This principle is referred to as Kant’s practical imperative and is an important principle for an ethical system which says that each human being is an end in himself or herself. No human being should be thought of or used merely as a means for someone else end. Dr. Jeffrey Wigand the main protagonist of “The Insider” portrays himself to be a conflicted individual as he makes decisions throughout the movie. Against an undetermined future, he ruminates about what he knows is right for example, receiving threats, the phone ringing at odd hours. He makes most of his decisions by weighing the cost and benefits, which may be referred to as Kant’s principle the “end justifies the means”.Analysis of Wigand if he had to disclose the information results in benefits for the good of the public, second it would satisfies Wigand’s desire to hurt brown & Williamson. But in return the consequences or cost of his actions results in Wigand and his family lose all benefits from the confidentiality agreement, second he will face a law suit, third the paranoia of receiving death threats, fourth it damages the tobacco industry and causes its employees to lose their jobs.
The utilitarian perspective would say it is right to disclose information about tobacco industry because, the possible benefits to public far out way the cost. Was Wigand angry at the industry or was it for good of humanity? Would Dr. Wigand disclose information about the industry if he were not fired? Kant would suggest that Wigand does not disclose the information. This contradicts with the principle of the universal law of breaking promises, he should uphold the integrity of the contract.Lowell Bergman a journalist hired to expose the big lies and air the hard-hitting stories. Be...
... middle of paper ...
...at everyone should be aware about the lies and false information given to the public. Dr. Wigand’s displays high utility to disclose information and protect the public from harm. It is also matter of intention, if he was acting out of his own selfish desire to damage the tobacco industry he would not be doing his nearest duty towards the public.
The importance of duty varies and depends on how one thinks about a rule or how absolute the rule is, because it sets absolute rules. Dr. Wigand was inclined towards his duty by giving his interview, even though it produced bad results for himself. He did also break a promise to the tobacco company. Wigand’s duties are in conflict and it makes it difficult for him to decide which duty is more important. In my opinion, I would not say doing my duty is more important compared to the moral obligation that must be satisfied.
One day while doing his job, a physician used a used swab that was possibly infected with HIV on another patient. When looked at by certain people, the doctor did the correct thing by telling his patient that he roused a swab on him/her. However, the chances of this patient getting HIV was substantially low, and he should have waited for the patient to develop symptoms, which would have been rare, before telling the truth. As stated by Michael Greenberg, “he might have done better by keeping his mouth shut.” If the doctor did lie, he could have lied to protect himself, the quality of life of the patient, and his ability to help others with their lives. If he had not told the patient that he used the swab on him/her, he/she would not have had to live in fear of getting HIV. Because of this decision of truth telling, the doctor lost his job, money, confidence, and also affected someone’s quality of life.
Duty may be performed without strain or reflection of desire, which means your duty, or responsibility, should be performed without hesitation. “Dutifulness could be an account of a morality with no hint of religion” (Murdoch 364). Religion’s demand for morality and being good trumps a person’s decision to
The prima facie duties that William David Ross has listed include duties of fidelity, reparation, gratitude, justice, beneficence, self-improvement, and non-maleficence. Duties of fidelity and reparation rest on previous acts that one has performed, and acting on these duties are acts such as promise-keeping (duties of fidelity) and making amends for previous wrongful acts (duties of reparation), while duties of gratitude rest on previous acts that others have performed. There is a duty associated with the distribution of pleasure or good regardless of its recipient, and this is termed as duties of justice. An additional duty rests on the mere fact that there are other beings in this world to whom we can be of assistance to: duties of beneficence. Duties of self-improvement claim that there are intrinsic moral reasons for one to improve oneself and finally, duties of non-maleficence states that there are intrinsic moral reasons to not harm others. Duties are placed on the list only when they have been judged to be basic moral reaso...
The nurse should not inform the patient of her leukemia. The nurse has not been observing the patient long enough to use her assumption that the patient is mentally sound as a means to justify telling the patient stressful information. The nurse ought to follow the physicians instruction to refrain from giving the patient news about their chronic lymphocytic leukemia. This resolution follows with my own moral intuitions. If someone is not in a healthy mental state, it would not be morally permissible to provide information to that person which could cause their mental state to worsen. Although in most cases it is obligatory for a moral agent to always tell the whole truth in accordance with the prima facie principle of honesty, the principle of beneficence in moral situations similar to this one overrides the principle of honesty. One’s own health and well-being is more important than answering their questions to the fullest knowledge
...l sources of utility or consequences, but about his moral identity and integrity. Jim is presented with a situation that challenges to who he is, and not just simply what he should do. Granted, is tricky to decide on the “right” action in this case because by not partaking in the deal, Jim is staying true to his personal moral beliefs; yet he is still left with the burden of knowing that all twenty of the Indians would be killed without his interference. One could also argue that Jim would only be contributing to the problem if he too committed such acts against these innocent people and it is his duty as a moral being to not partake. It seems that Kant’s theory passes the standard of internal support and explanatory power. This is because his principles are able to fit with considered moral beliefs and are able to help individuals identify a right and wrong action.
