Kantian Ethics and Utilitarianism?
Hello to all! I am a last year law student (International and European Law). This quarter, we have "Law and Ethics" course... and I have a lot, A LOT of troubles with this particular course. Unfortunately I find it quite difficult and complicated. Today we have the following assignment: "Amazon paying Employees to Quit – Please write an essay addressing the following question: Is paying employees to quit a right practice that should be widely adopted?" I suppose that I need to use some of the ethical theories that we already examined : Kantian ethics, utilitarianism etc. I would like to apply exactly these two. I know the theory pretty well, but I am not sure how to apply the theory in practice. Could somebody please, please help me, to analyse this ethical question? I will be extremely grateful!
Kants second formulation of the categorical imperative commands states treat people as ends in themsleves. -?
I have to write a paper based on this and I have no idea what it means so if anyone can help me! And what does the Kantian stakeholder theory of moral responsibility hold?
Shareholder Primacy and Categorical Imperative Philosophy help!!?
I'm having some trouble answering these questions that I need to study for a Philosophy exam (mostly because I simply don't understand my instructor.. ) Your help is VERY APPRECIATED! (1) Theories of corporate social responsibility: (1) Which aspect of the Shareholder Primacy Theory does Goodpaster agree with? (2) Which aspect does he criticize? (3) Which aspect of the Stakeholder Theory does Goodpaster agree with? (4) Which aspect does he criticize? (5) What is the “Stakeholder Paradox”? (6) How does Goodpaster solve the paradox? That is, according to Goodpaster, what is the source of the moral responsibility of the corporation? (2) Kant on the categorical imperative: (1) According to the Humanity Formulation of the Categorical Imperative, why is making a “lying promise” wrong? (2) What do we learn about what it means to treat someone as a mere means from Kant’s discussion of that example? (3) According to the Humanity Formulation of the Categorical Imperative, why is neglecting the needs and interests of other rational people wrong? (4) What do we learn about what it means to treat someone as a mere means from Kant’s discussion of that example?
Is there a moral/ethical imperative that governs scientific inquiry?
Yes. The moral/ethical imperative that governs scientific inquiry is the moral demand for HONESTY. Like Socrates, and like Philosophy in general, Science is committed to find the Truth — and to find the Truth, it must tell the Truth, without exception and without interference.The problem arises because in our search for the Truth, this is evidence that we don’t have the Truth today. Since we don’t, we are open to ERROR. Much error arises and claims to be the Truth. Creationism is one such error. Atheism is another such error. These one-side, quick-and-easy answers continually betray us.As Aristotle and GWF Hegel tried to teach us, the Truth is generally the Golden Mean between extremes. Hegel called it a synthesis, or the “concrete” which had harmoniously unified the abstract and the negative, without violence.The main problem that I have with what calls itself Scientific inquiry today, is a host of prejudices — promoted as a New Dogma — about Materialism, Atheism, the alleged stupidity of theologians — and this direction of procedure.It shatters society — it betrays human history — it fractures logic which remains open to metaphysics — and it deifies such beginners as David Hume and Alfred Ayers. Scientific inquiry must be held to its commitment to Honesty — but it often falls back into the lazy position of Dogmatism. This is a moral question.The main flaw of modern Science, then, is its hasty rejection of Metaphysics on Kantian grounds (ca. 1780), without a modern review, and without a cogent response to the challenges that Hegel proposed (ca. 1830). It is a question of logic — but the logic will remain obscure until we recognize the moral layer that acts as a lock on the box.
Does one find it easier to answer Civil Service GS4 ethics case studies after studying the ethics part or it depends upon your intelligence/awareness?
What a good question it is!Normally aspirants think that they can write an answer to ethics question by a mere understanding of other general studies material and newspapers. And it is true to an extent.Take these previous year questions as examples(2016 and 2018):I am confident that any serious CSE aspirant can write 150 words on these two questions without even touching the ethics syllabus.But the point is not simply writing an answer, does it? Our goal is to score maximum marks as well as to complete the paper, which by the way I assure you is the lengthiest paper among all the nine papers of mains.Hence there arise the need to not only study ethics but to imbibe the essence of GS4 in our personality. Which later would be reflected in our answers as our pen cruise through the three hours journey of GS4.By reading the ethics one can tell the difference between honesty and integrity, between sympathy, empathy, and compassion etc. It allows us to negotiate the paths of dilemmas and allow us to choose when the end or means are justified to achieve a certain goal.As the world does not run on absolutely Kantian lines and neither on the utilitarian principles of Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. A bureaucrat has to be pragmatic as well as moral.Quotes and philosophy of various moral thinkers are part of ethics syllabus. It’s understanding help us to take a stance in case studies while justifying the same with ethical and moral reasoning.Hence three things, ethical terminology, quotes, and philosophy becomes the cornerstone of GS4 paper.Here are some of the resources that I had found useful for GS4Ethical terms[1]Moral thinkers[2]Quotes[3] and quotes-bhavesh mishra.docxLecture series by Harvard Prof. Michael Sandel(It’s a gem)[4]Footnotes[1] https://blog.iasscore.in/wp-cont...[2] https://blog.iasscore.in/wp-cont...[3] quotes.pdf[4] Justice: What's The Right Thing To Do? Episode 01 "THE MORAL SIDE OF MURDER"