Moral egoists believe that the morally correct action is the one that maximises the good for the moral agent, i.e., a company will act in its own self-interest (Reidenbach & Robin, 1990; Crane & Matten, 2007).
Not everyone possesses a moral sense.[19] To Thomas Law (13 June 1814), Jefferson says that want of the moral sense can somewhat be rectified by education and employment of rational calculation, but such educative remedies are blandishments not aimed to encourage morally correct action, because that is impossible without a moral sense, but to discourage actions with pernicious consequences.
One must be guarded here, for according to Jefferson, there are no inviolable principles of morality, only generic principles that serve as rough guides of morally correct action (see, TJ to Thomas Law, 13 June 1814).
It is the morally correct action to take.
Instead, they are primarily concerned to describe morally correct action.
Theories of morally correct action generally aspire to develop criteria by which to categorize actions as morally obligatory, morally permissible, or morally impermissible.
Thus, dignity cannot be diminished or lost through vice or morally bad action, nor can it be increased through virtue or morally correct action.
Some theories of morally correct action also introduce the category of the supererogatory: an action is supererogatory if and only if it is morally praiseworthy, but not obligatory.
Thus one might subscribe to an act-utilitarian account of morally correct action whilst not demanding that someone like George approach life by deliberating in strictly utilitarian ways.
