what would Kant’s Formula of Ends require the doctor to? Why?
According to Kant’s formula of Ends require the doctor the doctor should help his patients at the end “ Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) argued that the supreme principle of morality is a standard of rationality that he dubbed the “Categorical Imperative” (CI). Kant characterized the CI as an objective, rationally necessary and unconditional principle that we must always follow despite any natural desires or inclinations we may have to the contrary” I would say doctors follow their duties producers that naturally comes to mind is this “ duties are rules or laws of some sort combined with some sort of felt constraint or incentive on our choices, whether from external coercion by others or from our own powers of reason. For instance, the bylaws of a club lay down duties for its officers and enforce them with sanctions. City and state laws establish the duties of citizens and enforce them with coercive legal power. Thus, if we do something because it is our “civic” duty, or our duty “as a boy scout” or “a good American,” our motivation is respect for the code that makes it our duty. Thinking we are duty bound is simply respecting, as such, certain laws pertaining to us” Johnson, R., & Cureton, A. 2016, July 7).[unique_solution]
what would Mill’s Principle of Utility require the doctor to do? Why?
As of my understanding the Mill’s principle theory is focused on the result if the effect is positive for that person the doctor can tell him “ Utilitarianism is a philosophical view or theory about how we should evaluate a wide range of things that involve choices that people face. Among the things that can be evaluated are actions, laws, policies, character traits, and moral codes ” Utilitarian’s believe that the purpose of morality is to make life better by increasing the number of good things (such as pleasure and happiness) in the world and decreasing the number of bad things (such as pain and unhappiness). They reject moral codes or systems that consist of commands or taboos that are based on customs, traditions, or orders given by leaders or supernatural beings. Instead, utilitarian’s think that what makes a morality be true or justifiable is its positive contribution to human (and perhaps non-human) beings.
If you were the patient, what would you prefer your doctor did? Why?
If I were the patients, I do not want to be told I am dying because negative thing is always having a negative impact in your life. If someone told you are weak every time, he /she see you, you will start losing your confidence about yourself and start thinking about your weakness. Death is the end of life and it is to hard to accept I am dying; how can I have spent each of my day? So, I would say it’s best not to know when you are going to die, but to live this day as if it were always your last 5 minutes to live. Do not be so sure of your skepticism, and realize that the only smart bet is to bet in favor of the House because the House always win and in the absolutely negative case of the other, nobody ever wins, nothing matters, and you have already lost. You know this is true. Everybody knows this is true. That’s why the Wager cannot be avoided. With 5 minutes left to live, I’m sure the wager becomes much clearer as all other matters fade when staring into the dark chasm of life’s terminus. Either all with God or nothing without Him. There are no other choices to make, and there never are, no matter how much time you have.
Johnson, R., & Cureton, A. (2016, July 7). Kants Moral Philosophy. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-moral/
Jesse Brimm
Hello everyone,
Thought experiment #2. A patient comes in complaining of a bad cold. You give them some treatments, and get ready to send them on their way, since they are otherwise quite healthy. However, you remember that you have five patients in the other room who desperately need new organs – heart, kidney, lung, pancreas, and intestines. From the patient’s record, you see that the cold patient is a match for all five patients, but the cold patient cannot live without these organs.
- At first glance, what would Kant’s Formula of Ends require you to do, based on the Module 2 reading? Why?
Kant argued that “rational beings can never be treated merely as means to ends; they must always also be treated as ends themselves, requiring that their own reasoned motives must be equally respected” (Benn, 1998, p. 95). Using the Experiment #2 example, Kant’s formula of Ends would require us to treat the patient coming in with a bad cold as an end and not treat them as a means (Munson, 2017, p 911). Since through Kant’s reasoning each person has value it would be morally wrong to treat the patient with a bad cold as a means, even if it meant saving five other people.
- At first glance, what would Mill’s Principle of Utility require you to do, based on the Module 2 reading? Why? Mill’s Principle of Utility argues that actions are right if they proportionality promote happiness and wrong if they promote unhappiness (Munson, 2017, p 903). Using Mill’s logic, since there would be 5 people who are happy because of their new organs, and one person unhappy because they died from the action of withholding the medication, the proportion to promote happiness is higher than unhappiness making the action right.
- This is a classic thought experiment that raises some problems for the Principle of Utility. What are the problems, and how could Mill get around them? The problem with Principle of utility in this example is that 1 person will lose their life to give 5 people happiness. For Mill to get around this problem he would have to add in some sense of justice to the problem so that the suffering of some to promote happiness for many is not exploited.