Question 1
Explain the three branches of ethics. Please also illustrate the difference between the three branches using examples.
Meta-Ethics
Normative
Utilitarianism
In general, the main theory behind utilitarianism is that performing good deeds to as much people as possible is a good value. The important part of utilitarianism is that the end result will justify the means. The definition of good in this case could be anything, ranging from pleasure, happiness, or even satisfaction.
Act utilitarianism
According to Jeremy Bentham, the theory of act utilitarianism is to provide people the most amount of pleasure while delivering as little pain as possible. As long as the act totals up a higher amount of pleasure than pain, then the act is considered good. Calculus formula is used to judge the greatest good at given situation.
Rule utilitarianism
Based on John Stuart Mill, he stated that utilitarianism should judge based on rules and laws instead of pure pleasure. Generally, the rule utilitarianism focuses on the consequences of deciding on which rule is the best for them to follow. Instead of executing a decision that gives everyone the greatest amount of happiness, rule utilitarianism focus on rules and morality that has already been imposed by the society.
Differences based on situation
In a bank robbery situation, the hijacker threatens to blow himself up with everyone in the bank if his demands are not fulfilled. Given that if there is a chance for the hostages to kill the robber, act utilitarian will suggest that killing him would be the right thing to do as this save lives of hundreds whereas rule utilitarian will remark that murdering is never the right thing to do as they are obligated to follow the morality standards imposed by the society.
Question 3
Discuss two ethical issues brought up in the movie, “ Thank You for Smoking”
Throughout the screening of the movie “Thank You for Smoking”, there are many ethical aspects that are worthy to be discussing about. The most prominent ethical dilemma that seen the entire movie will be Nick Naylor’s job as a lobbyist. Knowing very well that tobacco is truly harmful to one’s health, he is duty bound to perform his role as the chief spokesperson for the Academy of Tobacco Studies. This can be seen when he constantly hangs out with his friends that he calls them the MOD squad or better known as the Merchant of Death, to discuss whether which industries are killing people the most each day. Also being dubbed as the “The Sultan of Spin”, his role is to mainly manipulate people in order to protect most of the cigarette industries when crisis strikes. As talented as Nick is, he is excellent at fulfilling his job scope and similar to a lawyer, he doesn’t really care who is the really criminal or victim. Ignoring the ethical aspect, he will try to refute the claims made by other parties or even push the blame to them instead. This is clearly seen in the opening when they are interviewing 15-year-old cancer stricken boy Robin. By spinning the situation around, Nick managed to divert the crisis by pointing out the fact that tobacco companies will be making a loss if Robin were to stop smoking and even gain public sympathy at the same time.
However, I would like to also point out that Nick Naylor’s argument may not necessarily aimed to be on the winning side. There may not be right or wrong in certain situation, he however, believes that everyone deserves a fair trial and defence, and that includes the tobacco industries. As seen in the ice-cream flavour explanation it, Nick was explaining that it wasn’t necessary to pinpoint the dangers of smoking by arguing if it is the fair or unfair decision to label the poison symbol on the cigarette box. By default, everyone should already know the consequences of smoking and being in a democratic society, every person has their own choice to decide what is good or bad to them. It’s not the pictures or symbols that will prevent someone from smoking, their own parent upbringing or culture should be the one that guide them to do the right thing.
In another scene, I realized how unethical and low it was for the journalist, Heather Holloway to get herself into having sexual affair with Nick in order to get the information she wants for her papers to be published. What’s worst was that every single individual that got involved with Nick was also revealed in the papers. Using the rule of the First Amendment (the freedom of speech) against Nick, Heather decided that she could severely damages his career and reputation by including names of his accomplice, information and histories to the public. This not only causes Nick to lose almost everything he has worked for, it hurts the people around him as well which was totally unnecessary. It may be right that everyone has the right to know the truth but certainly it was an unethical move to accomplish it.
