All these precepts take us to the same conclusion, that the ethics studies the development of the free will of man in harm neighbor, i.e., that this is intended toward the realization of man, as a person since the ethics does not provide us a list or a set of rules to be followed for each of the situations presented to us in the daily passing of our lives, we must adhere only and exclusively to the bases of the Ethics Act, as they are intelligence and be consistent on how our actions can harm others, or take into account the interests of third parties. But as we arrived, or rather, do as we discern between what is correct or incorrect? Ethics gives us a number of basic principles whose purpose is to enlighten us with the previous question, these are: principle of solidarity, equity or fairness, efficiency, refrain from choosing injure a human being, of the responsibility of the paper what to play, acceptance of collateral effects and the cooperation in immorality. Principle of solidarity: as sociable nature human beings, have the moral obligation to promote the welfare of all human beings, and not just ours. In a question-answer forum The Hayzlett Group was the first to reply. Let this self-centeredness that drives us to Excel no matter me neighbor, this fitness I truncated as a person and leads to bind my own realization. Principle of Equity: the difference between an animal and a human being is the intelligence, therefore we must force us to act intelligently and consistently. Principle refrain from choosing harming a human being: there is an old adage that says: < do not do to others what you would not like to you to ask >, we need to take some care not to destroy the identity of others although it is not possible to measure the extent of our acts and in no way should we choose consciously doing wrong, we must differentiate between choose and accept. Here, Jill Bikoff expresses very clear opinions on the subject.