- Act-utilitarian
- Rule-utilitarian
- Kant
- virtue ethics
- ethics of care
- rights
- Ross' Principles
- Principles of Bioethics
B. I've graded your quizzes. What questions do you have now? Would you mind posting what you got wrong on your quiz for the group so we can discuss those issues? (Don't worry about your grade -- it is just a small part of your Quiz grade, and that's a small part of your overall grade. What's important is that you come to understand the various theories more deeply and fully. We'll learn as we apply them, but you probably have some questions about your own comprehension and we should try to address those basic issues now.) You seem to be getting the basics of ethical theory, but must still have questions. Please ask them here. By Friday 30 January.
I chose to respond to the trolley problem from the point of view of the act-utilitarian theory. The basis of the "act-utilitarian" theory is that: a person ought to act so as to produce the greatest balance of good over evil, everyone considered. From this standpoint, we would choose to swerve in the direction of the single worker, because we will end up saving 5 other workers, and 5 > 1. The loss of one life will produce five saved lives, and that is the "greatest balance of good over evil" that we could have. It does not answer any questions of morality or rules -- just strictly what has the best outcome for the most people.
ReplyDeleteFrom a rule-utilitarian perspective, it would mean that I would maximize the amount of pleasure based on moral rules that I already have in terms of the general welfare. So, in this situation I would also turn to hit the one person instead of the five because it causes less pain for everybody overall. I wouldn't consider the situation at hand, but following the rule that I must choose what makes the most people happy, then I must turn and hit the one worker.
ReplyDeleteI choose to respond to the trolley car problem from the point of view of virtue ethics. The focus of virtue ethics lies not on the duties or actions of a person but rather the person's virtues, or moral character of the agent. As the others before me, I turn to hit the one person instead of the five. This choice is made through a manifestation of the good virtues and using those to make the choice. That is not to say that killing one person leads to a better moral character but rather that choosing to end one life instead of five is the better "bad" choice. Neither choice improves the moral character of the person but choosing one over five leads to a decreased negative impact on the moral character.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of the first quiz, this is what I got wrong:
ReplyDeleteQ2.) Name a major weakness of Ultilitarianism.
-I got this question completely wrong. I answered:Utilitarianism relies heavily on a person having a strong moral character and thinking through it all
Question 4.) What is Virtue Ethics and what is the major difference between it and Kantian Ethics?
-I got this question partially wrong. I answered: VE is concerned with the person while KE is concerned with the actions/duties of the person
Question 7.) What is teleology?
-I got this question completely wrong: I answered: A belief centered on the purpose served rather than the cause.
Question 9.) What is Ethics?
-I got this question partially wrong. I answered: Moral beliefs that a person holds that they use to guide his/her life and the choices that are made
-With Dr. Cate's help, I now understand that Ethics is the study of right/wrong, good/bad, morality while my answer focused more on defining morality.
I chose to look at the trolley car problem from the Kantian ethical perspective. This perspective looks at people as ends, and not as means. With this in mind, I believe that Kant would argue NOT to turn the trolley car and kill the single person because you would be treating that single person as a means for the benefits of the five.
ReplyDelete