Discussion for Module 10

Module 10

Discuss one of the issues taken up from the point of view of the preliminary and finalist theories (3 preliminary theories and 3 finalist theories). That is, you will come up with six perspectives on the issue you choose.

Discussions:


Hate speech is a controversial term for speech intended to degrade, intimidate, or incite violence or prejudicial action against someone based on his/her race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, or disability. The term covers written as well as oral communication.


"Hate Speech" is the issue that i will be going to take into consideration in the following theories:

╫ Preliminary Theories ╫





******Ethical Absolutism*******

In here "all actions must be black or white and never gray, at any given time", so, regarding with this issue (hate speech) it is not right to publish something that cause hatred or disappointment to some people and as the name suggests (hate speech) it is very clear that it is unethical. So, it can never be right or good since it is "absolute", but of course there's always a disadvantage and advantage to this issue. Advantage to the one wrote the "hate speech" and disadvantage to whom the speech is address. Nevertheless, if you hurt someone even if you are happy with the result it cause then it still not right or "unethical". :-b

******Ethical Egoism*******

Here it is very clear that the one who wrote the said hate speech never think of the things it might cause whether it can harm or not but only think of himself. Maybe he wanted reveange or he just want to ruin the reputation of the person whom he attack. And maybe he think that if the said speech will be known to people some will praise him and follow his belief.

*******Ethical Altruism *******

Maybe the person who did the said hate speech wanted to make the people aware about the anomalies done by the victim (of the hate speech). He think that if he will be posting or doing that (hate speech) he could help many people whom are the victim of the anomalies or say, undesirable things the said person or organization do.

*****************************************************************

╫ Finalist Theories ╫







*******UTILITARIANISM*******

As John Stuart Mill believe that "those actions that bring happiness are considered morally right while those actions that inhibit hapiness are considered morally wrong", we can easily conclude that the one who made the hate speech which brings happiness to him considers it as morally right while the one whom the hate speech is addressed considered it as morally wrong. So, the said action of the actor (who made the hate speech) is right since it brings happiness to him.


*******Categorical Imperatives*******

e.g. Love one another is good in itself and does not need any purpose
(hard 2 analyze, huh!?!,eheh",)
For me, maybe the actor (who made the hate speech) is a media man (mostly naman noh!), so in this case he only did what the management want him to do, he posted it without even realizing what it could bring to the people. He does not think about why he should do so. He only wills the performance of his said duty.


*******Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics*******

In this theory the actor tried his best doing the said hate speech in order to attain the ends which he want or his purpose. Because as what i've understand in this theory that the "purpose" is needed in order for the person to motivate or to have a reason for what he is doing. So, maybe it is not his own will but for the purpose or end he want to attain.
"As a result every excellent decision presupposes an excellent reason."