I believe when it comes to firm ethical standards I would have to choose between either Sanders or Carson. Sanders has been very consistent with what he has been supporting politically and doesn't seem to change his answers with what is necessarily popular (he stands by what he believes). Carson also stands with what he believes, especially in anything that possibly has to do with religion. I think probably all candidates, even the ones I mentioned about the firm ethics, have used or alluded to some form of situational ethics. (one of) The main thing candidates think of is how they appeal to the voters, so that might mean altering ones view about a specific topic (something as serious as abortion or as dumb as no more Christmas decorations on the Starbucks cups) earns them a positive net amount of voters, then they'll probably do it. I think ethical relativism can be applied to Trump in a more specific fashion than culture. His mindset seems like he just thinks of people that are in his level of income even if he seems like he helping everyone. Machiavelli said that "a leader doesn't have to possess all the virtuous qualities . . but it is absolute imperative that he seems to posses them" which his probably why Trump is still currently leading and not out of the race like most people thought when announced he was running. I think firm and situational ethics are more important because the candidate should be rooted in their own ideals and be somewhat resilient to change while also being able to adapt when the situation calls for it.
No comments:
Post a Comment