Prince Georges Community College Trolley Problem Discussion

User Generated

ivetvavnambyrjnar

Humanities

Prince George's Community College

Description

In 500 words or more (no less), research the trolley problem and tell me why you would or would not pull the lever. Make sure you use the concepts introduced in the material above(- https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/consequentialism/ and https://www.iep.utm.edu/util-a-r/). You may use examples, but you will still need to include a full scholarly definition of each, with commentary. You may use any scholarly source other than a dictionary, to include online video lectures. You may use Wikipedia as a starting point, but be aware that Wikipedia is not a scholarly source and therefore can never be quoted in your paper or counted as 1 of your 5 bibliographic citations. You will need to include inline citations in your essay (last name, date, pg#) and must still cite any sources beyond the five required (Internet encyclopedia of philosophy,Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, Google scholar, The philosopher's Index,Microsoft Academic, BASE or Mendely)  that you use to write your paper in the references section of your essay. If you include an inline citation, there must be a corresponding entry in the reference list or bibliography. Use APA format citation.

Explanation & Answer:
500 words
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

Hello, I'm done, thank you.

Running head: ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
1

Annotated Bibliography
Name
Institution
Instructor
Course
Date

ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

2

ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Sosa, N., & Rios, K. (2019). The utilitarian scientist: The humanization of scientists in
moral dilemmas. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 84, 103818.
Nicholas Sosa is a graduate psychology student who has featured in several forums
involving making meaning beyond certainty. The article ‘The Utilitarian Scientist’ involved
scientists as more morally utilitarian except atheist compared to other rational groups, perceived
competence of scientists predicted their moral utilitarianism and the appropriate utilitarian
decisions by scientists were dehumanized less and more trusted more than other participants in
the study. Sosa in this study starts by examining prior stereotypes of trustworthy and rationality
of scientists as well as dehumanizing qualities. The study series involved 782 Mechanical Turk
Workers who believed scientists would solve moral dilemmas compared to other rational groups.
Studies 1-5 showed better utilitarian moral decisions, study 2 showed a better competence in
moral decision making while studies 3-4 expressed scientists as less dehumanized and more
trusted compared to other target groups. The implication is that scientists are better in moral
judgment, a utilitarian scientist.
Cushman, F. (2016). The psychological origins of the doctrine of double effect. Criminal
Law and Philosophy, 10(4), 763-776. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s1572-0149334-1
Cushman’s presentation of St. Thomas Aquinas’s the Doctrine of Double Effect is a rich
article that combines a variety of sources, both primary and secondary to the define the moral
principle that distinguishes between harm caused as a side effect and the harm caused as a means
to an end. The author creates the article as a purely descriptive subject showing that double effect

ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

3

i...


Anonymous
Awesome! Perfect study aid.

Studypool
4.7
Indeed
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Related Tags