How Do Individuals and Societies Resolve Those Ethical Disagreements?
They argue that if a person realises that it would be morally good to do something then it would be irrational for that person not to do it.
However, working to develop factual knowledge sufficiently well proven to be accepted by many people with different ethical points of view would focus the ethical arguments differently.
Also, I would try to respect the clients’ wishes because some issues can lead to unnecessary lawsuits because different people in the client’s lives may feel offended. I would also identify organizations or groups of people that would get affected by my decision. The confidentiality code of ethics helps support my claim because it is important to keep the clients information private. Breaking this code could lead to loss of clients and thus disgrace the organization. Confidentiality helps the organization serve more clients and also helps the organization grow big. Also confidentiality shows that the human services professionals respect the traditions and cultures of communities and safeguard their believes (Woodside & McMlam, 2014).
This essay has shown that although the argument from moral disagreement is not necessarily valid in its most basic iterations, by narrowing the type of moral disagreement relevant to their argument, moral anti-realists can build up an extremely strong case against the existence of moral facts. The impetus is now with moral realists to defend their views, but, at least for the time being, we have very good reason to believe that the existence of moral disagreement does indeed give us good reason to believe that there are no moral facts.
Reid Mandell, B., & Schram, B. (2012). An introduction to human services: Policy and practice (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Woodside, M., & McMlam, T. (2014). An introduction to the human services. New York: Sharpe Inc.