The Justification of Morality and Why You Should Act Morally

In this article, I would like to consider the following related questions: (i) Can we streamline the moral system? (Ii) Why do you take ethical behavior? (Iii) A way of persuading others to behave ethically. Moral philosophers have taken various responses for centuries, but have not reached a general consensus. However, as these problems are the basis of practical application of moral theory, it is worth continuing to ponder them.

All moral theories must have at least two main criteria. One is a standard of justification (that is, a particular ethical theory should not contain contradiction). Moral orientation). However, many (traditional) moral theories do not meet the second criterion, so there is no high demand for applied ethics to solve the modern complex moral problem. Why is this happening? In short, the traditional moral theory is that it is not enough to deal with new problems such as nuclear power, genetic engineering, and cloning. Therefore, people are interested in updating and strengthening specific ethical theories to meet the latest requirements. This is difficult, often a very complex process.

How do I understand this question? Why is it ethical? Can I answer this question? If so, how is it? In this article, I developed a practical moral defense paradigm, the rationality theory of the first moral matters we did. I believe that morality is essentially a set of practices that everyone participates in their existence. I think that skilled practitioners of these different practices should be understood as authority of the times and should appeal to moral authority for the purpose of moral action. Moral authority. I can not answer the question "Why should I become moral?"

Moral philosophers tend to focus on the justification of moral assertion, the existence and justification of moral truth, and the doubts required by morality. These are quite different from the problem of experiences being pursued in science, but the way we answer each question may influence the way we answer different questions. While the two questions are quite different, scientific explanation projects pose potential challenges to specific philosophical views, while concerns about philosophical problems have brought some explanation with the name science. Suspected of sexual assertion. This depends on philosophical assumptions which are usually controversial. Advances in this field can not be achieved by a moral philosophy unrelated to science nor by an ethical and philosophical quest for scientific exploration by the hands of philosophers.