This article reviews and criticizes Aristotle’ s Eudemian ETHICS based on Anthony Kenny’ s translation. We have tried to show that morality in Aristotle means living good, and his purpose in writing this work is to find an answer to the question “ what is good life and how we can achieve it” an answer in the virtuous tradition of philosophical environment which he is thinking in. Hence the understanding of the nature of what is happiness based on the understanding of the nature of virtue. After examining all the various virtues, he ultimately defines happiness as "full life activity according to complete virtues" (1219 a, 39) and this main virtue includes all other virtues, namely moral virtue and intellectual virtue. Studying and acquainting with such a book for those interested in ethical studies have this advantage that they can examine some of the ethical issues in society from the scope of virtueism.

This article introduces, analyzes, and criticizes the work of Lawrence M. Hinman, ETHICS: A Pluralistic Approach to Moral Theory. Hinman is a Philosopher of ETHICS in the multimedia learning. He believes that multiculturalism is important factor of nowadays so the most important responsibility of philosophers of ETHICS is prevention of moral conflict. The global communication and information in 21st century needs global tolerance and respect of various nations, cultures, and moralities together because different people and societies have a common human nature and common natural rights that obligate to justice and moral relationship between different people and various societies’ beliefs throughout the world. Moral communication in multiculturalism approach is against racial, gender, national, and ethnic prejudice. Hinman believes in moral dialogue and global learning across different cultures. The book of ETHICS: A Pluralistic Approach to Moral Theory has a proper category of new ethical problems, and the candid standpoint of author is considerable. He has a logical method, and in the end of every part of book there are some questions for evaluation of students learning. So this book is proper for the philosophy of ETHICS in universities.

The present article seeks to explain the criterion moral philosophers have proposed to determine which moral judgments are right and which ones are not. Nevertheless, since the writer holds that ETHICS of virtue is of a significant status among others, he has made an attempt to investigate the critiques and criticisms offered by different thinkers on ETHICS of virtue. The writer also touches on the criticisms regarding another type of ETHICS called applied ETHICS and finally deals with the convincing opinion about the subject in question.

Despite of its important and widespread ethical dimensions, architecture has long been studied and considered as aesthetics, rather than ETHICS. Any free and autonomic action of human is subject to moral observance and judgment. To build is the most fundamental activity in architecture and has many effects on human, natural environment and built environment. Therefore, it should be a subject of moral judgment. On the other hand, the relation between theory and practice is unavoidable, and ethical theory, which is essentially “ prescriptive” and refers to “ ought” and “ ought not” , has a profound connection with acting and building. The philosophy of ETHICS, is the study of justifying the ethical positions and reasoning behind our moral beliefs. Normative ETHICS is a main branch of philosophy of ETHICS that generally examines good (right) and bad (false) affairs, and examines how to determine morally right and false actions. Three types of theories can be identified in the normative ETHICS, according to the type of attention to the results of the acts: 1) “ Consequentialist theories” (includes Egoism and Utilitarianism), in which merely the result of the acts determines goodness and evil of the acts. 2) “ Non-consequentialist theories” (includes Natural law theory, Divine command theory, Kant theory), in which the result does not determine goodness and evil of the acts. 3) “ Virtue ETHICS” , in which the concept of ‘ virtue’ is vital and central. Each of the normative ethical theories has some particular general position and criteria. Special opinion of these theories about ‘ building in architecture’ can be deduced and inferred from their basic and general principles and viewpoints. This research is developmental, in terms of purpose; and its approach is qualitative. The research method is descriptive-analytic and it is based on rational reasoning. The purpose of this article is to study the perspectives of two important theories of normative ETHICS (virtue ETHICS and Kantian ETHICS) about building in architecture. How does define the desired and acceptable building in these two moral perspectives, and what kind of architecture will be result from these two theories? In the first part of the article, that is descriptive, it has been tried to identify and introduce the principles and criteria of two theories of virtue ETHICS and Kantian ETHICS through referring to the technical texts of ETHICS. In the second part of the article, which is analytical and argumentative, it has been tried to infer the basic instruction and their point of view on the acceptable building in architecture through reflecting on the basics and criteria of each theory, with logical reasoning method, and it has been tried to provide some evidences and examples in confirming the inferences. The Research results show that, firstly, there are several deep and serious differences between these two ethical theories; and, second, there is direct relationship between virtue ETHICS and traditional architecture and between Kantian ETHICS and contemporary architecture. On the other hand, each of us, often subconsciously, follows rules and maxims in our actions, that can be considered as kind of moral theory. If everyone be aware of his/her ethical position and reasoning for his/her ethical rules that governing his/her actions, he/she can criticize, deepen and transcend them. This paper can also be helpful in this regard.