This act also covers sexual harassment in the workplace. Discrimination disrupt good order and discipline and creates a hostile environment. These actions are considered immoral and as law-abiding citizens, it is our duty to intervene to curtail these types’ actions. Duty theory talks about two approaches, the first imply we all have a catalog of instinctive obligations. The Ten Commandments is a perfect example because it speaks about not killing, committing adultery, covet thy neighbor things and bear false witness. These practices have been adopted by many cultures, which play an important role in their
Philosophy is one’s oxygen. Its ubiquitous presence is continuously breathed in and vital to survival, yet its existence often goes unnoticed or is completely forgotten. Prussian philosopher Immanuel Kant was one of the many trees depositing this indispensable system of beliefs into the air. Philosophy is present in all aspects of society, no matter how prominent it may be. As Kant was a product of the Scientific Revolution in Europe, the use of reason was an underlying component in the entirety of his ideas. One of his main principles was that most human knowledge is derived from experience, but one also may rely on instinct to know about something before experiencing it. He also stated that an action is considered moral based on the motive behind it, not the action itself. Kant strongly believed that reason should dictate goodness and badness (McKay, 537). His philosophies are just as present in works of fiction as they are in reality. This is exemplified by Lord of the Flies, a fiction novel written by William Golding. The novel strongly focuses on the origins of evil, as well as ethics, specifically man’s treatment of animals and those around him. Kant’s philosophy is embedded in the thoughts and actions of Piggy, Ralph, Jack, and Simon throughout the novel. Kant’s beliefs also slither into “Snake,” a poem by D.H. Lawrence, focusing on the tainting of the pure human mind by societal pressures and injustices. Overall, both the poet in “Snake” and Piggy, Ralph, Jack, and Simon in Lord of the Flies showcase Immanuel Kant’s theories on ethics, reasoning, and nature.
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.
The ethical issue presented is about a conflicted family member who asked whether or not to expose their niece's fake food allergy and Kwame Anthony Appiah responded. The article “Should a Family Member Expose a Niece's Fake Food Allergy” is a personal anecdote of how the writer views the situation and feels responsible to act on behalf of their niece. According to the article, the sister in law of this person has imposed false belief in her daughter that a lot of food is dangerous. The family member believes that the sister in law is afraid of her daughter abandoning her to the point of creating a pretend food allergy. The anonymous writer states that they and their brother believe the food allergy is entirely fabricated. However, as pointed
In an ideal medical society, no dilemma should arise on whistleblowing associated with poor medical practice or illegal behaviours. However these dilemmas arise when these whistle blowers take privileged information to the public in order to address their personal concerns or conscience. It can however be said that they are often left with little or no choice. Lipley (2001) discusses a case which occurred in the UK where a nurse wrote to the media reportedly that the elderly inpatients at her organisation did not receive adequate care and that this was jeopardising their lives. The appeals tribunal ruled that her decision was right and was both reasonable and an acceptable way to raise such issues ...
In the movie Miss Evers’ Boys, the basic ethical principles were disregarded. The study participants were not allowed justice because the researchers did not disclose the facts of the study. The government officials, Dr. Douglas and Dr. Brodus the lead research doctors, and Miss Evers the nurse were aware of the purpose of the study and that no treatment would be initiated for months or even a year. When they chose not to disclose this information to the participants they violated fidelity, disregarded integrity and did not uphold beneficence for the participants (Sargent, 1997). As the study progressed, they were continually denied the funding to purchase Penicillin. When Penicillin arrived at the clinic the doctors decided that this would interfere with the outcome of the
The Transcendental Deductions of the pure concept of the understanding in Immanuel Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, in its most general sense, explains how concepts relate a priori to objects in virtue of the fact that the power of knowing an object through representations is known as understanding. According to Kant, the foundation of all knowledge is the self, our own consciousness because without the self, experience is not possible. The purpose of this essay is to lay out Kant’s deduction of the pure concept of understanding and show how our concepts are not just empirical, but concepts a priori. We will walk through Kant’s argument and reasoning as he uncovers each layer of understanding, eventually leading up to the conclusion mentioned above.
...st luckily desires to do things that are in accordance to duty. An action has moral worth if and only if it is done from the motive of duty because it may go against our desires, but we still ignore what we might want because we know what we must do.
Kant's Categorical Imperative Deontology is the ethical view that some actions are morally forbidden or permitted, regardless of consequences. One of the most influential deontological philosophers in history is Immanuel Kant, who developed the idea of the Categorical Imperative. Kant believed that the only thing of intrinsic moral worth is good will. Kant says in his work Morality and Rationality “ The good will is not good because of what it affects or accomplishes or because of it’s adequacy to achieve some proposed end; it is good only because of it’s willingness, i.e., it is good of itself”.
It is based on a true story related to a 1994 episode of the CBS news show 60 Minutes