Create A Framework For Development

create A Framework For Develop

Course Objective: Create a framework for developing one’s own ethical and moral philosophy. Instructions: You will identify a current ethical issue from provided options and analyze it from Mill's utilitarianism, Kant's deontological ethics, and Aristotle's virtue ethics. Conclude by defending one of these approaches. The format will be a PowerPoint presentation with 10-12 slides, including an introductory and a reference slide, incorporating best practices. You may include audio narration or speaker's notes. Submit the presentation as an attachment. Choose your topic from the provided list or from the United Nations' list of Global Issues.

Paper For Above instruction

Developing an ethical and moral philosophy requires a structured approach grounded in established ethical theories. For this assignment, I have selected the issue of euthanasia—a highly debated topic with diverse perspectives—focusing on the ethical implications of allowing individuals to choose death through assisted means. This issue embodies complex moral considerations that can be examined through the lenses of Mill's utilitarianism, Kant's deontological ethics, and Aristotle's virtue ethics, providing a comprehensive framework for moral analysis.

Mill's utilitarianism prioritizes the greatest happiness for the greatest number. From this perspective, euthanasia may be justified if it alleviates unbearable suffering and thereby increases overall well-being. Utilitarian calculations involve assessing the balance of pleasure versus pain for the individual involved and for society. Proponents argue that allowing euthanasia reduces overall suffering and can respect personal autonomy, thereby maximizing utility. Critics contest that it may infringe on societal values or lead to slippery slopes, highlighting the necessity of careful consideration of consequences.

Kant's deontological ethics emphasizes duty, moral rules, and respect for persons as ends in themselves. According to Kant, euthanasia might violate the categorical imperative, which demands treating humanity always as an end and never merely as a means. Kantian analysis would argue that intentionally ending a life, even to alleviate suffering, compromises moral duty and respect for human dignity. However, some Kantian philosophers consider whether respecting autonomy aligns with moral duties, creating a nuanced debate on moral permissibility within this framework.

Aristotle’s virtue ethics centers on character development and moral virtues such as compassion, courage, and prudence. From this perspective, decisions about euthanasia should promote virtues that lead to human flourishing. Virtue ethics would evaluate whether assisting death reflects moral virtues like compassion and justice, and whether it cultivates a good character. Supporters argue that compassionate aid to the suffering aligns with virtues of mercy, whereas opponents caution against vices like cruelty or recklessness.

After analyzing the issue through these approaches, I defend the utilitarian perspective as the most compelling framework for addressing euthanasia. The utilitarian model prioritizes outcomes that maximize happiness and reduce suffering, which aligns with the ethical intuition to alleviate intractable pain. While respecting individual autonomy is important, the utilitarian approach considers broader societal implications and strives for the greatest good, allowing for ethically justified permissibility of euthanasia under specific circumstances where benefits outweigh harms.

In conclusion, establishing an ethical framework involves integrating insights from multiple theories yet ultimately choosing the approach that best aligns with one's moral intuitions and societal values. For my moral philosophy, I adopt utilitarianism because it provides a pragmatic, consequence-based perspective that can accommodate complex moral dilemmas like euthanasia, balancing individual suffering with the well-being of society.

References

• Mill, J. S. (1863). Utilitarianism. Parker, Son, and Bourn.
• Kant, I. (1785/2012). Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Cambridge University Press.
• Aristotle. (350 B.C.E./2009). Nicomachean Ethics. Translated by Robert C. Bartlett. University of Chicago Press.
• Singer, P. (2011). Practical ethics. Cambridge University Press.
• Korsgaard, C. (1996). The normativity of instrumental action. The Journal of Philosophy, 93(3), 199–217.
• Rachels, J. (1986). The validity of utilitarianism. In Ethics in Practice (pp. 134-152). Oxford University Press.
• Sherwin B. Nuland. (2007). How We Die: Reflections on Life’s End. Knopf.
• Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2013). Principles of Biomedical Ethics. Oxford University Press.
• Baggini, J., & Benatar, D. (2017). Debates in Bioethics. Routledge.
• Brody, H. (2015). The ethics of euthanasia. British Medical Journal, 350, h2993.