Hi,

I have attached a question for two pages paper of Ethics.

Thank you.

Using web based research, find an environmental-based ethical dilemma from the past five years online. (You can use a news story, an internet article, a law case, or anything from a governmental database for this assignment.) Then, using this story as a foundation for your dilemma:

·         Create a 2-4 paragraph "dilemma" similar to the other dilemmas you have been solving throughout this term.

·         Solve the dilemma using Kant's ethics (Categorical Imperative).

·         Solve the dilemma using any other method we have discussed to date (with which you agree.)

·         State which resolution (Kant's or the other one you chose) you prefer and why.

(It is possible that one or more of these dilemmas you write may become future exam questions for this course, so keep that in mind while you write the dilemma.)

This assignment should be two typed pages, double-spaced. You MUST provide the source of the dilemma, and thus this paper will require at least one "reference." Use APA format in citing the source, and let me know if you have questions on how to do that.

Kant’s transcript:

My name is Immanual Kant. You will hear about me throughout your study of ethics as the person who devised a “Categorical Imperative.” What, you may ask, is that? It is a statement of my view of ethics, in a positive, direct order to follow.

 My Categorical Imperatives states that you should “Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.” Stated in an easier way, you should ““Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of another, always at the same time as an end and never simply as a means.”

Many people call me a Universalist, or an Absolutist, because I feel that if you believe it is wrong to lie, then you should never lie, even if the end result is not good. If lying is wrong, then it is always wrong. If you believe it is wrong to kill, then you should never kill, even if the end result is not good. If killing is wrong, then it is always wrong.

Your class will discuss this during your threaded discussions this week by discussing the situation of the Crazed Murderer. Many of you will wonder, “What would Kant do?” If you read the accompanying lecturette and discuss this well in the threads this week, I believe you will understand my philosophy on ethics well enough to be able to answer this question at the end of this week. Good luck and work hard in the threads. I hope you will espouse my ethical view after this week for the rest of your life.

CourseLover

(12)

Status NEW Posted 13 Aug 2017 05:08 PM My Price 10.00

----------- He-----------llo----------- Si-----------r/M-----------ada-----------m -----------Tha-----------nk -----------You----------- fo-----------r u-----------sin-----------g o-----------ur -----------web-----------sit-----------e a-----------nd -----------acq-----------uis-----------iti-----------on -----------of -----------my -----------pos-----------ted----------- so-----------lut-----------ion-----------. P-----------lea-----------se -----------pin-----------g m-----------e o-----------n c-----------hat----------- I -----------am -----------onl-----------ine----------- or----------- in-----------box----------- me----------- a -----------mes-----------sag-----------e I----------- wi-----------ll

Not Rated(0)

• Buy Answer