Reference no: EM133875002

Assignment:

Summery

Immanuel Kant (Konigsberg, Prussia, 1724-1804) was well known as one of the most influential intellectuals of his time. From this great German philosopher, came what some would say, the most sophisticated and influential deontological theory had been written. His other works in epistemology (the theory of knowledge) and aesthetics greatly influenced the philosophy, especially in the studies of Kantianism and idealism. Kant had lived on a remote province, where he was born, and lived for his entire life. Both of parents were devoted members of the Lutheran church, which this religion gives teachings of the inner life expressed in simplicity and obedience to moral law. The with influence of the church pastor, made it possible for Kant obtain an education. This was the start of his intellectual and philosophical career.

Because he had a strong focus of duty, "For Kant, the core of morality consists of following a rational and universally applicable moral rule and doing so solely out of a sense of duty." ((Vaughn, 2024, page 42). Kant's reasoning was, if your where actions would be praiseworthy, it would have been done by duty alone. "The theory tells us; the morality of an action would depend on a moral law about that act itself. The moral law, that is being used, needs to be universal for all, absolute and not to be judged by outcome of the act" (Vaughn, 2024, page 42).
Kant had can up with a system, that moral duties would be described in the form of categorical imperatives. "An imperative is a command to do something; it is categorical if it applies without

Padmore 1

Exception and without regard for particular needs or purposes" (Vaughn, 2024, page 42). This is a contrast of the hypothetical imperative. Hypothetical imperative would be more it the act work in to positive an event then it was a good thing. Kannt's theory of ethics is encircled in the idea of categorical imperative. The are moral principles, that Kant had come up with. are a guide on how to act; as that you would want everyone else to act also. If we were put Kant's theory of ethic up against the other morel theories, and what tools we could use to judge them; what are standards the theories would be judge. ethics is to try to tell which is which. "Moral theories can be useful and valuable to us only if there are criteria for judging their worth-and fortunately there are such standards" (Vaughn, 2024, page 52).

Today's accepted way to measure effectiveness of the moral theories is a tool called the scientific criteria of adequacy. It has a series of three criteria, and each of these criteria will help to judge the relevance of the theory being looked at. If we art to start with Criterion I, it looks at the consistency of the overall moral judgment the which are influenced by the morel theory in question, "An important criteria of adequacy for moral theories is Criterion I: consistency with our considered moral judgments. Any plausible scientific theory must be consistent with the data that the theory is supposed to explain; there should be no conflicts between the theory and the relevant facts".

(Vaughn, 2024, page 53) The main reason it is first on the list, would be if the looked at theory cannot be justified at this point, it would be dead in the water. About Kants theory of ethic, a populator notion is that the theory is not able to meet this Criteria, "Many philosophers argue that it is not consistent with moral common sense (Criterion I)" (Vaughn, 2024, page 56). A popular argument the naysayers would use, would be the tale of a bad guy who comes to your home and demand to know if a friend of your is there. The critic clams that you follow Kant's theory, you to be trueful and tell the angry person they are in the house. This

Padmore 2

would cause this person to come into the home and kill the friend. But murder is against this any theory, so that will not work out very well. The critic thinks the other options would be to lie, and if you do that, your will be going against the theory also. But the scenario has a third solution that has been ignored; it is not giving an answer and tell this individual to leave. That might cause you to have conflict with this person, but it would be the only morally seeable solution available.

Looking at criterion II, it asks us to question the consistency of the known facts of the moral life, toward real life's application. "In science, good theories are consistent with scientific background knowledge, with what scientists already have good reasons to believe." (Vaughn,
2024, page53) As we used this standard, we need to keep in mind that in the world of science and ethics, we use good data to be the bases of a good foundation. A good theory has the data, that would influence the shaping of the theory. This is so the theory can make sensible predictions if something like true not at all. So, if the theory is conflicting with what the person has already knows or to believe it is less likely to be a true moral theory.

The 3rd and last of the criterion deal with resourcefulness in moral problem-solving. If a moreltheory enables an individual to answer a moral question, or solve a moral problem, which thesolution would make sense and is found useful it would pass this criterion. "A major cause of theproblem, they say, is Kant's insistence that we have absolute (or "perfect") duties-obligationsthat must be honored without exception" (Vaughn, 2024, page56). Just like the first criteria, justbecause it is difficult, does not make it imposable. If we lived in a life, where an absolute dutynot to lie, to break a promise or to kill the innocent, would produce a quality of life that would beperfect. Once again, it is not an easy way to be but can be done..

I need help giving a review of this writing example from a bio-ethics standpoint

1) Does the paper convey a clearly defined message with a discernible beginning, middle, and end?

2) If not, please comment on any of the following: Did you have a clear sense of what the paper was about without trying hard to figure it out? Did you have any difficulty following the narrative? If so, what could they have done differently?

3) Authenticity and Credibility: The Paper includes relevant references in proper format to credible, authoritative sources to accurately substantiate messages and claims.

4) Were there any areas where they made a statement or claim that was not sufficiently backed up with a citation or reference? If so, list page number and paragraph.

Did the references they provide appear to be credible based on their References slide? If not, which ones could have been stronger?