Month: February 2025

Today’s Life Class was an eye-opening experience as we explored Critical Thinking – Ethical Paradoxes. I had never realized how many factors come into play when making decisions. The session was incredibly engaging, keeping us hooked from start to finish.

One of the most thought-provoking aspects was imagining how our decisions might change when viewed from different perspectives. We explored various ethical paradoxes, and the one that resonated with me the most was Moral Relativism—the idea that morality isn’t universal.

Previously, I assumed that my moral beliefs were commonly shared by those around me. However, I learned that ethical values are deeply influenced by one’s environment and experiences. What feels right to me might not be the same for someone else, and that doesn’t make either of us wrong. Our conditioning shapes our perspectives, making what seems unfamiliar to me completely natural for another.

Reflecting on past experiences, I now realize that I have encountered this paradox multiple times. Moving forward, I will be more mindful when facing such situations. I will respect differing moral values and embrace the idea of agreeing to disagree, depending on the context. The content learned today will sharpen my skills related to decision making and analysing it.

Reflection on the Life Session on Moral Dilemmas and Ethical Theories

Attending the life session on moral dilemmas and ethical theories was an eye-opening experience. We explored different moral perspectives, including self-interest theory, utilitarianism, and Kant’s approach, applying them to real-life scenarios and discussing their implications.

The session was highly interactive, encouraging us to think critically and justify our moral decisions. One of the most engaging aspects was applying these theories to dilemmas where no clear right or wrong answer existed. For instance, we debated whether it would be justifiable to lie to protect someone, weighing it from a utilitarian perspective (maximizing overall happiness) versus Kant’s deontological stance (where lying is inherently wrong, regardless of the consequences).

Another thought-provoking exercise involved prioritizing moral scenarios based on our values. This exercise helped us understand how our personal principles influence our decision-making. Some of us leaned towards pragmatism, prioritizing outcomes, while others held steadfast to absolute moral rules.

The best part of the session was the open, respectful discussion, where differing opinions led to deeper understanding rather than conflict. Hearing varied perspectives on the same dilemma broadened my thinking, showing how different moral theories apply in different circumstances. It reinforced the idea that morality isn’t always black and white but a nuanced, ever-evolving process of reasoning and reflection.

Overall, this session was a great learning experience, equipping me with a more structured approach to ethical decision-making and helping me appreciate the complexity of moral reasoning in everyday life.

This session was about how we make ethical decisions and justify our actions. The session introduced key ethical theories that shape our perspectives on right and wrong, helping us navigate difficult choices in both personal and professional life.

One of the central discussions revolved around Moral Relativism, which suggests that morality is subjective and varies across cultures and individuals. This challenged us to question whether universal moral principles exist or if ethics depend on societal norms.It was also eye opening in the sense that my ethics can be exact opposite from someone else ,and I should be open about it and should understand there perspective leading to the conclusion that moral ethics might not be universal and that is ok.

We also explored Self-Interest Theory (Egoism), which argues that individuals act in ways that benefit themselves. While this may seem selfish, it raised interesting debates about whether acting in self-interest can sometimes lead to overall good.

On the other hand, Deontology, founded by Immanuel Kant, asserts that moral duties and rules should guide our actions, regardless of the outcomes. This theory contrasts with Utilitarianism, which emphasises the greatest good for the greatest number. The debate between Rule Utilitarianism (which follows general rules that maximize happiness) and Act Utilitarianism (which evaluates each situation separately) highlighted the challenge of balancing fairness and consequences.

It was also interesting to note that how most of us make decision on self-interest theory and how our ethics and decision changes based on the situation. Specially after reading the article “The man hired to have sex with children” it came to everyones immediate reaction that this is wrong, but then the question was how come parents are involved in this thing and making their daughter undergo the same. The conditioning was then discussed.

A key takeaway was that moral reasoning is not about choosing the “right” theory but understanding different perspectives to make more informed, ethical decisions. By questioning our assumptions and applying these frameworks, we can navigate ethical dilemmas with clarity and confidence.

आज की लाइफ क्लास बहुत ही सोचने पर मजबूर करने वाली थी। हमने नैतिक दुविधाओं (Ethical Dilemmas) और उन चीजों पर बात की जो हमारे फैसलों को प्रभावित करती हैं। मुझे समझ में आया कि परवरिश और माहौल का हमारे सोचने की क्षमता को गहराई से प्रभावित किया है। इनसे मेरे अंदर दूसरों के प्रति सहानुभूति और न्याय की भावना विकसित हुई है, साथ ही अलग-अलग विचारों को समझने का मौका भी मिला। चर्चा से यह भी पता चला कि खुद को समझना और अपने मन के झुकाव/रुचि को पहचानना कितना जरूरी है। नैतिक फैसले अक्सर आसान नहीं होते, बल्कि सोच-विचार और सही संतुलन की जरूरत होती है।