I. Summary
For this question you should identify features essential to the view in question and give an example of how each feature would affect how we reason about a particular situation.
1. Summarize the basic features of Kantianism.
2. Summarize the basic features of Mill’s Art of Life.
3. Summarize the basic features of Aristotelian virtue ethics.
II. Scenario
In Europe, a woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to make. He paid $200 for the radium and charged $2,000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about $ 1,000 which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said: "No, I discovered the drug and I'm going to make money from it." So Heinz got desperate and broke into the man's store to steal the drug-for his wife. Should the husband have done that?
1. Analyze the scenario from an Aristotelian virtue-ethical perspective.
2. Analyze the scenario from the perspective of Mill’s Art of Life.
3. Analyze the scenario from a Kantian perspective.
III. Readings
1. Ursula K. LeGuin’s story, “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas,” is often used as a criticism of utilitarianism. Do you think it succeeds if it is used in this way? Would it make a difference if the utilitarianism were Bentham’s or Mill’s? Are there any ways in which the story would raise questions about Kantian or Aristotelian ideas?
2. It is sometimes argued that Kant’s handling of his correspondence with Maria von Herbert was inconsistent with the categorical imperative; others argue that the correspondence shows some defect in Kantianism (e.g., that it is not humane enough). Do you think Kant’s handling of it was consistent with the categorical imperative, and why or why not? How might Kant have handled the matter if he were an Aristotelian or utilitarian?
3. What is the argument of IV Maccabees, and how does the author make use of virtue ethics in order to establish his conclusion? Could he have made the same argument utilitarianism or Kantianism, if they had existed when he was writing? How would Eleazer’s story be treated differently if the author were a Kantian? What if he were a utilitarian?
IV. Comparison
1. How would a Kantian and an Aristotelian virtue ethicist differ on the importance, for moral education, of imitating virtuous people or having ethical role models? How would a Kantian and a Confucian virtue ethicist differ on this?
2. Are there aspects of Mill's approach to utilitarianism that you think Aristotle might have liked? Why or why not? Is there anything Kant might like about Mill’s utilitarianism? Why or why not?
3. If Dante were a deontologist rather than a virtue ethicist, do you think he would have approached the story of Francesca and Paolo differently? Why or why not? What if he were a utilitarian instead?
