Hi, this paper is basically a homework assignment which counts a lot towards my grade. In this paper there are three cases which need to be answered. Basically all the points need to be covered in essay format. I will provide the stories for case number 1 and 2. Please label each answer with the case number before. Thanks !

Assignment:

Case #1

Using Mill’s theory and the attached format (Brothers keepers) determine whether the actions of William Bulger and David Kaczynski were morally justified. After #7, present the strengths and weaknesses of utilitarianism.

Use the following format:

1) what are the facts in each case?

2) What are the circumstances?

3) What are the intentions of the agents? (the brother in each case)

4) What are the contending values as understood by the agents?

5) What are the probable consequences of the possible actions of each agent?

6) what is the morality quality of the action taken by each agent?

7) According to utilitarianism ethics explain why the action taken in each case was or was not ethically justified.

Case #2

Use Kant’s theory of duty ethics to determine whether in the case of ABC versus Food Lion the reporters were justified in lying on their application forms in order to gain access to Food Lion’s food producing operations.

1) Explain the apriori conditions (ie what the mind is aware of before sense experience) from which it forms a moral judgment. Include in your response the answers to the following

-What is it in the human being that is good in itself.

-When is the will functioning as good will?

-What does it mean to be autonomous?

-What is the categorical (ie. Explicit, universal, absolute) imperative?

-How is the categorical imperative constructed?

2) Show how the above ought to be applied to the behavior of the reporters.

-What is the conflict of values in the case?

-What is the standard for making a decision in this case according to duty ethics?

-What ought the reporter do?

3) In your judgment what are the strengths and weaknesses of this theory?

Case #3

Use the virtue ethics of Aristotle to arrive at a decision in the following case:

During the occupation of France in World War II the French underground engaged in sabotaging the German arum’s fuel and ammunitions depots and other such actions. To stop sabotage the Germans would take hostages that would be freed if the saboteurs surrendered. Otherwise the hostages would be executed. On one particular case the German commandant of a village had taken hostages. During the time of his deployment he became romantically interested in his housekeeper who ignored his advances. He approached her with an offer that he would free the hostages if she would live with him as his lover for the duration of the war. Otherwise, the hostages would be executed. The house keeper was a devout Catholic married woman whose husband was fighting in the underground. Given her particular set of circumstances what in your judgment would be the virtuous action on her part?

-Show how your deliberation is based on the principles of Aristotle’s metaphysics and philosophical psychology. Include in your response; (a) the essence (nature) of the human being. (b) the principles of change in the human being. (c) the end or purpose of a human being (d.) what is it in nature of a human being that can deter one from achieving that purpose. (e) How human actions themselves account for a good or a bad character (f) how virtue is the practice of the golden mean (g) whether she will be able to experience a sense of well being in carrying out her decision.