sample essay attached
In this second week, notice that most moral decisions make use of utilitarianism or deontology. In other words, if you consider any important moral decision you have ever made, you probably considered either what made the most people happy, or what was right.
Just like last week, remember the directions about writing philosophy.
Just to be thorough, however, here are a few more.
Always read my introductions to the thinkers for the week. In the modules, these are always first. Sometimes these are brief, although they can be quite detailed. Typically, I outline the main points and so this can be useful.
Lastly, after I grade the essays for the week, make sure to read my comments on your essay. Depending on the essay, I can write quite a bit. Sometimes, I end up writing a whole new essay!
After all, when it comes time for you to do peer reviews in the last month of class, you will be doing the same.
With all that out of the way, here are your potential prompts for the week. Just like last week, do one of the two.
1. Remember that Rachels offers 3 cases in his Introduction- Baby Theresa, Mary and Jody, and the Latimer case. All are real stories. But the people on either side in these cases either appeal to utilitarian ideas (i.e. the greater good) or deontological ones (i.e. about what is truly right or wrong). In each case, who is appealing to which, do you think? Explain why the people in these cases (e.g. the parents of Mary and Jody) are making use of either utilitarianism or deontology. This is a fair bit. Do not just label positions (e.g. Robert Latimer) as either utilitarian or deontologist, but rather explain why that position is one or the other. Make sure to quote both from Rachels chapter 1, as well as the latter chapters (i.e. 7, 8, 9, and 10). Since each case has at least two sides, this requires that you explain 6 positions.
2. According to Kant, morality is absolute. When something is right or wrong, it is always right or wrong. When something is wrong, moreover, it is prohibited no matter what. Yet how can we know what the moral law is? According to Kant, we can ascertain what the moral law is by means of his ‘categorical imperative’ test. To evaluate this test, read the chapters in Rachels on Kant- he is really good on the objections to deontology. Indeed, do not omit any of his objections! Moreover, read Kant himself (i.e. “Morality and Rationality”) from our supplemental readings- make sure to quote from him. Does the categorical imperative work to reveal the moral law? Or does it not? Make sure to consider the potential objections (e.g. from Phillipa Foot) to this categorical imperative test. What do you think, exactly?
