What determines whether an action undertaken by any agent is right or wrong? Lon L. Fuller's 1949 article, The Case of the Speluncean Explorers, provides a situation whereby the ethical definitions of right action are evaluated. The ethical study of right action consists of two major moral theories being de-ontological (backward looking/origin) and teleological (forward looking/ends). Both also have religious and non-religious strands. The de-ontological theory consists of the divine-command theory (religious) and Kantianism (non-religious), while the teleological theory is composed of natural-law theory (religious) and utilitarianism (non-religious). In this paper, all four strands of moral theory will be used to evaluate the Fuller article and decipher which moral theory best serves the argument whether the actions of the four defendants were ethically permissible given the situation. At the end of this paper, sufficient proof will be given to prove that the application of Kantian ethical theory regarding right action—the categorical imperative—with Christine Korsgaard's double-level theories is pertinent in bringing about a moral conclusion to the case involved. The story begins when the five individuals, all members of the Speluncean Society, are trapped in a limestone cavern as a result of a cave-in. Rescue operations commenced once the individuals did not return from the exploration. On the twentieth day of this debacle, radio communications were established and all five explorers discovered that they would not be able to survive if one individual is not consumed as food. A pair of dice was used to determine who would be consumed. Roger Whitmore, who proposed this cannibalistic idea in the first place, decided to withho... ... middle of paper ... ...f undesirable, was vital in saving the majority of the group and provided distributed good as far a universal maxim is concerned. In conclusion and after testing the four strands of moral theories with regards to right action, it is in Kantian ethical theory regarding right action in conjunction with Christine Korsgaard's double-level theories provides answers to normative questions concerning Fuller's article and also does so without compelling itself to any fallacy or misaligned reasoning. Kant's categorical imperatives provide all purposive agents with moral laws to govern actions irrespective of circumstances. However, in extreme circumstances such as those faced by the Speluncean explorers, the four defendants cannot be considered guilty of their actions because they acted on the only solution available conforming at the same time to their moral obligations.
Ross, William D.. "What Makes Right Acts Right?" The Right and the Good. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1930. 753-760. Obtained from PHIL 250 B1, Winter Term 2014 Readings – Ethics. University of Alberta eClass.
The basis of this paper is centered around two somewhat conflicting moral theories that aim to outline two ways of ethical thinking. The theory behind both rule consequentialism and Kantian ethics will be compared and evaluated. These theories can then be applied to a relatively complex moral case known as the “Jim and the Indians” example.
In the essay titled “Foundations of the Metaphysics of Morals” published in the Morality and Moral Controversies course textbook, Immanuel Kant argues that the view of the world and its laws is structured by human concepts and categories, and the rationale of it is the source of morality which depends upon belief in the existence of God. In Kant’s work, categorical imperative was established in order to have a standard rationale from where all moral requirements derive. Therefore, categorical imperative is an obligation to act morally, out of duty and good will alone. In Immanuel Kant’s writing human reason and or rational are innate morals which are responsible for helping human. Needless to say, this also allows people to be able to distinct right from wrong. For the aforementioned reasons, there is no doubt that any action has to be executed solely out of a duty alone and it should not focus on the consequence but on the motive and intent of the action. Kant supports his argument by dividing the essay into three sections. In the first section he calls attention to common sense mor...
In 1492, Christopher Columbus sailed the ocean blue, which started a huge push by European nations to gain power and wealth, mainly in the way of building Empires in the New World. This was called the Age of Exploration and lasted from the late 15th to the early 17th century. Spain, under King Ferdinand II of Aragon, was the first nation to do this. Juan Ponce de León was a conquistador and one of the earlier voyagers to the New World in the European Age of Exploration, he accomplished several notable things in his life, but overall and looking in hindsight he is seen as a failure when compared to other conquistadors.
