applied ethics nooooo

Question 1

what do act utilitarians say about stealing

Answer 1

stealing being acceptable depends on the situation - if the act of stealing results in greater happiness then it’d be morally acceptable to steal.

Question 2

when would stealing be acceptable for act utilitarians

Answer 2

it’s acceptable for a starving person to steal food if it saves their life, as the victim’s loss is outweighed by the theif’s benefit. similarly, a poor person stealing from the rich, the rich person’s loss of happiness is insignificant compared to the theif’s gain

Question 3

what do rule utilitarians say about stealing

Answer 3

although there may be specific instances where stealing brings greater happiness, the general rule of ‘dont steal’ leads to greater happiness overall.

Question 4

what example do rule utilitarians use for stealing

Answer 4

john stuart mill - a society that permitted stealing would be one where everyone lived in fear of being robbed/insecure they’d be stolen from. this fear would lead to a less happy society than one that doesnt permit stealing and so we should never violate someones property rights even if theres situations where it would maximise happiness

Question 5

what does kant say about stealing

Answer 5

its never acceptable to steal - categorical imperative. if my maxim is ‘to steal’ and this became a universal law, then everyone could steal but then the concept of personal property wouldnt exist as everyone would be entitled to everything. if theres no such thing as personal property, then stealing wont exist as you cant steal if something wasnt theirs in the first place. so willing the maxim to steal leads to a contradiction in conception therefore we have a perfect duty not to steal and its always wrong

Question 6

what does aristotle say about stealing

Answer 6

stealing is an action that never falls within the golden mean as it’s an injustice. it deprives a person what is justly and fairly theirs.

Question 7

what example does aristotle use for stealing

Answer 7

stealing 2 pound from a millionare to buy food for a starving child who will die if not is simply an unjust state of affair (an unfortunate situation) which is how the world is. It would be worse to deliberately choose to commit unjust actions (stealing) even if youre doing so to counteract unjust state of affairs

Question 8

what does moral realism say about stealing

Answer 8

naturalism - stealing is wrong is true if it has the natural property of wrongness e.g causes upset
non-naturalism - stealing is wrong is true if it has non-natural property of wrongness

Question 9

how does utilitarianism say simulated killing is okay

Answer 9

the person watching a film or playing a video game where someone is being murdered gives some pleasure, and the person being murdered isnt suffering because its a simulation so it results in a net gain of happiness

Question 10

how does utilitarianism say simulated killing is wrong

Answer 10

some situations where simulated killing could decrease happiness e.g what if someone is exposed to it and it makes them more likely to kill someone irl, then this pain would outweigh happiness. if there was a study to support such, then rule util would say its wrong

Question 11

what does kant say about simulated killing

Answer 11

murder in video games doesnt lead to contradiction in conception nor contradiction in will, so thered be no objections. however we do have a perfect duty to develop morally (cultivating feelings of compassion to others) simulated killing may weaken these feelings of compassion and so we may have an imperfect duty not to engage in it

Question 12

how would aristotle say simulated killing is wrong

Answer 12

being a good person involves acting on virtues until theyre apart of your character. so if someone spends time playing simulated killing video games they could develop bad habits/character. e.g repeatedly killing fictional innocent people may make someone unkind/unjust

Question 13

how would aristotle say simulated killing is okay

Answer 13

could be argued killing fictional people isnt unjust as theyre not real so theres no real injustice. doing unjust acts develops vice of injustice, but simulated killing is technically not an unjust act

Question 14

what would act utilitarianism say about eating animals

Answer 14

bentham’s view that happiness is the only view should be extended to animals as animals can feel pain and pleasure just as humans would - they cant reason/talk but they can suffer

Question 15

what would preference utilitarianism say about eating animals

Answer 15

to privilege human pain over animals is speciest in similiar way priveliging men over women is sexist. eating animals is wrong because the pain caused to them outweights the pleasure of those who eat them

Question 16

how would a utilitarian justify eating animals

Answer 16

if it wasnt for farming animals for food, many animals wouldnt have existed to experience pleasure in the first place and so if animals farmed for food have an overall happy life and painless death then it results in a net increase of pleasure. so bad farming conditions would be morally wrong, not eating meat.

Question 17

what would kant say about eating animals

Answer 17

kants categorical imperative only applies to rational beings, which animals arent. theres no contradiction in will/conception that results from the maxim ‘eat animals’

Question 18

what would aristotle say about eating animals

Answer 18

eudaimonia is concerned with good life for specifically humans, and animals arent capable of reason like humans are therefore eudaimonia doesnt apply to them. theres no issue with eating animals

Question 19

how would act utilitarians say telling lies is okay

Answer 19

if telling a lie leads to greater happiness, then it’s morally okay. e.g if someone asks whether they look okay and they dont, utilitarians would say the right thing to do is lie and say yes. Dependent on situation

Question 20

how would rule utilitarians say telling lies isnt okay

Answer 20

a rule to never lie would lead to greater happiness than a rule that says everyone can lie. if everyone was an act utilitarian and always lied to increase happiness/reduce pain, then no one would trust anythin anyone said. a world where no one trusts anyone would be less happy overall

Question 21

what would aristotle say about telling lies

Answer 21

lying about oneself- boasting is a vice of excess, and false modestly is a vice of deficiancy so telling the truth is in the middle and is therefore the virtuous action. theres degrees to which lying is bad - lying to protect ur reputation is not as bad as lying to gain money for example