philosophy paper assignment

User Generated

djregn

Humanities

Description

Instructions:

  1. You are to chose 1 theory from the following: Ethics of Care, Virtue Theory, Kantian Deontology, Utilitarianism.
  2. You are to pick 5 case studies.(out of 8)
  3. Clearly and accurately, explain/summarize the theory you have chosen. This is worth 40 points.
  4. Clearly and accurately, summarize each case study (This is worth 40 points) before analyzing that case study with the theory you have chosen (This is worth 40 points).
  5. Make sure your paper is well written, grammatically correct, properly punctuated etc. In other words, make sure it isreadable. This is worth 40 points.
  6. When grading these papers, the last thing I will consider is the quality of the paper: does it reflect critical thinking skills? Does the writer carefully consider the issue? Etc. This is the final 40 point.

THE PAPER--NO LESS THAN 8 PAGES AND NO MORE THAN 11.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

More Questions and Alternative Scenarios for the Challenger Disaster Thequestion explosion the of the disaster space shuttle in January 1986The is without worst in thisChallenger nation's space program. seven astronauts aboard died, and the shuttle was grounded until it could fly safely. The explosion resulted from the failure of O-rings to seal in the booster rocket joints, apparently because of unusually low temperatures that day in Florida. The catastrophe is also remembered as a classic example of alleged retribution against whistleblowers by their employer-Morton Thiokol, Inc., maker of the shuttle's booster rockets. Some Thiokol employees were critical of the company and of NASA in their testimony before the presidential commission investigating the accident, and they believed that they were punished as a result. Most notable among these individuals was Roger Boisjoly, an engineer who for several months had voiced concerns about the O-rings and whose warnings against launching Challenger were ignored. For a year before the Challenger explosion, Boisjoly conducted research into concerns that low temperatures could compromise critical joints and seals in the shuttle's booster rockets. He advised his superiors about his concerns, but they did not view the matter with the same degree of urgency. On the evening before the Challenger liftoff, Boisjoly and other engineers opposed the launch because of the low temperature. After NASA officials objected, Thiokol senior managers overruled the engineers and authorized the flight. After the disaster, Boisjoly was initially placed on the investigating team. But after testifying before the Rogers Commission about the disagreement over launching the shuttle, his position was changed and he was isolated from NASA and the effort to redesign the seal. After the commission chairman criticized the company for what appeared to be punishment of Boisjoly and Allan McDonald, another engineer whose testimony was critical of Thiokol and NASA, both men were given their jobs back. A couple of months later, however, Boisjoly left Thiokol on extended sick leave .• Discussion Questions 1. It is generally conceded that the Thiokol engineers did what they could to prevent the Challenger launch. But did they? In view of what was at stake, did they have a moral responsibility to do more? What more could they have done? 2. Consider the following scenario: After the engineers are overruled, Boisjoly calls a major television news reporter and goes public with his concerns. The story is aired, the flight is stopped, and Boisjoly is eventually eased out of the company. How do you assess the moral character of Boisjoly's actions? Are there conditions under which a whistleblower has a moral obligation to publicize a matter outside company channels? Even ifhis or her job will be at risk? 3. Imagine that when the reporter checks with an engineer at NASA, she is told that Boisjoly is absolutely wrong and that the risk is minimal. Not having enough time to check out the facts, the reporter chooses to kill the story and tells Boisjoly of her decision. Boisjoly then calls another reporter and anonymously claims that a terrorist group has planted a bomb on the shuttle. As a rocket engineer, Boisjoly is able to convince the reporter that the threat is genuine. The story runs, the flight is postponed, and the shuttle launches safely on a warmer day. The original reporter never reveals that Boisjoly called her, and Boisjoly keeps his job. Assess the moral character ofBoisjoly's actions. Are there conditions under which a whistleblower has a moral obligation to resort to deception or law breaking? 4. Imagine that Boisjoly's original story is reported, the flight is delayed, and Boisjoly is gradually eased out of the company. The news story causes a precipitous drop in Thiokol's stock price. The price remains depressed for a year while the O-ring problem is solved. The next launch is successful, but a massive unrelated computer malfunction causes the shuttle to burn up during reentry. NASA decides to cancel such space flights for good, costing Thiokol millions of dollars and hundreds of jobs. Assess the moral character of Boisjoly's actions. Sources Boisjoly, Russell P., Ellen Foster Curtis, and Eugene Melican, "Roger Boisjoly and the Challenger Disaster: The Ethical Dimensions," Journal of Business Ethics, 8 (1989),217 -230. Rossiter, AI, Jr., "Company Sidelines Exec Who Objected to Challenger Launch," Sunday StarLedger, May 11, 1986, I, 10. L
Purchase answer to see full attachment
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

Attached.

Running head/theory philosophy

1

THEORY PHYLOSOPHY
NAME
INSTITUTION
DATE

Running head/theory philosophy

2

Among the above theories, the theory which considered to be best was the Utilitarianism.
UTILITARIANISM
When choosing to do a certain thing which is mainly associated with the kind of the
feeling the fellow human being will have then there is the freedom of choosing whether the
feeling that human being will experience will be a happy feeling or whether the feeling will be a
sad or a wrong feeling apart from the expectations which that fellow human being had. That is
why there is a reason for taking action A on something rather than alternative B is that the action
A which you have considered taking will have positive impact on human being and will
definitely make the human much happier than the alternative B which would have impacted them
negatively and by such is where utilitarianism is considered and evidently seen to be taking place
(j.j smart 1973).
When speaking about utilitarian then there are things which are considered and for it then
the only thing that has value are only the states of affairs, and if the act has value as right or
wrong, then it can only be derivatively, because of the good or bad states of affairs that it
produces. It has only one fundamental principle of which this principle is the principle of utility.
The principle of utility means that the moral right action is the one that produces the best overall
consequences with regard to utility or welfare of all parties that might be affected. The right act
or policy of utilitarianism is that which normally leads to the greatest happiness of the greatest
number leaving them in pleasure, basically, utilitarianism defines that it is only the happiness or
wellbeing of sentient beings that is the most and delicate valuable thing to a human being. For
one to understand the what is good about happiness and what is bad about suffering, then it is not
just for one to appeal to anything mysterious or intrinsically valuable, for a human being to claim

Running head/theory philosophy

3

that they are happy in terms of pleasure or claim that they are in pain then all of this is
contributed by psychological make-up of those human beings.
There are four different aspects of UTILITARIANISM which includes;
1.

Welfare hedonism

Under this utilitarianism explains that good is the experience or sensation of pleasure which
under this situation then the pain does not exist on a human being.
2.

Higher and lower pleasures

This is a point whereby the good acts as the promoter of the entire range of valuable mental
states. Happiness can be in different ways whereby some are a long-term happiness which seem
to be from the achievement of something, like the completion of a very important project, and
there are short-term projects which last for a while this can be like the happiness achieved from
eating.
3.

Preference satisfaction

Under this then what is good is desire satisfactory or the fulfillment of preferences whereas what
is bad is the frustration of desires thus this conclusion that the more you get what you desire, the
more satisfied you become and thus making you happy.
In utilitarianism, the impatility is a very important thing whereby everybody is much equally
important and one should treat the other equally and the way they would wish to be treated with
utility.
There are two types of utilitarianism which are

Running head/theory philosophy

1.

4

Act utilitarianism- where...


Anonymous
I was struggling with this subject, and this helped me a ton!

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Similar Content

Related Tags