, the definition of morality is such that it is open to interpretation by all the parties. A problem therefore, does arise when determining what is morally or ethically right and what is not. With such complications already in place, it is therefore not surprising to find one running into trouble for taking an option they thought to be morally right. So, how does one go about making a choice that is morally acceptable to everyone? This is the challenge I intend to cover in this paper. In my study, I will concentrate on Aristotle’s philosophy on morality.

            The line between virtue and vice is so thin to an extent that you may find yourself on either end without being aware. Considering morality pertains to believes rather than preferences, it is very unlikely that what may be considered to be legally right may a vice in the eyes of the society or the individual. One common point of contention in the society that address the varying believes relating to morality is doctor assisted suicide or euthanasia. Those that view it as a vice believe that it is taking of life, which is not only illegal but also immoral. However, those that support euthanasia perceive it as a way of aiding the patient that may be suffering substantially that even death is an easy way out. Putting aside the legal issues, it would be quite hard to tell whether it is a vice or a virtue since arguments from either side do have some truth in them.

            To support such arguments, we may opt to look at Aristotle’s philosophy on morality. According to him, every ethically or morally right issue can be described as a pleasant intermediate activity, which exists between painfully excess and painfully deficient traits. All traits that can be considered to be virtuous should lead up to what is beautiful. In addition, Aristotle states that for there to unbiased choice in what is and what is not virtuous, we should be able to avoid any emotional dispositions. Such emotional dispositions include modesty, which is considered to be the tendency to feel shame.

Evaluating Aristotle’s definition of virtue and vice, it is evident that there is not much that separates the two. They lie on either extreme thus; one can easily find them making the wrong choice. For example, a courageous activity is considered to lie between painful activities of rash confidence and painful activities of fear. If there is too much of fear or too little of confidence will eventually result in cowardice. Therefore, the choices taken can only be virtuous if they are the mean of extreme painful activities.

For a choice to be made there should be a disposition for emotions. In most cases, when people take up believes from which the moral standing is made, emotions are usually central. However, according to Aristotle, if the choices taken are to be acceptable to everyone, then emotions should be put aside. Considerable bias in choice can be recorded if emotions are to be let free. However, some emotions despite being categorized in a class of their own such as the capacity to feel shame do have a positive effect on the choices made.

From our earlier experience as pertains to which option to take, either parties should be able to study both extremes. Those against euthanasia should be able to understand the other extremes and vice versa for the supporters. Of greatest importance when taking either option is that the feelings of the patient. Emotions should not be left to run. If we are to follow Aristotle’s model, then it should quite acceptable for the doctor to aid the patient if they feel they cannot take the pain anymore.