What would a satisfactory moral theory be like?

Name
Instructor
Course
Date
Satisfactory Moral Theory
Morality has been fairly obvious and constant for centuries. It defines who we are and how we interact with others in the community. Philosophers like Aristotle argued that contemplation and friendship are the two virtues define our humanity. Friendship is intertwined with other values such as empathy, care, trust and concern, all which are aspects of harmonious living. There, however, are other many factors that come into play when we talk about molarity. It is clear that conventional thinking and quest to offer justification to what we do form the core of our moral account. However, where our moral sensitivities have been constant, the ethical theories seem to fall short of their primary goal that is to provide a framework for moral judgment. This is displayed in the form of egoism, relativism, and humiliations. Many moral frameworks leave the reader more confused than informed. However, a satisfactory moral framework should be just what humans require for an amiable and practical life.
A satisfactory moral theory would be sensitive to all forms of nature. Nature defines all that surrounds us including animals, fellow humans, and geographies. Human must accept that they were made to be by natural selection and random mutation and not via their design. Since the time our ancestors formulated the initial moral philosophies, leaning on their sense of superiority over the other creation, the universe has reacted in total aversion.

The theories protected their interests in the lone understanding of right or wrong. However, the understanding that both human and the environment co-exist is the initial stage of conformity to all other forms of life. The reason why people confront each other has been the pursuit of control of the earthly properties. If everyone was to agree to be sensitive to nature, then there could not be the confrontations and wrangles. This action would help cure our desires and frustrate our reason for doing the wrong. If we became sensitive, then we would abstain from the philosophy of ‘ought’ and rather use logic for and against some notions. As a result, every action would originate from deliberation.
Morality rests in one treating another as they deserve. Basically, this means having a clear motive and moral justification why or why not to pursue certain traits. It is only a fool who could disregard the virtues of loyalty, love and the like from the basic understanding or moral living. Many moral philosophies insist on these kinds of characters, and this makes people satisfied and happier. Eliminating love would mean instigating hatred and indifferences. Further displacing loyalty can only create room for cheats and distrust. People do all evils out of the negative morals. It is when they have no love for their neighbors that they can kill, steal, injure and emotionally hurt their fellow human. There can never be trust when we do not have confidence in the people one interacts with.
Everyone is satisfied when there are justice and fairness. Although the theory of utilitarianism has been employed of late, it fails to account for the two. It recognizes that people must assume diverse strategies when pursuing a goal (Verser 2). However, it is only aimed at maximizing welfare regardless of the method and the consequences. When people are devoted to just getting rich, then rules do not apply as long as the end product is accessible. The exceptions are what make lead to unethical behaviors like mistreatment. The question of justice arises when we treat others unfriendly. When justice prevails, then a fair and equal treatment is adopted. Being just is simply being considerate of others people’s perspectives, feelings and treating then in a similar manner one would expect (Wakin 49). This falls under the notion that everyone is alike. A person gets an equivalent of what they show to others. When they emulate injustice, then every other person will be biased to them. This may sound harsh, but it is a reality considering that individuals are treated as responsible agents who merit in responses bound to their past conduct. Although it is a harsh way of creating balance, it is a lesson that we ought to be as fair as we expect others to be to us.
All the aspects of good morality lean on our ability to safeguard the truth. Truth starts with oneself. Our inner conscience dictates what is right or wrong for us. Whenever one engages in an activity whose results could be adverse, they will always defy their conscience. There is no justification for what is wrong unless the same defense is cooked. In the end, this will only instigate a negative morality that defines one’s character. Being true requires one to defend all other aspects of positive ethics such as reason, justice, and fairness. Being truthful conforms to the utilitarianism theory that dictates practices like stealing, breaking promises, and killing as wrong. However, the consequences may not be enough to train one to follow the correct moral standards. Some practices such as homosexuality and atheism may not necessarily have visible negativities. However, the psychological wellbeing of oneself is hurt. The only way to evade such behaviors is by being genuine to ourselves and others. The conscience that dictates killing a person to donate an organ to another is wrong. First, the one performing the surgery will be wrong in killing one when trying to save another. It is even worse when one believes they are more important and hence should live while others die. This starts by being dishonest to oneself and then to others.
Besides differentiating what is right and wrong, the moral theory must satisfactorily promote aspects of positive ethics such as responsibility, reliability, focus and productivity. It is currently the highest form of immorality to not work as expect to live happily. This in itself will lead one to weak reasoning and bad decisions like theft. Being responsible means embracing any opportunity and taking leading roles when required. The roles will be to guide others to realize their goals, be focused in all they engage in and work to be self-reliant. By avoiding dependency, then one can make stable personal decisions that include maximizing modesty and protecting what is virtuous.
It is evident that satisfaction is different from one person to the other. There no single theory that can gratify everyone. However, the ethical theory should satisfy some average set criteria. This regards what people judge as good, adequate and considerate. This dictates that our life should not be centered on individual survival and fulfillment. Rather, for one to be morally satisfying, they must emulate what is legitimately right regardless of how the respondent will react if they are indifferent. It should be understood that an ethical conduct will in most cases conflict with people’s interest in the current world. However, it must be adopted if we were to avert the modern ideology of survival of the fittest through which all forms of immorality have been instigated.

Works Cited
Wakin, Malham M. Integrity First. 1st ed. Lanham: Lexington Books, 2000. Print.
Verser, Evan. “Ethics Commentary Part VII: A Satisfactory Moral Theory”. Faminetimes.blogspot.co.ke. N.p., 2016. Web. 30 Nov. 2016.