Explain Kant's categorical imperative.
Transfer-Encoding: chunked Explain Kant’s categorical imperative (25 marks). Kant is an 18th century German philosopher who wrote the book Groundwork for metaphysics. The book deals with his theory that morality is a priori synthetic (a priori is a statement that is knowable without reference to any experience and synthetic means having truth or falsity can be tested using experience or the senses) and that moral decisions should be taken with a universal view to one’s duty to mankind as a whole. He laid out his ideas about the categorical imperative in this book. An imperative is a statement of what should be done. The philosopher Hume said that you can’t get a ‘should’ statement out of an ‘if’ statement. This means that experience can only give us hypothetical imperatives (not moral commands to the will – they are ‘if’ statements and do not apply to everyone and you only need obey them if you want to achieve a certain goal, for example, ‘if’ you want to be healthy then you should exercise and eat a balanced diet). A categorical imperative is a ‘should’ statement, but it is not based on experience, and doesn’t rely on a particular outcome. According to Kant, categorical imperatives apply to everyone because they are based on an objective a priori law of reason (an objective law is something that is factually true). The categorical
Describe the main strengths and weaknesses of Utilitarianism
Describe the main strengths and weaknesses of Utilitarianism Strengths * Utilitarianism is simple. It doesn't have a lot of complex rules, but instead the individual can decide would be the 'best', by how it affects others. * It is flexible: no law or principle is unchallengeable. * It allows for circumstance, so you can decide what is the best thing to do given the current circumstance. * It ties in with the Christian ethic of unconditional love, as preached by Jesus. * If someone believes that both lying and breaking promises are acts that are intrinsically wrong, utilitarianism provides a principled way in which they can choose which moral rule to break if forced to make a choice between them. * The emphasis on impartiality, unselfishness and altruism is to be commended. * There is no need to consider precedents as absolute - just because one action worked for someone does not mean that it must be enforced again, when it may not work for someone else. * It is also attractive to secular thinkers, because it makes no grand claims to the supernatural or metaphysical. It appeals to tangible results - the consequences of an action will be perceived. Weaknesses * What do we mean by happiness? What makes us happy? It is hard to define happiness as it varies with person to person. * Should happiness always be pursued? What if we can only be happy if we achieve it in
Capital Punishment
'Capital Punishment, also known as the death penalty, is the execution of a person by the state as punishment for a crime. Crime is known as a capital offence, or capital crimes.'1 Capital Punishment has been a worldwide issue, and has been elaborated since the Christian faith was introduced into the world, although the Christian faith was introduced when capital punishment was an accepted feature of the legal system, as represented when Jesus and a penitent thief were on the crosses..."We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong".2It has and still being debated among a variety of countries and religions. Although only in recent times has capital punishment been questioned. The feature has still been retained by a few western European countries, or those of Anglo-Saxon origin in other parts of the world. 104 countries have formally abolished the feature from their legal system but some countries still retain the feature, but is only used under specific circumstances and capital offences, such as treason. In the USA the practices varies among different states. Capital Punishment was partially abolished in the UK by 1965; at this time only major felonies passed the judgement of using capital punishment such as treason, piracy with violence and arson remained as capital crimes. By 1999 the act of Capital Punishment had
To what extent should our emotions be considered an important aspect of our ethical and aesthetic judgments?
Sebastian Symonowicz To what extent should our emotions be considered an important aspect of our ethical and aesthetic judgments? Emotions are one of the most significant factors that affect our life. They accompany us most of the time; sometimes we don't realize that, but they have a giant influence on our life. Occasionally this influence is dreadful, especially in formation of aesthetical and ethical judgements. That's is why men always wanted to define the extend of its use as an aspect of our ethical and aesthetic judgements. Aesthetic issues have been discussed since classical times, but they would not then have been so described. 'Aesthetics', deriving from the Greek word aesthesis ('perception'), was coined by the German philosopher, Alexander Baumgarten, in the middle of the eighteenth century. By it, he meant 'the science of sensory knowledge', though the term soon began to be confined to a particular area of such knowledge and understood as 'the science of sensory beauty', the examination of taste. Aesthetics judgements have always been considered a matter of personal taste and therefore subjective. Attempts to look at aesthetics objectively go back to the ancient Egyptians who devised precise mathematical systems for proportioning their structures and art. More refined systems were cultivated by the classical Greeks and Romans and later revived by
The founder of situation ethics, Joseph Fletcher felt that the individual should be of paramount concern and that each ethical situation should be judged in its own context.Fletcher wanted to preserve the Christian principle of agape love
(A) What may be said in favour of situation ethics? [7] This essay shall discuss what may be said in favour of situation ethics. Firstly it shall discuss scholars that favour it and why. Secondly it shall discuss the features that situation ethics posses that makes it favourable to others. Finally it shall analyse the effect of situation ethics and why people favour to apply it. The founder of situation ethics, Joseph Fletcher felt that the individual should be of paramount concern and that each ethical situation should be judged in its own context. Fletcher wanted to preserve the Christian principle of agape love. Fletcher therefore proposed an anapaestic calculus and followed, "love your neighbour as yourself." Fletcher believed that only "one things is instrinclly good - love itself" Therefore a person following situation ethics would take each situation as it came and they would come to a judgment of the situation as responding by assessing the most compassionate option available. Fletcher claimed that Justice is only love in action. Agape love can also be seen to collapse into utilitarianism, "the greater good for the greater number" where "number" is replaced with "love" Paul Tillich said, "The law of love is the ultimate law because it is the negation of law, it is absolute because it concerns everything concrete. The absolutism of love is its power to go into
