Ethics Paper

/in /by

Explain why utilitarianism has difficulty accommodating the concept of justice showing how and why the unjust treatment or scapegoating of some people(especially the weak and voiceless)for the sake of the general happiness is in principal possible with this ethical theory.Assume the classical conception of justice as meaning giving each individual his or her due.Critically examine the problem of justice in utilitarian approaches to distributive justice,euthanasia, and abortion. In doing so, select at least three readings that are representative of utilitarianism in social ethics.(one from chapter 8 and one from chapter 1 and one from chapter2.) Consider whether the principal of double effect offers a more satisfactory outcome in each case. Explain and justify your answers.Required:MlA Format, Times New Roman 12Work should be citedCan be used any book resources for paperPaper should be no more than 7 pages so 5 pages is fine for me

PHI2604 Critical thinking and ethics

/in /by

I need to do a short essay test about:Exam 3 Review Work SheetMarquis, D. “Why Abortion is Immoral”1.       What does Marquis mean by “future of value”?2.       Why does Marquis think that standard pro-life arguments fail?3.       What are the strengths and weaknesses of Marquis’ argument?Thompson, J. J. “A Defense of Abortion”1.      What is Thompson’s central thesis in this argument?2.      What is the analogy of the diseased violinist intended to prove?3.      Why does Thompson think that the right to life is not unrestricted?Steinbock, B. “Why Most Abortions Are Not Immoral”1.       What is the potentiality principle? Why does Steinbock argue it is problematic?2.       Why does Steinbock think Marquis’ argument is not successful in establishing the immorality of abortion?3.       What is the interests view? Why does Steinbock think that a fetus does not have interests?Singer, P. “Famine, Affluence, and Morality”1.       Why does Singer think we are obligated to contribute to famine relief?2.       What is the child drowning in the pond case meant to prove?3.       Why does Singer think distance does not excuse our moral duty to prevent death by starvation?Nocross, A. ”Puppies, Pigs, and People: Eating Meat and Marginal Cases.”1.       Why does the example of Fred present a problem?2.       Why does Norcross compare puppies and pigs? Or pigs and people?Huemer, M. “America’s Unjust Drug War”Why does Huemer think the Harm to Self and Harm to Others arguments for drug prohibition fail?Why does Huemer think the drug war is not merely wrong — but deeply unjust?

Bibliography

/in /by

Based on: ” How emotions effect decision-making” Create an annotated bibliography of 5 sources that you will use for a future project. 3 of the 5 sources must be from a peer reviewed journal.See an example attached

Reply 7-2 SI

/in /by

Reply to:The insanity defense is used as a plea in court cases when a defendant does not want to be held criminally responsible for the alleged act. In legal terms, if the defendant has had a lack of mental capacity or didn’t understand right from wrong, or was unable to conform their conduct to the requirements of the law, they may be found not guilty due to insanity (Meynen, 2021). The standard used by juries has changed with different eras seen in our society. This can be true when looking at current-day measures and those of the past.It is complex that the insanity defense criteria have changed throughout history. There has been much debate over whether it is justified for this to be used in court. The question of how to define insanity was always a challenge, and some cases were questionable. While some people thought there were legitimate reasons to prove why it should be used, others argued against it because they felt some mental illnesses were not trustworthy in a court case. This conflict shows us that differences in society are a part of our world and that people will always disagree on specific issues no matter what.The changing criteria for the insanity defense tell us that society’s attitudes toward mental illness have changed even more than our attitudes toward crime. A person who commits a violent offense today is more likely to be held accountable for their actions and less likely to be acquitted of insanity (VanDercar & Resnick 2018). Modern medicine allows us to view mental illness differently, and our prison system has evolved too.