ethics

Discussion 4

Immanuel Kant is well known for his moral absolutism. The moral law is what it is–no exceptions, no compromises, no utilitarian calculations. But this (extreme?) position is subject to a powerful objection, namely, the problem of moral conflict.

1. For your original post, consider the following scenario:

An innocent child is being chased through narrow alleyways by a criminal known for dealing in human trafficking. The child has about a 40 foot lead his pursuer. As the boy approaches a three-way junction in the alley system, he speeds past a law-abiding local resident by the name of Immanuel and, with a look of desperation, quietly utters, "Help me." He then disappears down the rightmost alley. A moment later the criminal was in Immanuel’s face demanding, "Tell me where the kid went!" Immanuel, who fancies himself a moral absolutist, finds himself in a moral conundrum: tell the truth or help the innocent boy? He believes both truth-telling an innocent-helping to be absolute moral duties. What is he to do?

In an original post, please (i) reflect on the above scenario by explaining moral reasons Kant might give for telling the criminal the truth, and (ii) describe your own position on this issue (agree with Kant? disagree? explain). 

Discussion 5

This week’s discussion will center around Thomas Nagel’s essay, "Moral Luck." Please complete the following tasks:

1. For your original post, consider the following two scenarios (the first is a true story; the second I made up):

a.) Franz Jägerstätter was born to an Austrian peasant family in the year 1907. Not long after his birth, his father was killed in WWI. By the time of WWII, Franz was a grown man and, unsurprisingly, was conscripted into the Nazi army. But he never fought in the war. He had become a rather serious religious person and, after discovering various Nazi atrocities, he proclaimed himself a "conscientious objector" to the war effort, refusing to swear an oath of loyalty to Hitler. The Nazis accused him of undermining military morale and executed him for his "crime" on August 9, 1943. Pope Benedict XVI declared him a martyr saint in 2007. (Incidentally, in 2019, a film about his life called A Hidden Life was released. I found it to be one of the most beautiful and moving films I have ever seen. See the trailer below.)

b.) Gottfried von Meyer was born in Berlin in the year 1910. When he was still a young boy, his father moved the family to Argentina where they established a large estate and became quite wealthy. Gottfried received the best schooling available and lived a life of luxury. Nevertheless, when he learned of the rise of the Third Reich, he was inspired to move back to Germany in order to join the Nazi party. He did just that and quickly rose through the ranks to take on the role of Chief Advisor to the Design and Implementation of Concentration Camps. He was sentenced to death by the Allies at the Nuremburg Trials in 1946.

In an original post, please (i) explain how you think Kant would morally assess Franz and Gottfried, and (ii) describe the areas of moral luck in the two scenarios. (Note: you will likely have to read the Nagel piece to get a good sense of what "moral luck" is supposed to be.)

Discussion 6

This week’s discussion will focus on the reading from W.D. Ross, "Intuitionism" (263-276).

1. For your original post, please (i) explain whether you agree or disagree with Ross about the centrality of intuitions to morality, and (ii) discuss whether, in general, you trust your own moral intuitions.

Discussion 7

This week’s discussion focuses on Aristotle’s contention that happiness requires both virtue and a measure of good luck.

1. For your original post, consider the following:

Ms. X is filthy rich. In fact, she is nearing billionaire status. She is smart, politically powerful, physically healthy, and has a strong support system of family and friends. However, she is also rather arrogant, dismissive of those she deems below her (which is almost everyone), and stingy with her money.

Ms. Y is hovering around the poverty line. In fact, she recently was "let go" from her fast food restaurant job (one of three jobs) and is unsure how she will pay next month’s rent. She is below average in intelligence, feels politically powerless, has undiagnosed chronic pain, and is estranged from her few living relatives. However, she is also exceptionally kind to well-nigh everyone she meets, indifferent to social station, and is very generous with what little money and resources she has.

Now we might say that Ms. X is lucky and vicious, whereas Ms. Y is unlucky and virtuous. In an original post, please answer the following questions: (a) Which of the two women would Aristotle say has the better chance at achieving happiness? Why? (b) Which of the two women do YOU think has a better chance at achieving happiness? Why?

