PHL 292 1nd EditionExam # 1 Study Guide Ethics Essay QuestionsExam 11. (Utilitarianism) Explain the principle of utility. This answer should include an explanation of the major concepts mentioned in the principle. Be sure to explain agent neutrality and the requirement of impartiality. Briefly outline William’s Jim and the Indians case. What objection against utilitarianism does Williams use this case to illustrate? Briefly explain.- The principle of utility = the net balance of happiness and unhappinessconsidered- Instead, most consequentialists claim that overall utility is the criterionor standard of what is morally right or morally ought to be done.- It is quite compatible with the principle of utility to recognize the fact, that some kinds of pleasures are more desirable and more valuable than others- Utilitarianism isi. The most important version of consequentialism (the view that whether an act is right depends only on consequences)ii. Hedonistic act utilitarianism is the view that an act is optimific if and only if that act produces the greatest amount of good for the greatest number of individuals, with all (relevant) parties’ interests considered - Agent-neutrality = whether some consequences are better than others does not depend on whether the consequences are evaluated from theperspective of the agent (as opposed to an observer)i. There is no time limit on how close in time the consequences must occur to the action to count - Requirement of impartiality: in determining the right action, benefits toone individual matter just as much as benefits to another individual – all count equally 2. (Kantian Deontology) What is the Categorical imperative? What is its relation to moral duties? State two formulas of Kant’s Categorical imperative. Explain one formulation of the Categorical imperative in detail (including the major concepts in that formulation). Using one of the two formulation, (1) give an example of an action that is morally permissible and (2) an example of an action that is morally impermissible according to the Categorical imperative; explain why each is or is not morally permissible. - Deontology: a rule-based ethical theory based on the notion of duty- Kantian Deontologyi. When one acts from duty, what makes that act the right act is not the consequences of the act but rather the maxim (or motive or reason) behind the actionii. The morality of our actions is not based on something out of our control like the consequences of our actions- Morality is the system of categorical imperatives (all moral duties). All are derived from the Categorical imperative - The Categorical imperativei. The supreme moral principle out of which we derive all our moral dutiesii. 1st version: the formula of universal law, or principle of universalizabilityiii. 2nd version: the formula of the end-in-itself, or principle of humanity- First version = act only in accordance with that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it become a universal lawi. Connection to the golden rule – do unto others what as you wish done to youii. Test of consistency and fairness – are you treating yourself as anexception?- Second version = so act that you use humanity whether in your own person or in the person of any other, always at the same time as an end, never merely as a meansi. Each person has intrinsic valueii. Treat each Kantian person as a being who can set goals for themselves and has maxims for actioniii. To use someone as mere means is to involve them in a scheme of action to which they could not in principle consent – if the other party were privy to your maxim, they would not consent- Permissible acts = acts one is morally permitted to perform but is not required to perform- Impermissible acts = acts one is morally prohibited from performing- Think of morally permissible and impermissible examples3. (Virtue Ethics) What is Aristotle’s account of the morally right action? Explain the major concepts in this account. What is the relationship between living a virtuous life and a eudaimon life, according to Aristotle? State and explain one objection against this account of right action.- “For all things have a function or activity, the good and the ‘well’ is thought to reside in the function, so would it seem to be for man if he has a function”- Human function is that which is distinctive of humans – human’s function is the action of the soul - Some people can be good in the role of doctor but not good in the role of being a good person- Eudaimoniai. Any action is well performed when it is performed in accordance with the appropriate excellenceii. So human good – living well – is “activity of soul exhibiting excellence”iii. Eudaimonia means human flourishing - Virtues are a means between extremes – virtue is acquired over time by experiences - “An act is morally right just because it is one that a virtuous person, acting in character, would do in that situation”- Aristotle though that living in accord with virtue was necessary but not sufficient for Eudaimonia because of moral lucki. It is a matter of luck whether you have certain necessary external resources for E- Practical knowledge and training is necessary for possessing virtue andliving life in accordance with virtue is required for Eudaimonia. The good life is the virtuous life- One objection: possible contradictioni. Is it possible to have two virtuous persons, both acting from virtue, to act differently in identical situations?ii. Response: no, it is not possible: all would do the same OR there is only one ideal virtuous person4. (Utilitarianism and Kant) Outline the Transplant Case (case in which the optimific act is to kill an unconsenting patient and harvest his organs in order to save the lives of the five other patients). State and explain what is the right action in this scenario according to Hedonistic Act Utilitarianism. Briefly explain the Objection from Justice and Rights against the act utilitarian using the Transplant Case. According to Kant, is it morally permissible to kill the patient and harvest his organs to save the others? Briefly explain why or why not. Does Kant’s response avoid the Objection from Justice and Rights? Why or why not?- Hedonistic Act Utilitarianism – is the view that an act is right if and onlyif that act produces the greatest amount of good (happiness) for the greatest number of