Moral, Social and Political Philosophy Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Moral, Social and Political Philosophy - Essay Example Held charged traditional philosophy with presenting masculine morality as gender neutral and superior to those of women. The paradigms used, such as the contractual, conflict, competition and controversy models, are by themselves forms of gender bias and support patterns of domination and subordination. The ratiocinations of Alasdair MacIntyre in his essay Is Patriotism a Virtue, although admittedly an improvement over traditional Western concepts of morality and philosophy is actually founded on its basic masculine bias and interests. It remains to be contract, conflict, competition and controversy driven, resting on public rather than private realities. Espousing the particular characteristics and merits of one's particular nation is relevant only within the framework of physical national boundaries and the competition for resources and relies on a culture of scarcity, selfishness and rivalry. Identity is not really inflexible and set on hard and fast rules. MacIntyre's rejection of objective and impartial moral vantage point from which to view patriotism is superficial. He even acceded that personal morality is colored by its source, the culture of its situs and the ethics of its teachers. It is an admission that the subject is learned by osmosis subconsciously and not from formal education. It is highly susceptible to emotional prodding of self-interest and pride. Patriotism is only partially induced by the maternalist ethics of care which Ms. Held would like to become the foundation of modern morality, philosophy and politics. As such, it cannot cross the chasm of bias and regionalism which would be otherwise in a culture of care where responsible beings would be willing to let go of superficial standards in order to achieve a more enlightened national or even world culture. 2. Current morality and ethics on war and capital punishment depends on the justness of the grounds and the means for doing so. A reactive war on self-defense and self-preservation in response to an invasion or attack is accepted as ethical and moral and so would a pre-emptive one if a threat of invasion or attack is eminent and likely. A just war is not one for invasion and selfish purposes and ends. The convictions of doing away with armed conflict between political communities came about after suffering two world wars and centuries of smaller ones and embodied in the United Nations Charter. Only the possibility of international cooperation could prevent any nation from using force to gain territory, wealth and resources from another. The Clausewitz definition is no longer probable except under the auspices of the United Nations. A disagreement in governance no longer justifies killing of a multitude by another nation. Nevertheless, wars do break out once in a while as long as nations keep arms and manufacture them. Killing as a way of punishment is justified by way of social protection and retaliation for the commission of serious crimes. This is practiced because imprisonment of the criminal for life does not ensure deterrence of criminal behavior and rehabilitation of the convict, in addition to taxing the treasury of necessary funds to keep the criminal behind bars. It has also been asserted that the same goes with capital punishment and death does not reform the criminal nor make amends especially for the murder of another person. There is always the possibility of