- Action: divided into obligatory, optional and wrong
- Obligatory: morally required
- Wrong: what you are refrained from or otherwise, not permissible for you
- Optional: Neither obligatory nor wrong. Neither duty, nor your requirement
- Deontological: from Greek duty where you have a right or good for their acts.
- Consequences: thinks morality with consequences and consequences determines the action.
- teleological: goal-directed to find rightness and wrongness
- Character: Character is virtue or ethics.
- Motive: introduction of motive to understand a stance
Plato's Moral Philosophy:
From a discussion between Socrates and his friends, What is Right Conduct was written. The first division of thought started from being old or young is better when it was Socrates who eventually proclaimed that it was one's opinion that differences between these two choices. One might claim that being young is better and one might think the direct opposite because of their prior experience. Here Socrates gives off his judgment skills and his rationalization to compete in a debate with Polemarchus. He states:
"Then, Polemarchus, for many who are mistaken in their judgment it follows that it is just to harm their friends, for these are bad and to benefit their enemies, who are good, and so we come to a conclusion..."In another part, there is another debate among the craft itself:
Well then, is the craft of medicine itself defective, or is there any other craft which needs some further excellence-as the eye are in the need of sight, the ears of hearing, and, because of this need, they requre some other craft to investigate and provide for this?- is there in the craft itself some defect, so that each craft requires another craft which will investigate what is beneficial to it, and then the investigating craft needs another such still, and so ad infinitum? Or does a craft investigate what is beneficial to it, or does it need neither itself nor any other to investigate what is required because of imperfections? There is in fact no defect or error of any kind in any craft, nor is it proper to any craft to seek what is to the advantage of anything but the object of it's concern; it is itself pure and without fault, being itself correct, as long as it is wholly itself in the precise sense.But let me start to get to the point where Socrates links all the ties saying that "no one willingly wants to rule, to handle and straighten out the affairs of others. They ask for pay because the man who intends to practice his craft well never does what is best for himself, nor, when he does such orders" and this summarizes that government's benefits from governing which would be absolutely nothing if there was no money. But later on he says that "good man will not be willing to rule for the sake of either money or honor [...] They [the rulers] approach office not as something good or something to be enjoyed, but as something necessary because they cannot entrust it to men better than, or even equal to, themselves." Here it is straightened out that one does rule because they think they have the right, which sounds quite something like the Mandate of Heaven and they rule because they are ought to.
Most of us say it is our deed that takes us to Heaven or Hell and we should thus do well but because we do not, we have to suffer. But why should one do good deed in Earth if they do not believe in Heaven or Hell?