ethics104 discussion question 2
Post a 200 – 250 word response to the following questions:
A) (A) Would Utilitarianism permit injustice? For example, could we abduct terroristsâ€
relatives (innocent people) and threaten to torture or kill them, if the terrorists do not stop their activities (can we make innocent people suffer to attain peace or safety)? [150 words]
B) Does Utilitarianism recognize the intrinsic value of justice, or Utilitarianism subordinates justice to the aggregate well-being? [100 words]
Part II
Read all other posts, and then reply to at least one. Your reply should be 100 – 150 words in length.
- Your DQâ€s part II (Replies) should address a point, or a problem, you see in another studentâ€s post. You should offer either an alternative (possible) perspective with respect the opinion someone presented, or point to some difficulties associated with another personâ€s view.To say that you agree with another studentâ€s post, or to complement on someoneâ€s work, contributes very little (if anything at all) to the academic discussion. Also, you should avoid evaluating each anotherâ€s work; this makes you look like a self-appointed co-instructor.
their responses below reply
A) Utilitarianism is choosing the option that will benefit more people, and overall provide more happiness, however, it does promote injustice. In the case of abducting terrorists’ relatives to cause terrorists to stop their activities, utilitarianism states that it is morally right to capture innocent people, because in the end more people are happy and the benefits are greater. However, it is unjust that innocent people are being harmed for the benefit of others. In the theory of utilitarianism, it is acceptable to capture innocent people because in the end, their is a greater outcome and more happiness is caused then suffering, but the flaw in the theory is the circumstances are not always looked at. Although the theory seems like it should always work, the circumstances need to be considered. Although the greater population gains happiness and the lesser population suffers, it needs to be taken it account who deserves to suffer and who deserves to be happy.
B) Utilitarianism subordinates justice to the aggregate well-being entirely. Justice is given to the greater majority, regardless of who they are and if they are more in need of it. For example, if there was one pizza, and 7 people, one starving and 6 not starving, and the decision was to give the pizza to the starving person or to the group, under utilitarianism, the group would receive a portion of pizza. This is giving justice to the whole, rather than actually interpreting the morally right answer to the problem that is faced.
REQUIRED READING
The Fundamentals of Ethics, Russ Shafer-Landau, Oxford University Press.
ISBN# 978-0-19-999723-7
Documents posted in Learning Module 2
Reading
Landau, pp. 119-157 [Consequentialism and Utilitarianism]
“Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!
Use Discount Code “Newclient”for a 15% Discount!”
The post ethics104 discussion question 2 appeared first on Student Homeworks.
