We can integrate ethical systems on the basis of the structure of action. Ethical reflection can begin with the acting subject, the action itself, or the outcome. Another consideration is the field of application: What actions can be subjected to ethical considerations? (Sneezing or falling from a tree is not an ethical act.) Furthermore, does ethics only apply to actions between subjects, like in the case of lying, or does it extend to other objects, like trees, animals, landscapes, etc.? Is cutting down a tree, or slaughtering an animal, an action that can be subjected to ethical consideration? If so, why? 

The table below compares five different approaches to ethics: Relativism, Religious ethics, utlitarianism, deontology, and virtue ethics.

Utilitarianism:

• Ethics as "Calculation of Outcome system." It quantifies Ethics.

• What's best for me? How do I make this decision?

• Cost-Benefit analysis for any action. But: the example of Syria?

• Anticipating the future.

• Where is the place of Ethics here? What about accepting bad actions for good outcomes?

• Do we have to assume full autonomy of the actors?

• Real states versus anticipated states: Betting, Gambling. Happiness machine?

• Avoiding negative consequences versus striving for good results: Pain avoidance or pleasure seeking?

• Why are pleasure and pain so opposed? Maybe it is much more connected.

• Where does Utilitarianism work best: individuals, groups, governments, companies?

• What makes trade or exchange fair?

• Is the employment relation a fair economic exchange or trade? What makes it so?

Ethical Reasoning through Game Theory?

• Where does ethics come from?

• Golden Rule versus Satanic Rule

• Basic assumption: Ethical rules emerge as the rules of the game. Therefore, Ethics is built into the way nature works

• Evolution and ethics?

• Do systems need external ethical, political authority to enforce ethical standards? Contractarian theory. 

• But what about right or wrong?