There is also another interesting scene when Nick tries to guilt trip Lorne Lutch (Marlboro Man) into taking the bribes so that the recently diagnosed lung cancer Lorne will not be bad-mouthing the tobacco companies. Initially Lorne was reluctant to take the offer and stands to his principle but Nick being the talker, persuaded him to either keep all the money or report him to the news press about the bribery attempt. Mentioning that Lorne will either gain absolutely nothing for his family if he decides to turn the blood money to the authorities, Nick managed to confuse but convinced Lorne to accept the money. Take note that this bribery attempt may be an unethical move did by Nick, but the decision is made entirely by the Marlboro Man himself. All Nick did was to even the odds of both sides of the consequences.
Question 4
Discuss the three (3) elements of citizenship according to T.H Marshall
According to T.H Marshall, the British Sociologist, the three elements of citizenship consist of:
a)Civil Citizenship
Generally, civil citizenship is societies that should be entitled of their civil rights which composed of the necessary rights for an individual’s freedom. This includes the liberty of the person’s freedom of speech, thought and faith, the right to own properties and to conclude valid contracts. They should also be given the right to obtain justice.
b)Political Citizenship
By default, anyone should be given the right to participate in the exercise of political power as a member of a body invested with political authority or as an elector of the members of such a body, The corresponding institutions are parliament and councils of local government.
c)Social Citizenship
This citizenship includes the different variety of rights ranging from the miniature economic welfare and security to the right to share to the full in the social heritage and to live the life of a civilised being based on the fundamental standards in the society. This can be interpreted as covering the entitlements of acquiring social benefits, particularly health care, income security and housing.
In conclusion, all these 3 citizen rights could be classified as a person’s basic rights in order to make themselves feel like a full and equal member within the society.
Explain the three branches of ethics. Please also illustrate the difference between the three branches using examples.
Meta-Ethics
- Metaethics is defined as the study of the moral value itself. The existance of meta-ethic is to understand while attempt to question the nature of ethics itself.
- What is exactly listed as good, bad, justice or immoral values? Are moral values absolute or flexible?
- A good example will be the quote "eating an apple a day keeps the doctor away" why is eating apple considered as a good and healthy habit?
Normative
- Normative on the other hand is basically a set of guidelines that helps people to define what is right or wrong within a society.
- Just because the value is practised by the majority people but does it mean it the correct thing to do?
- An example will be the good value of being a parent. What are the things that should be practiced by them to be considered as a good parent based on the community's perspective
- For applied ethics, this philosophy is judged based on the things that has already been done.
- It is not always about being right or wrong but the most important question will be is it done for the right reason?
- A good example of applied ethics will self defense. Hitting someone may be wrong but doing so to protect ourselves is considered the right thing to do based on the situation.
Utilitarianism
In general, the main theory behind utilitarianism is that performing good deeds to as much people as possible is a good value. The important part of utilitarianism is that the end result will justify the means. The definition of good in this case could be anything, ranging from pleasure, happiness, or even satisfaction.
Act utilitarianism
According to Jeremy Bentham, the theory of act utilitarianism is to provide people the most amount of pleasure while delivering as little pain as possible. As long as the act totals up a higher amount of pleasure than pain, then the act is considered good. Calculus formula is used to judge the greatest good at given situation.
Rule utilitarianism
Based on John Stuart Mill, he stated that utilitarianism should judge based on rules and laws instead of pure pleasure. Generally, the rule utilitarianism focuses on the consequences of deciding on which rule is the best for them to follow. Instead of executing a decision that gives everyone the greatest amount of happiness, rule utilitarianism focus on rules and morality that has already been imposed by the society.
Differences based on situation
In a bank robbery situation, the hijacker threatens to blow himself up with everyone in the bank if his demands are not fulfilled. Given that if there is a chance for the hostages to kill the robber, act utilitarian will suggest that killing him would be the right thing to do as this save lives of hundreds whereas rule utilitarian will remark that murdering is never the right thing to do as they are obligated to follow the morality standards imposed by the society.
