Choose either utilitarian or deontological ethical theory to apply to the ethical question.

GENDER AND EQUALITY

 

• Choose either utilitarian or deontological ethical theory to apply to the ethical question.
• Explain the core principles of that theory.
• Demonstrate how the principles of the theory support a certain position on that question.
• Articulate a relevant objection to the theory on the basis of that argument.

 

Instructions
Write a five paragraph essay that conforms to the requirements below. The paper must be 600 to 900 words in length (excluding title and reference pages) and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center. The paragraphs of your essay should conform to the following guidelines:

 

1. Introduction
   The introduction should be one paragraph, no more than 120 words. This should clearly delimit the ethical problem or question under consideration, and define the essential issues. You may build upon the problem you raised in the Week One Assignment, or you may choose a different topic, but it must be from the list of acceptable topics.  The last sentence of the introduction should briefly summarize the conclusion or position on this issue that you think is best supported by this theory, and succinctly state what the objection will be. Remember that your essay will not be concerned with your own position on this issue, but what someone defending the chosen theory would conclude.
2. Body Paragraphs
   Each paragraph in the body should start with a topic sentence that clearly identifies the main idea of the paragraph. Each paragraph should have at least four sentences.
   1. Theory explanation:
      This should be approximately 150 to 200 words explaining the core principles or features of the deontological or utilitarian theory and the general account of moral behavior it provides.
      • You must quote from at least one required resource that defends or represents that theory. Please view this list of acceptable resources.
   2. Application:
      This should be approximately 150 to 200 words, and should address how the principles or features of the deontological or utilitarian theory apply to the problem or question under consideration and identify the specific moral conclusion that results from that application.
      • Your application should clearly show how the conclusion follows from the main tenets of the theory as addressed in the previous paragraph. Please see the associated guidance for help in fulfilling this requirement.
   3. Objection:
      This should be approximately 150 to 200 words raising a relevant objection to the argument expressed in part “b.” A relevant objection is one that exposes a weakness in the theory as it applies to your problem, and so you should explain how it brings out this weakness.
      • Note that this does not necessarily mean that the objection succeeds, or that the conclusion the theory supports is wrong. It may be an obstacle that any adequate defense of the conclusion would have to overcome, and it may be the case that the theory has the resources to overcome that obstacle. Your task here is simply to raise the objection or present the “obstacle”.
3. Conclusion
   The conclusion should be one paragraph, no more than 150 words. The conclusion should very briefly summarize the main points of your essay and must contain a paraphrased restatement of your thesis.

 

Resources Requirements:

 

• You must use at least two resources to support your claims.
• At least one of the resources should be one of the Required or Recommended resources that directly represent the theory you have chosen, and must be drawn from the list of acceptable resources.
• The other source should pertain to the particular issue you are writing about, and should be drawn from the Required or Recommended readings in the course.
• You are encouraged to use additional resources, so long as at least two conform to the requirements above.
• To count toward satisfying the requirement, resources must be cited within the body of your paper and on the reference page and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.

Just War

• What are some circumstances that would make a war just or unjust?

• What are some controversial reasons nations have gone to war, contemplated going to war, or refrained from going to war? Were they justified?

• Are there ways of conducting a war that should be defended as just or opposed as unjust?

• Thinking of some specific technology such as drone weapons, nuclear weapons, or chemical and biological weapons, is its use justified? When would it not be justified?

• Consider various methods of war such as carpet bombing, targeting of civilians or intentionally killing non-combatants, using human shields, the use of blockades, sanctions, and other means of preventing basic good from reaching the enemy civilians. When would one of these be justified or unjustified?

• Are there forms of treatment of suspected enemy combatants, such as torture, imprisonment without trial, warrantless surveillance, etc., that should never be done? Why or why not?

Recommended Resources on Just War Theory

The entry on “War” from The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is an excellent place to learn more about various aspects of military ethics, especially the notion of a just war.