In conclusion we can say that consequentialism is flawed in the fact that the borders of a wrongdoing, to bring about a better good, are limitless. We can conclude that evil wrong doing can be construed as bringing about a better happiness for what the evil doer contrives to be for the better good of the people. For the most part we have seen that deontology’s view of good will in the individuals act can lead to moral justification. The captain and his men must make this moral decision to kill or not, if they do kill the Indians, their actions must be left to higher authority to deal with.
American history is accompanied by a long list of explorers who first discovered and who explored the massive continent. All of the explorers had an impact on the development of America. The Lewis and Clark expedition, also known as the Corps of Discovery, stands prominently at the top part of this list. The Lewis and Clark Expedition has had a significant political, social, and economic effect on America. They were the first to map out the west and set off westward expansion. Without the success of the expedition growth of America would have taken five times as long, as predicted by Thomas Jefferson.
Have you ever wondered what an expedition would look like? How it would feel to actually do one in the early 1800’s? Lewis and Clark lived through many attempted ones and actually did one themselves and their story has been told for hundreds of years. Lewis and Clark were very well known expeditioners. Their real names are actually Meriwether Lewis and William Clark. Thomas Jefferson was interested in the Western land, between the Mississippi River and the Rocky Mountain. The Louisiana Purchase happened which gave Jefferson an opportunity and a reason to fulfil his dreams onto Westward land. Lewis began to prepare for this expedition. He was interested in the length of rivers and location, geographical features, economic and agricultural development and much more. It took Jefferson, Lewis, and Clark many hard years of preparation to get everything ready for the trip. They knew that it wasn’t going to be a safe nor easy trip, but the intriguing sound of the trip and what the Westward land could hold was unbearable. After years of planning, stressing, and getting ready for the expediton, Lewis set out on August 31, 1803 in his keelboat, flat-bottomed, large dugout “canoe”.
Many great philosophers have attempted to tackle the issue of ethics and, consequently, have come up with various ethical theories in order to define ethical and moral situations. In this paper, I will be summarizing a scene from the 2004, Academy Award winning film, Crash, and further analyzing it in terms of the ethical theories of Immanuel Kant. In terms of this scene, I will be arguing that Kant’s ethical theory provides a satisfactory analysis of its ethicality.
Quite possibly one of the most important purchases in the history of The United States was the one in which Thomas Jefferson enabled the size of the country to double. The territory was the Louisiana Territory, the 820,000 square mile piece of land was bought for 15 million dollars which equaled out to about three cents an acre. The United States originally only wanted to buy the port of New Orleans. Thomas Jefferson wanted to buy this because there was a risk that the half million Americans living west of the Appalachian would secede from the Union. Purchasing the port would keep them from seceding because they would then have a port that they could easily use to get to the ocean.
As opposed to Naturalism, the ethical theory of duty occupies a completely different domain. Immanuel Kant, the major advocate of this ethical appro...
In this paper, I will argue that Kant provides us with a plausible account of morality. To demonstrate that, I will initially offer a main criticism of Kantian moral theory, through explaining Bernard Williams’ charge against it. I will look at his indulgent of the Kantian theory, and then clarify whether I find it objectionable. The second part, I will try to defend Kant’s theory.
Pojman, L. (2002). 6: Utilitarianism. Ethics: discovering right and wrong (pp. 104-113). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
In Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, Immanuel Kant argues that human beings inherently have capability to make purely rational decisions that are not based on inclinations and such rational decisions prevent people from interfering with freedom of another. Kant’s view of inherent ability to reason brings different perspective to ways which human beings can pursue morality thus it requires a close analytical examination.
Ethics can be defined as "the conscious reflection on our moral beliefs with the aim of improving, extending or refining those beliefs in some way." (Dodds, Lecture 2) Kantian moral theory and Utilitarianism are two theories that attempt to answer the ethical nature of human beings. This paper will attempt to explain how and why Kantian moral theory and Utilitarianism differ as well as discuss why I believe Kant's theory provides a more plausible account of ethics.
I will now analyze how the moral factors and considerations in regards to this case would have been justified under Utilitarianism and Kant.