Question 3
Discuss two ethical issues brought up in the movie, “ Thank You for Smoking”
Throughout the screening of the movie “Thank You for Smoking”, there are many ethical aspects that are worthy to be discussing about. The most prominent ethical dilemma that seen the entire movie will be Nick Naylor’s job as a lobbyist. Knowing very well that tobacco is truly harmful to one’s health, he is duty bound to perform his role as the chief spokesperson for the Academy of Tobacco Studies. This can be seen when he constantly hangs out with his friends that he calls them the MOD squad or better known as the Merchant of Death, to discuss whether which industries are killing people the most each day. Also being dubbed as the “The Sultan of Spin”, his role is to mainly manipulate people in order to protect most of the cigarette industries when crisis strikes. As talented as Nick is, he is excellent at fulfilling his job scope and similar to a lawyer, he doesn’t really care who is the really criminal or victim. Ignoring the ethical aspect, he will try to refute the claims made by other parties or even push the blame to them instead. This is clearly seen in the opening when they are interviewing 15-year-old cancer stricken boy Robin. By spinning the situation around, Nick managed to divert the crisis by pointing out the fact that tobacco companies will be making a loss if Robin were to stop smoking and even gain public sympathy at the same time.
However, I would like to also point out that Nick Naylor’s argument may not necessarily aimed to be on the winning side. There may not be right or wrong in certain situation, he however, believes that everyone deserves a fair trial and defence, and that includes the tobacco industries. As seen in the ice-cream flavour explanation it, Nick was explaining that it wasn’t necessary to pinpoint the dangers of smoking by arguing if it is the fair or unfair decision to label the poison symbol on the cigarette box. By default, everyone should already know the consequences of smoking and being in a democratic society, every person has their own choice to decide what is good or bad to them. It’s not the pictures or symbols that will prevent someone from smoking, their own parent upbringing or culture should be the one that guide them to do the right thing.
In another scene, I realized how unethical and low it was for the journalist, Heather Holloway to get herself into having sexual affair with Nick in order to get the information she wants for her papers to be published. What’s worst was that every single individual that got involved with Nick was also revealed in the papers. Using the rule of the First Amendment (the freedom of speech) against Nick, Heather decided that she could severely damages his career and reputation by including names of his accomplice, information and histories to the public. This not only causes Nick to lose almost everything he has worked for, it hurts the people around him as well which was totally unnecessary. It may be right that everyone has the right to know the truth but certainly it was an unethical move to accomplish it.
There is also another interesting scene when Nick tries to guilt trip Lorne Lutch (Marlboro Man) into taking the bribes so that the recently diagnosed lung cancer Lorne will not be bad-mouthing the tobacco companies. Initially Lorne was reluctant to take the offer and stands to his principle but Nick being the talker, persuaded him to either keep all the money or report him to the news press about the bribery attempt. Mentioning that Lorne will either gain absolutely nothing for his family if he decides to turn the blood money to the authorities, Nick managed to confuse but convinced Lorne to accept the money. Take note that this bribery attempt may be an unethical move did by Nick, but the decision is made entirely by the Marlboro Man himself. All Nick did was to even the odds of both sides of the consequences.
Question 4
Discuss the three (3) elements of citizenship according to T.H Marshall
According to T.H Marshall, the British Sociologist, the three elements of citizenship consist of:
a)Civil Citizenship
Generally, civil citizenship is societies that should be entitled of their civil rights which composed of the necessary rights for an individual’s freedom. This includes the liberty of the person’s freedom of speech, thought and faith, the right to own properties and to conclude valid contracts. They should also be given the right to obtain justice.
b)Political Citizenship
By default, anyone should be given the right to participate in the exercise of political power as a member of a body invested with political authority or as an elector of the members of such a body, The corresponding institutions are parliament and councils of local government.
c)Social Citizenship
This citizenship includes the different variety of rights ranging from the miniature economic welfare and security to the right to share to the full in the social heritage and to live the life of a civilised being based on the fundamental standards in the society. This can be interpreted as covering the entitlements of acquiring social benefits, particularly health care, income security and housing.
In conclusion, all these 3 citizen rights could be classified as a person’s basic rights in order to make themselves feel like a full and equal member within the society.