Analysis of Universal and Relative Moral Theories

Analysis of Universal and Relative Moral Theories

Introduction

Universal moral theories

Universal moral theories is a situation where ethical systems apply some form of universality to all individuals, regardless of race, culture, religion, sex and nationality. It is composed of ideal observer theory which holds that ethical sentences express truth propositions regarding the attitudes of a hypothetical perfect observer. There is also divine command theory which suggests that a morally right action must be a command from God. Besides, we have universal prescriptivism which indicates that people actions are in line with moral judgments they make in all situation where the same facts apply.

Relative moral theories

Relative moral theories are concerned about philosophical positions which bring forth moral judgments across different cultures and people. Descriptive relative moral is the first theory which suggests that people do in fact, disagree with what is ethical. On its part, meta-ethics theory holds that nobody is objectively right or wrong in agreement. Lastly, the normative relative theory suggests that people tend to tolerate the immoral behaviours of others because they think that nobody is right or wrong. Notably, not all normative doctrines can adopt descriptive theories, and not all descriptive relativists can take meta-ethics theories.     

The useful theory for a team’s success 

Universal moral philosophy would contribute hugely in taking a team to the next level as opposed to relative morals. Universal moral suggest that ethical sentences express truth propositions regarding the attitudes of a hypothetical ideal observer (Lind, 2017). Precisely, members will tend to judge their actions and approaches based on the ethical propositions, thereby differentiating between right and wrong (Isaak, 2017). On the other hand, the relative moral theory suggests that nobody is objectively right or wrong in agreement, a statement which may lead to continued disagreement in arriving at morally appropriate behaviours for group members. Notably, the application of relative theory may lead to mistrust due to difference in ideologies.

Again I would recommend a team to apply universal theory in the sense that it holds that morally right action must be in line with God’s commandments. Importantly, team members will tend to relate their behaviours with the commandments provided in the Holy Bible, hence eliminating instances of mistrust and etiological differences (Gibbs, 2019). On the other hand, relative moral theory enlightens that people have the right to disagree or agree on ethical behaviours (Hutchings, 2018). Relative philosophy can promote productivity and success among the team members because it will always create room for negotiations on actions which are obviously immoral. Again, ideological differences may as well be noticed on aspects which can affect a team’s performance adversely.

Team’s goals can be attained with the aid of universal moral theory based on its proposition that people actions are in line with moral judgments they make in all situation where the same facts apply. In light of the above illustration, morally fit team members will always execute their duties concerning their past ethical practices (Hutchings, 2018). When it comes to relative moral theory, a team may face a series of challenges to success (Lind, 2017). Notably, the relative ethical theory holds that people tend to tolerate immoral behaviours of others because they think that nobody is right or wrong, which will, in turn, promote mistrust.

Impact of unethical behaviour on a team’s trust

Unethical behaviour is a significant contributor to deteriorated dishonest, lack of confidence and immoral thinking in a group. Unethical behaviour impacts a team’s trust adversely since it leads to a lack of transparency and honest on the opinions presented by the members (Isaak, 2017). The previous research has confirmed that the impacts of immoral behaviour can be detrimental to the team member’s beliefs. Besides, unethical behaviour stands a higher chance of hampering a team’s trust (Lind, 2017). This point is supported by universal moral theories, which holds that people morals beliefs are reflected in their actions. In connection, a team with members with unethical behaviour will as well attain immorally fit outcomes.

Unethical behavior leads to elevated instances of indulging in dishonesty deals and activities. An immoral mind oriented members will make peers lose trust in the position held, or the role played in the team (Hutchings, 2018). Unethical behaviour may in the form of using a team’s property for personal gain, dishonest when handling finances and exposing the team’s secrets to outsiders. Again, unethical behaviour may come in when some of the team members are only interested in attaining their personal goals as opposed to taking the team to the next level (Isaak, 2017). Overall, the above-illustrated behaviours are unethically fit for the group’s success, which will, in turn, lead mistrust among the members.

Immoral behaviour triggers clashes among the group members due to continued arguments regarding right and wrong lanes. You will find team members who conduct themselves decently and uphold high levels of morals (Isaak, 2017). As a result, they will tend to feel betrayed and helpless due to immoral behaviours of counterparts, hence leading to mistrust between the two extremes (Gibbs, 2019). Due to frustration, the honest members will make efforts towards looking for other teams or reconstructing the existing one. Notably, unethical behaviour may lead to not only mistrust, but also depression and stress to the honest members, because they may have invested much of their resources in it.

References

Gibbs, J. C. (2019). Moral development and reality: Beyond the theories of Kohlberg, Hoffman,

and Haidt. Oxford University Press.

Hutchings, K. (2018). Global ethics: An introduction. John Wiley & Sons.

Isaak, R. (2017). Green logic: Ecopreneurship, theory and ethics. Routledge.

Lind, G. (2017). The theory of moral-cognitive development a socio-psychological assessment.

In Moral Judgments and Social Education (pp. 25-48). Routledge.