Discussion 8

This week’s discussion relates to "The Good Samaritan" story (pp. 388-389).

1. For your original post, consider the following:

There once was a man–let’s call him, Sam–who, in his travels, came across another man who very recently had been robbed, beaten, and left for dead. Sam felt pity for the poor, semi-conscious man and, in an effort to help him, drove him to the nearest hospital for treatment. Once there, the doctors determined that the victim would need a blood transfusion and a kidney transplant. STAT! With no blood and kidneys readily available, Sam offered his own (which fortunately for nameless man were a good match). Sam also paid for the man’s medical expenses, and Sam ain’t rich, so this put a strain on his finances for over a year, forcing him to take another job just to make ends meet.

There once was a man–let’s call him, Larry–who, in his travels, came across another man who very recently had been robbed, beaten, and left for dead. Larry felt pity for the poor, semi-conscious man and, in an effort to help him, turned off his favorite Spotify playlist and called 9-1-1. He reported what he saw to the 9-1-1 operator and then continued his journey to the local pub where he enjoyed a few drinks with his friends.

Now, as these two scenarios are laid out, it’s pretty clear that Sam is the moral hero here (though I’m sure some could find fault with his over-eager, perhaps financially irresponsible, and likely unnecessary efforts). But what about Larry? Did he do enough? In an original post, please discuss what is required of us in our treatment of our fellow human beings? Are we required to be Sams? Larrys? Something in between? Something totally other? Explain your point of view. 

Discussion 9

For this week’s discussion, please consider the following quotation from Christos Yannaras’s The Freedom of Morality.

"[T]he morality of the Gospel is the absolute antithesis of any kind of individual ethics, since it presupposes the transformation of individuality into an existential reality of communion and relationship” (53).

: Write an original post explaining what you take this passage to mean (note: you may want to read the surrounding context or the section on Yannaras in "Notes on God & Morality"). 

Discussion 10

Write an original post in which you (a) give the best definition of "person" you can and (b) explain how your definition of "person" relates to unborn fetuses (does it include all of them? none of them? some of them?). 

Discussion 11

For this week’s discussion consider the following famous passage from Judith Jarvis Thomson’s "A Defense of Abortion":

You wake up in the morning and find yourself back to back in bed with an unconscious violinist. A famous unconscious violinist. He has been found to have a fatal kidney ailment, and the Society of Music Lovers has canvassed all the available medical records and found that you alone have the right blood type to help. They have therefore kidnapped you, and last night the violinist’s circulatory system was plugged into yours, so that your kidneys can be used to extract poisons for his blood as well as your own. The director of the hospital now tells you, "Look, we’re sorry the Society of Music Lovers did this to you–we would never have permitted it if we had known. But still, they did it, and the violinist now is plugged into you. To unplug you would be to kill him. But never mind, it’s only for nine months. By then he will have recovered from his ailment, and can safely be unplugged from you (711-712).

1. For your original post, please (a) explain how Thomson seeks to use this story about the violinist to justify a woman’s right to abortion and (b) give your reasons why you find her argument convincing or unconvincing (or somewhere in between). 

Discussion 12

For this week’s discussion, consider the following:

Dr. Smith is a big believer in the techniques of modern medicine. In fact, he believes that medical intervention ought to be available in every sphere of life, including death. If a person is terminally ill and desires to be killed as opposed to die slowly and painfully, it would be unjust not to offer him/her the medical service of euthanasia, argues Dr. Smith. Dr. Modified-Jones disagrees. In fact, he believes that, while modern medicine has brought the world many wonderful blessings, it has its limits and is not appropriately applied to death. Death is and presumably will always be the ultimate and inevitable defeat of all our medical techniques. In other words, Dr. Modified-Jones believes there always comes a time when the patient is beyond the physician’s help, and that is the time for the physician to lay down his scalpel, syringe, and scrubs and turn the patient over to grim death. The last legitimate effort of the doctor, for Dr. Modified-Jones, is to make his patient as comfortable as possible prior to death.

1. For your original post, please complete the following: state which of the two imaginary doctors above with whom you most agree and explain why.