Question

What would a Satisfactory Moral Theory Be like?

response with Thesis Statement, Argumentative, 700 words

Answer 1

A satisfactory moral theory is just a moral theory that's satisfactory. Something is a moral theory if it tells you broadly in what conditions things are morally right and morally wrong, or what features make things morally right and morally wrong. Utilitarianism is a famous example of a moral theory: it says (in one form) that actions are right when they maximize total happiness, and wrong when they fail to maximize total happiness.

A moral theory is satisfactory if it satisfies you. A theory is unsatisfactory if it has flaws--for instance, if it makes wrong predictions, or it's internally contradictory, or it's inconsistent with other theories that we want to accept, or something like that. Here is an example of a moral theory that everyone agrees is unsatisfactory: "An act is right as long as it involves eating grapes, and wrong otherwise." This theory is unsatisfactory for a lot of reasons. Not only is it it completely unmotivated but it also makes really bad predictions about cases, like that it's okay to murder people as long as you're eating grapes while you're murdering them. You're being asked to find a theory that's much better than the grape theory.Essentially, we'll never truly be able to distinguish between "right" and "wrong" actions. At any given time in history, however, philosophers, theologians, and politicians will claim to have discovered the best way to evaluate human actions and establish the most righteous code of conduct. But it's never that easy. Life is far too messy and complicated for there to be anything like a universal morality or an absolutist ethics. The Golden Rule is great (the idea that you should treat others as you would like them to treat you),