Answering 4 questions on philosopy
Directions: Do the associated readings for that topic. (I will upload pages for the questions). Answer the questions for the topic you have selected. Your response should be:
Typed, Times New Roman, 12-point font
A 2 4 page, double-spaced essay, in the MLA format
With your class notes and The Fundamental of Ethics as your only source
Submitted via Turnitin.com
Due on Sunday, 4/5/2020, by 11:59pm
Topics
Choose any one of the following three topics and answer all four questions corresponding to that topic.
1. Kant and the First formulation of the Categorical Imperative. Read pages 160 174 of the Fundamentals of Ethics to answer the following questions:
What is a maxim, what does it mean for a maxim to be universalizable, and why did Kant emphasize the importance of maxims when determining the morality of an action? Note that this question is essentially asking you to explain the first formulation in a robust nutshell. (See pages 160 166).
Apply the first formulation of the categorical imperative (i.e. the principle of universalizability) to the following dilemma:
You have been married for over ten years and have had a good relationship with your partner. Early in your marriage, you had a brief affair. Your partner never knew about it, and you have always regretted your behavior. Although your partner has no grounds for suspicion, one day they ask you whether you have ever been unfaithful. You know that if you are honest with them, it will ruin your marriage. According to the principle of universalizability, should you tell them the truth? Justify your response by applying the three-step test to determine whether a maxim is universalizable.
According to Kant, acting immorally implies that one is being irrational. What reason did he have for this? Your response should explain Kants Argument for the Irrationality of Immorality. (See pages 166 170).
According to the author of our course text, it is possible for a maxim to be universal, yet for the action stemming from that maxim to be immoral. Why? Is this a problem for Kants philosophy? (See pages 170 171).
