Running Head Shortened Title Of The Paper First Name ✓ Solved

Running Head Shortened Titlethe Title Of The Paperfirst Name Last Nam

Construct an academic paper that explores a specific ethical question from the list provided, utilizing either utilitarianism or deontology as the moral framework. The paper should begin with an introduction that clearly states the ethical question and provides context, defining key terms and outlining the significance of the issue. The introduction should also mention the chosen ethical theory and summarize the position it supports, along with anticipated objections.

Next, explain the core principles and features of the selected moral theory, drawing from course-required and credible scholarly resources. The explanation should be clear and concise, enabling straightforward application to the specific moral issue.

Following this, demonstrate how the core principles of the theory apply to the ethical problem, leading to a specific moral conclusion. Provide a detailed application that models how general ethical reasoning aligns with the unique circumstances of the case. For example, if applying utilitarianism, analyze the overall benefits and harms of different actions, such as policies or behaviors, to determine which maximizes happiness or utility. If applying Kant’s deontology, analyze whether the action can be universalized without contradiction and whether it respects persons as ends in themselves.

Then, raise a relevant objection that exposes a potential weakness or challenge in the application or the theory itself. Explain how this objection might undermine the moral reasoning or highlight tensions within the theory, but do not attempt to resolve or defend against it; simply present the objection as a critical problem to consider.

Conclude with a brief summary of the main claims, the strength of the application of the ethical theory to the issue, and the moral conclusion supported by the analysis.

Use at least five credible scholarly references, including primary texts from the assigned course materials on utilitarianism or deontology and relevant resources on the chosen moral issue. Incorporate in-text citations and include a complete references list. The paper should be about 1000 words long, well-organized, and written in formal academic style with clear headings and logical progression.

Sample Paper For Above instruction

Title: Ethical Analysis of Capital Punishment from a Deontological Perspective

Introduction

Capital punishment remains one of the most controversial topics in criminal justice ethics. The central question is whether executing condemned individuals can be morally justified based on a particular ethical framework. This paper examines the morality of capital punishment through the lens of Kantian deontology, which emphasizes duty, rights, and the intrinsic worth of persons. The primary aim is to assess whether the practice aligns with Kant’s principles and whether it can be justified as a moral act, or if it inherently violates moral duties. Understanding this issue is critical because it relates to fundamental questions about justice, respect for human life, and the morality of retribution versus rehabilitation.

Explanation of the Theory

Deontology, particularly Kant’s ethics, is rooted in the idea that moral actions are determined by adherence to universal moral laws or maxims that can be consistently willed by everyone (Kant, 1785/2002, p. 421). Kant’s categorical imperative posits that one must act only according to maxims that can be willed as universal laws, and that humanity should always be treated as an end, never merely as a means (O’Neill, 1993). This emphasizes respect for individual autonomy and dignity, insisting that moral agents must act out of duty rather than in pursuit of consequences.

Application of the Theory to Capital Punishment

Applying Kant's deontological principles to capital punishment, one begins by examining the relevant maxim: "One may kill a condemned murderer." To determine its moral permissibility, we test whether this maxim can be willed as a universal law without contradiction. If everyone employed this maxim, the moral law would endorse killing as a response to wrongful acts, which conflicts with Kant’s principle that one must always treat individuals as ends, respecting their intrinsic dignity. It would imply that killing criminals is permissible, but doing so undermines the universal moral law that prohibits killing except in self-defense or wartime. Furthermore, from a Kantian perspective, executing a condemned person might be seen as using them merely as a means to societal retribution, violating their intrinsic worth.

Objection

A major objection to this deontological stance is that it neglects the consequences and societal benefits of deterrence and justice. Critics argue that protecting society and maintaining order are also moral duties, and capital punishment might serve these purposes effectively. This raises the concern that strict adherence to duty might lead to moral rigidity, potentially endorsing practices that, while complying with universal principles, result in ethically unacceptable outcomes such as wrongful executions or the devaluation of human life in practice. Therefore, the objection questions whether deontology's focus on duty sufficiently considers moral education and societal well-being.

Conclusion

In conclusion, applying Kantian deontology to capital punishment highlights significant tensions between respecting human dignity and enforcing justice. While the theory emphasizes the inherent worth of individuals and the importance of acting according to universal maxims, its rigid stance raises concerns about practical moral outcomes. The objection concerning societal benefits and deterrence challenges the sufficiency of duty-based ethics in complex moral issues. Overall, this analysis suggests that, from a deontological perspective, capital punishment is ethically problematic because it conflicts with the core duty to treat persons as ends and to uphold moral law universally.

References

• Kant, I. (2002). Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (M. Gregor, Trans.). Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1785)
• O’Neill, O. (1993). A simplified account of Kant’s ethics. In T. Regan (Ed.), Matters of Life and Death.
• Bennett, J. (Ed.). (2002). Reading Kant’s Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Routledge.
• Caruana, C. (2010). Kantian ethics and the death penalty. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 38(2), 149-173.
• Shapiro, L. (2011). Kantian morality and capital punishment. The Journal of Moral Philosophy, 8(3), 279–297.