You can also browse the website JustWarTheory.com , which contains links to hundreds of articles, resources, websites and other media sources on all things related to war, terrorism, counter-terrorism, pacifism, the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, and just war theory.

An interesting discussion of the ethics of going to war (jus ad bellum), especially when one’s own country is not being directly threatened, is in Richard Miller’s “Crossing borders to fight injustice: The ethics of humanitarian intervention.” This article is in the book Empowering our Military Conscience, edited by Roger Wertheimer, which can be found in the Ashford University Library Ebook Collection.

A discussion of the justice of acts within war (jus in bello) that responds to Nagel’s critique of utilitarianism is in Richard Brandt (1972), “Utilitarianism and the rules of war.” This article can be found in the JSTOR database within the Ashford Library.

Finally, an illuminating account of how just war theory relates to the Islamic practice of jihad, which is obviously of great concern in the world today, can be found in Charles Amjad-Ali’s (2009) “Jihad and Just War Theory: Dissonance and Truth”. This article can be found in the EBSCO database within the Ashford Library.

List of Acceptable Primary Resources for the Week 3 and Week 5 Assignments

Hinman, L. (n.d.). Gender and Ethical Theory.  Ethics Updates. Retrieved from http://ethics.sandiego.edu/theories/Gender/index.asp

Hinman, L. (n.d.). Gender and Sexism.  Ethics Updates. Retrieved from http://ethics.sandiego.edu/Applied/Gender/index.asp

These are the primary resources that you can cite when explaining a moral theory in order to fulfill the relevant portion of the resources requirement. Readings included in the “Required Readings” list are indicated with a *.

Utilitarianism:

*Mill, J. S. Utilitarianism, in the original version in the textbook, or in the version by Jonathan Bennett retrieved from www.earlymoderntexts.com.

Haines, W. (n.d.). Consequentialism. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from http://www.iep.utm.edu/conseque/

Singer, P. (2003). Voluntary euthanasia: A utilitarian perspective. Bioethics, 17(5/6), 526-541. Retrieved from the EBSCOhost database.

Deontology:

* Kant, I. (2008). Groundwork for the metaphysic of morals. In J. Bennett (Ed. & Trans.), Early Modern Philosophy. Retrieved from http://www.earlymoderntexts.com/pdfs/kant1785.pdf (Original work published in 1785).

Virtue Ethics:

* Aristotle. (350 B.C.E.). Nicomachean ethics (W. D. Ross, Trans.). Retrieved from http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/nicomachaen.html

Annas, J. (2006). Virtue ethics. In D. Copp (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ethical Theory (pp. 515–36). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Retrieved from https://www.sesync.org/sites/default/files/resources/case_studies/10-kenyaecotourism-handbook.pdf

Hursthouse, R. (2012). Virtue ethics. In E. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-virtue/

MacIntyre, A. (1984). After virtue. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press. Chapters 14-15 are included in the Chapter 6 readings of the textbook.

Feminist/Care Ethics:

*Held, V. Feminist transformations of moral theory. Included in the Chapter 6 readings of the textbook.

*Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Retrieved from https://lms.manhattan.edu/pluginfile.php/26517/mod_resource/content/1/Gilligan%20In%20a%20Different%20Voice.pdf

 

 

Checklist

This checklist can help you ensure that you have completed all of the assignment instructions.

Provide an introduction that briefly describes the topic and the ethical problem at hand, the theory you have chosen to apply to the problem, the conclusion that is best supported by the theory, and the objection you will raise.

Explain the theory with sufficient detail to allow for a clear application to the problem.

Explain how the ethical theory applies to the question you have chosen to arrive at a position

Show how the conclusion follows from the main tenets of the theory.

Utilize at least one required resource that defends or represents the theory .

Utilize at least one required resource that pertains to the chosen topic.

Focus on identifying and explaining the theory and its application, rather than your own view.

Raise a relevant objection to the argument.

Include a title page and list of references.

Proofread carefully for mechanical and grammatical errors.

Format the assignment in APA style.

Write between 600-900 words.