Introduction to Philosophy Phil 1200 A03 2023-24
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
University of Manitoba *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
1200
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Apr 3, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
5
Uploaded by acharyaharsh9
1
Student’s name- Harsh Acharya
Student id - 07908621
Course- Phil 1200
Date- 11/12/2023
Introduction to Philosophy Phil 1200 A03 2023-24
First Paper
Introduction
The country of Ethycs is in a moral bind when it comes to its yearly Day of Peace when
people play out a war to stop terrible wars from happening again. This practice's moral effects
will be looked at using utilitarianism and rights/duties theory, along with ideas from Sober's
"Core Questions in Philosophy" (8th version).
Utilitarian Perspective
According to utilitarianism, an activity is good if it makes people happy or provides them
pleasure in general. Sober delves into this consequentialist moral framework, stating,
"Utilitarianism is the theory that the right action is the one that produces the most overall
happiness" (Sober 92). A utilitarian would probably say that in the case of Ethics' Day of Peace,
the practice is morally okay if it makes most people happier and healthier by keeping them from
experiencing the terrible effects of war through the war game.
The practical way of judging needs to carefully look at the happiness that comes from
both avoiding war and the pain of the few people who do go to war. As Sober mentions,
"Utilitarians believe that the morally right action is the one that maximizes the overall happiness"
(92). In this situation, giving up a few people for the good of the whole country might be seen as
2
ethically okay, especially when compared to the worst-case scenario, which is widespread pain if
war breaks out again.
Rights/Duties Theorist Perspective
A rights/duties thinker, on the other hand, focuses on the moral duties people have and
the rights they have by nature. As Sober explains, "Rights/duties theorists believe that the moral
rightness or wrongness of actions is not solely a matter of the overall consequences of those
actions" (91). A rights/duties thinker would argue that war simulations violate people's rights to
life, liberty, and safety on Ethics' Day of Peace.
Instead of endangering its citizens, the thinker may argue that the government should
defend their rights and well-being. He adds, "Rights/duties theorists often maintain that there are
certain moral rights that individuals have, regardless of the overall consequences of respecting or
violating those rights" (91). Thus, forcing individuals to participate in a life-threatening activity
may violate their rights and fail to safeguard residents.
Personal Reflection
Thinking about these perspectives shows that the Day of Peace's practical justification is
built on concerns for society's well-being. The rights and responsibilities Scholars, on the other
hand, emphasize the importance of protecting individual rights and debate whether it is
appropriate to place individuals in dangerous circumstances.
In this ethically difficult domain, a careful balance between individual rights and
communal well-being is required. Because the topic is so complex, it requires critical
consideration and ethical reflection. It is important to remember that the practical desire for
pleasure should not take precedence over the fundamental rights and obligations that underpin a
just and caring society. As Ethics residents, we must carefully look at the values that shape
3
society's choices and make sure they are in line with principles of fairness and respect for human
life.
Ethics, a country that just got over a terrible war, has a National Day of Peace where
towns have to send people to a war exercise. This approach keeps things from falling apart even
more and lets people live comfortably. But a crucial ethical issue arises: would the moral impacts
be different if the individuals were volunteers rather than being chosen at random via a lottery?
This is particularly true when it comes to consent concerns.
Volunteers vs. Random Selection: A Utilitarian Perspective
Utilitarianism, which is talked about in Sober's "Core Questions in Philosophy" (8th
version), says that acts are decent if they have good results in the long run. Maximizing
happiness is one of the most important rules. "Utilitarianism is the theory that the right action is
the one that produces the most overall happiness," Sober says (Sober 92).
For Ethycs' Day of Peace, if the people who take part are volunteers, it could be said that
they knowingly accept the possible physical and mental harm that comes with the war exercise.
People who gladly take part in the process may feel like they have a reason or are fulfilling their
needs, which could make them happier overall. So, utilitarianism would agree with the idea that
is letting people help lessen the bad effects of the game.
Volunteers vs. Random Selection: A Rights/Duties Theorist Perspective
A rights/responsibilities thinker, on the other hand, which Sober also talked about,
focuses on people's rights and duties regardless of how they affect society as a whole. As Sober
points out, "Rights/duties theorists believe that the moral rightness or wrongness of actions is not
solely a matter of the overall consequences of those actions" (Sober 19).
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
4
In this light, the way the candidates were chosen becomes very important. Picking
volunteers at random through a draw could be seen as an abuse of their rights since they are
being forced to go through the horrible war exercise. Theorists might say that people have the
right not to be hurt needlessly and that being picked at random without permission breaks this
right.
Consent and Moral Implications
When determining the moral difference between volunteers and persons chosen at
random, it is critical to consider the issue of agreement. One of Sober's most crucial comments
concerning permission is that "without it, the action violates the individual's autonomy, treating
the person as a means to an end rather than as an end in itself" (Sober 115).
Participating in the war exercise indicates that people understand and accept the bargain.
It fits with what rights/duties thinkers say about respecting each person's freedom. However,
picking people at random might violate their right to privacy, which could make the action
ethically questionable.
Conclusion
When thinking about the moral effects of volunteers vs. randomly chosen participants in
Ethics' Day of Peace, both the practical and rights/duties views are useful. Maintaining
everyone's happiness while maintaining rights like the freedom to disagree and be left alone is a
delicate balance. Ethics students must comprehend these moral theories to make sensible
judgments that benefit the nation and its citizens when faced with this difficult moral challenge.
5
Work Cited
Sober Elliott. Core Questions in Philosophy. 8th ed., Oxford University Press, 2016, p. 92.
Sober Elliott. Core Questions in Philosophy. 8th ed., Pearson, 2015, p. 19.
Sober Elliott. Core Questions in Philosophy. 8th ed., Oxford University Press, 2023, p. 115.