It seems to me that the deontology theory focuses on abiding to moral rules and obligations as determined by God. It involves obeying God and stresses the reasons why something is done and having the correct motivation. I don’t believe that Gates considered either the obeying of morals from God or whether his motivation was correct. I think that more than anything else, early in life, Gates wanted to be a successful and excellent in business. I believe that history will show that over the long run, Gates strove for excellence and any bad choices he has been accused of making along the way were really just minor bumps in the road caused by those that were jealous and envious of his success. Because of being successful and being excellent in business, Gates became a target for criticism. Gates has been accused of stealing ideas, patent infringement and more. However, since making his billions, Gates has consistently donated to charities, set up foundations and generally tried to make a difference for the greater good of society.
If you’re so dedicated to doing whatever makes the world best, how about you quit doing moral philosophy, go start a hedge fund, and give the profits to reputable charities? Surely, says the objection, the good done by the money you’d earn in such a venture far outweighs whatever good you might be doing propounding consequentialist moral theory. I’ve no reason to expect I’d actually produce much good in finance, but I have a reasonable expectation of producing at least some good in my present work, so the best choice is to continue
He ridiculed the pretence of the establishment of his time, using his own brilliance to expose their ignorance. Above all else he wished to know what was true, what was right and what was just. His own mind was to be the judge of this truth, not the opinions of his feeble interlocutors. His passion was for nothing else but his rational mind which he delighted in using in the same way a young child delights in playing with a new toy. His drive and ambition had seen him soar above the masses, while offering them technologies once unimaginable. And the higher above them he soared, the more they despised him. In the name of what was termed ‘justice’ he was put on trial. It was a show trial, throughout which one theme was clear. His crime was his ability, his productivity, and his achievements. His sin lay in being too able, too productive and too great an achiever. He granted to the state a fundamental right to his mind, his effort, and his product. Never take the deceit of soulless power-lustres to heart, lest you lose your passion for life. Do not surrender like Bill Gates! Do not grant them any moral right to the product of your intelligence. Stand up for your right to your own life. Selfishly. Egoistically.
Inequalities must always benefit everyone in society. Giving some people more than others is sometimes to everyone’s advantage (i.e. Giving doctors a higher salary promotes better medical treatment for everyone).people behind the veil of ignorance would prefer inequality to equality because it is to everyone’s advantage. Injustice is inequalities that are not to the benefit of all. Where the worst off members of society are made as well off as we possibly can.if the rich are able to do so, they should probably take some of their earnings and put it toward improving the lives of the homeless and the disabled, the impoverished and those who are discriminated against. Those who are well off do have social obligations to take some of their wealth, of time, money, food, etc. and improve the lives of others with it.
He pursued a number of philanthropic endeavors.he donated large amounts of money to various charitable organizations and scientific research programs through the bill and Melinda gates foundation. Bill and warren Buffett founded the giving pledge, whereby they and other billionaires pledge to give at least half their wealth to philanthropy. Gates has also provided personal donations to educational institutions in 1999,gates donated $20 million to the Massachusetts institutes of technology(MIT) for the construction of a computer laboratory named the William H. Gates building that was designed by architect Frank Gehry.while Microsoft had previously given financial support to the institution, this was the first personal donation received from gates . The foundation works to save lives and improve global health and is working with rotary international to eliminate polio.
Contemporary environmental ethics, drawing on case studies from philosophy, public policy, and civil society in sustainability, animal welfare, land ethics, wilderness preservation, environmental economics, and resource management. Recurring questions are what fundamentally explains the value of nature and non-human animals, and how to integrate those values into decision-making analyses for society in which competing values may be at stake (such as human nutrition and wellbeing), and in which considerations of justice and sustainability may also loom large. Increasingly, such analyses must dovetail with analyses at a global scale — for example, at the nexus of food, water, energy, and climate. Thus, values of local vs. global justice are increasingly at the forefront of environmental ethics, as well as concrete questions about the desirability and design of various international institutions. To the people of poor nations, we pledge to work alongside you to make your farms flourish and let clean waters flow; to nourish starved bodies and feed hungry minds. And to those nations like ours that enjoy relative plenty, we say we can no longer afford indifference to the suffering outside our borders nor can we consume the world’s resources without regard to the effect.
References: // James Salzman and Barton Thompson, Environmental Law and Policy (4th Ed.)
If you’ve had this treatment and are now much stronger and hardier than ordinary folk, don’t you have a particular obligation to, say, spend your life in disaster areas? And if you’re a consequentialist and you know that receiving such a treatment would leave you so much better equipped to do great good in the world, how could you justify not undertaking it? And so on – for each new potential enhancement, the consequentialist will always be confronted with the fact that, if she only took this pill (wore this brain-stimulating device, underwent this gene therapy, the world could become a much better place.
Due to diminishing marginal utility of money, the rich are obligated to take some of their money to help the poor for that money will bring the poor much more happiness than it will bring to the rich and our moral obligation is to increase the amount of happiness in the world as much as we can.