From the religion you have studied, discuss the view that religious ethics must be either deontological or teleological, but cannot be both
From the religion you have studied, discuss the view that religious ethics must be either deontological or teleological, but cannot be both. To answer this question, this essay will firstly give a definition and brief explanation of what is meant by deontological and teleological. Secondly, I will describe how Christian ethics can be deontological and how they can be teleological, giving examples and using ethical theories, to illustrate each. Finally, I will try to give an idea about how a religious ethic can combine elements of a deontological with a teleological approach, including my own personal views of the argument. Deontological Ethics (from the Greek Deon, meaning obligation) is an ethical theory considered solely on duty and rights, where one has an unchanging moral obligation to abide by a set of defined principles. Thus, the ends of any action never justify the means in this ethical system. If someone were to do their moral duty, then it would not matter if it had negative consequences. When we follow our duty, we are behaving morally. When we fail to follow our duty, we are behaving immorally. Teleological moral systems are characterised primarily by a focus on the consequences which any action might have. Thus, in order to make correct moral choices, we have to have some understanding of what will result from our choices. When we make choices which result in
Discussion of abortion
Abortion Abortion An abortion is a termination of a pregnancy. This results in killing an unborn baby. The technical name for this type of abortion is a procured abortion, however some people do not like to use the term procured as it means killing so they call it a termination. Sometimes abortions can occur naturally because the baby does not develop normally or the mother may have an injury, which would prevent her from carrying the pregnancy to term. This type of abortion is called a spontaneous abortion, which is usually known as a miscarriage. Abortion used to be a crime and in some countries like Ireland it still is. Each year 140,000 abortions take place without the consent of the father. Even if the father of the baby is married to the expectant mother he still has no rites and cannot stop the abortion. In 1967 David Steel introduced a bill, which became the abortion act. This said that an abortion could take place for up to 28 weeks. However now it has been amended to 24 weeks, because now doctors can keep babies alive from 24 weeks. After 24 weeks abortions are very rare but if two doctors decide that it is appropriate to still have an abortion because of the risk to the mother or the baby then it could take place. There are many different groups of people who campaign for and against abortion. 'The National Abortion Campaign' campaign for the right of the woman,
Explain what is meant by 'moral relativism'
a) Explain what is meant by 'moral relativism' Before we can discuss this question in more depth, we must simply give a definition for moral relativism. Moral relativism is a theory, especially in ethics, that conceptions of truth and moral values are not absolute but are relative to the persons or groups holding them. From this definition I can go on to further discuss moral relativism and briefly explain what is meant by the opposed view of relativism as well as other terms related to moral relativism. Moral relativism is the belief that morality does not relate to any absolute principles of right and wrong, but that 'good' and 'bad' are dependant on culture and circumstance. The opposite of moral relativism is absolutism. Absolutism declares that there are universal standards of right and wrong, whether or not they are agreed with by people, and independent of individual circumstances. According to an absolutist such as Immanuel Kant, if moral rules are right then they should apply to everyone, without making any exceptions for different people or special circumstances as the laws should be 'universalisable'. For example, in an absolute moral system, a rule that applies to a Muslim woman living if Afghanistan is equally applicable to a farmer in rural Canada. Another example would be Christian Churches preaching the Ten Commandments as a guide to knowing what one
Religious and/or moral principles are a hindrance with medical ethics. Examine and comment on this claim, with reference to the topic you have investigated.
George Thomas 12JB Religious and/or moral principles are a hindrance with medical ethics’. Examine and comment on this claim, with reference to the topic you have investigated. Abortion is the medical ethic of which I have investigated; a controversial topic to say the least. The above statement is one that definitely applies to the problems of abortion. However to understand how the statement can be applied one must come to terms with the definitions and aspects of abortion. Abortion can be defined as the intended termination of an unborn child, a foetus. The abortion act was introduced to the UK in 1967; however in Ireland the approach is still illegal. With abortion there is a criteria that follows: two doctors must certify and allow for the abortion to proceed and an abortion cannot go ahead if the method were to cause any lasting physical or psychological damage. In most cases an abortion can go under way if it protects the life of the mother. The methods of abortion are also an important aspect to consider. There are various methods and treatments a woman can have to proceed with the abortion. For example a woman between 7 – 15 weeks can take a pill which induces the same consequences of a miscarriage; an early medical abortion. This contrasts then with the late term abortion which relies on surgery and surgical instruments being used to extract and exterminate
How can Bentham's Utilitarianism be used to decide the right course of action?
Georgina Macaulay How can Bentham’s Utilitarianism be used to decide the right course of action? Jeremy Bentham was an English philosopher born in 1748. He influenced the idea of utilitarianism, which is the teleological theory of ethics looking at the consequences and results of an action to decide whether an action is right or wrong and is a consequentialist theory. Utilitarian’s were social reformers and utilitarianism got its name from the question ‘What is the use of it. Bentham came up with this idea when he came across ‘the greatest happiness for the greatest number’. Bentham defined happiness as ‘the sum of pleasures and pains’ and his philosophy is known as utilitarianism due to its emphasis on the utility of acts consequences. Good is defined in terms of happiness; an act is right or wrong according to the good or bad that results from an act. ‘Happyism’ would’ve been a better name as this utility is seen as a contribution to happiness. He wanted to develop an ethical theory which showed whether something was good or bad according to its benefit for the largest majority of people. Bentham’s version of utilitarianism is often called act utilitarianism. Through research, Bentham concluded that people would naturally seek to avoid pain; as a result he argued that good is what equals the greatest pleasure and the least amount of pain for the