Project #157496 - Paper 3-4 for PHIL 101.101

Philosophy Tutors

Subject Philosophy
Due By (Pacific Time) 12/07/2016 12:00 am

This assignment requires 1800 words minimum, composed in your own words. Quotations from the book are permitted (and they can help you make your paper better) but they do not count towards this word requirement. Your paper must be double-spaced, 11 point font size, on a regular 8.5 x 11 paper size with 1” margin. Your name must be at the top, followed by this title: Paper 3-4 for PHIL 101 Section __ (add your class’s section number – either 101 or 555). Online students: save your exam with a filename that starts with your last name and then says ‘paper three’ - looks like this: Nixon paper three.docx

First, explain how Kant’s categorical imperative applies to this question: Is it morally right for every child to be vaccinated against bad diseases like measles and mumps? Be sure to explain how you imagine a world in which that moral rule is the rule for everyone. In that imagined world, would everyone prefer that this rule is followed by everyone? Based on your answer to that question, describe how you reach your final answer: would Kant agree, or disagree, that it is morally right for every child to get vaccinated. Then describe how you would explain to people against child vaccination, using only reasoning based on Kant’s ethics, why their opinion can’t be morally right.

Second, describe how John Stuart Mill’s utilitarian principle – “the greatest happiness for the greatest number” – would be applied to this problem: Should there be a law that requires all parents to make sure that all their children receive vaccinations to prevent bad diseases like mumps and measles? Be sure to describe how your answer – “Yes, that law is the utilitarian answer” or “No, utilitarianism does not support this law” – is supported by considering the long-term consequences. How would the whole country be affected, one way or the other? Then describe how you would explain to people who are against child vaccination, using only reasoning based on utilitarianism, why their opinion can’t be morally right.

TutorRating
pallavi

out of 1971 reviews
amosmm

out of 766 reviews
PhyzKyd

out of 1164 reviews
rajdeep77

out of 721 reviews
sctys

out of 1600 reviews
sharadgreen

out of 770 reviews
topnotcher

out of 766 reviews
XXXIAO

out of 680 reviews