Exploring the relationship between gender and ETHICS is the common concern of some feminist scholars. From this perspective, feminists criticize the traditional morality for ignoring the importance of cultural values as well as the moral experience of women with a view of patriarchy. Therefore, they express various approaches and ideas, trying to address a new formulation of moral relations and system appropriate to gender. Female attitudes to ETHICS emphasize on personal relationships and the ETHICS of care, engaging in the value of human relationships. Besides, maternal approaches assert the special relationship between mother and child as a moral and interactive pattern. For this reason, these gender-based approaches unlike traditional morality which contains the general rules of morality, impartiality and rational ideas are non-holistic, context-driven, objective, and emotion-oriented.

This article considers the similarities and the differences between Levinas’s and Kant’s ETHICS. The article has two sections. In the first, the common features of moral thinking of Levinas and Kant such as "primacy of practical reason" and "respect to human status" are considered and it is shown that of Levinas’s and kant’s philosophies share a moral spirit in their philosophical systems. In the second, we referred to different features such as Kant’s autonomy in contrast with Levinas’s heteronomy. Moreover, sensibility in Levinas’s ETHICS has been replaced by Kantian reason. In addition, the nature of ethical subject of Kant is different that of ethical subject of Levinas. The Kantian subject is free and rational and Levinasian subject, at first sight, is the subject who is responsible for other and his face. Therefore, it can be said that Levinas and Kant together have a moral mission.

Background: Recently ETHICS of care has been one of approaches which has being discussed and developed its theoretical basis by nursing ethical theorists. The aim of this article is to introduce this approach and its entry to nursing.Methods: This study was descriptive - analytical study that was conducted cross-sectional in 2015. The data gathering tool was a questionnaire consisted of three parts: demographic information, Quranic Intimacy questionnaire and a test of mental health. The collected data were analyzed using SPSS version 19 software and Pearson correlation test, t-test and ANOVA.Results: The article has been divided to sections includes introduction, introduction to history of ETHICS of medicine, ETHICS of care and ETHICS of care in nursing. Care has been defined as a sense of being worry and feeling empathy for someone and to be commitment about him. Care of ETHICS has begun as a feministic movement and emphasized care as a feministic virtue which can be used for being commitment about others. Care of ETHICS unless teleological and deontological views is context based, objective, and emotion based. In the recent years, nursing ethical theorist has been attentive to this approach. The article discusses the current knowledge and the forward way to the development of a unique care of ETHICS in nursing.Conclusion: Nowadays ethical theorists in nursing have not accepted ETHICS of care as a dominant ethical approach for nursing but for creating a more professional independency, it has been discussed as a complement for current ethical approaches used in nursing ETHICS.

The followers of the divine command theory regard ETHICS as completely dependent on religion and do not regard a meaning and reality for it beyond the divine command and countermand. On the other hand, the followers of secular ETHICS view ETHICS as prior and superior to religion, and at least consider moral values as an independent meaning and reality. In the meantime, some theorists of Islamic thought, despite the rejection of the theory of the divine command, believe in religious ETHICS and deem religion consisting of ETHICS. The chosen theory is that ETHICS is the same as religion and religion is the same as ETHICS, and despite the inaccuracy of divine command theory, there is a reading of religious ETHICS that is superior to secular ETHICS in all semantic, ontological, epistemological, and psychological aspects.

The English word "ETHICS" is derived from the ancient Greek word ē thikó s (ἠ θ ι κ ό ς ), meaning "relating to one's character", which itself comes from the root word ê thos (ἦ θ ο ς ) meaning "character, moral, nature". (1). This was borrowed into Latin as ethica and then into French as é thique, from which it was borrowed into English.