Kantian Philosophy

May I please the court, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, opposing counsel. This is a simple story of betrayal. A story of laziness that lead to rounded corners. Not only did this laziness lead to a broken friendship, this plagiarism possibly led to the loss of $20 million dollars promised to Regan Buschell. The defendant, Regan Buschell stabbed Becca Ables alone at the festival for this money. If Regan graduated from Wheeler U with a GPA of 3.5, he would gain $20 million. But when a hard class came along, Regan Buschell plagiarized to keep that precious green paper. But rightfully so, when Becca Ables went to turn Regan in, she was stopped by the blade. Unable to be here today due to her physical state, unconscious at the hospital and hanging

Despite the sufferance of victims, they often aren’t entirely blameless, as their poor decisions and irresponsibility is ultimately associated with their upsetting and newfound situation. Therefore victims like Fin O’Neil in The Story of Tom Brennan, who ultimately chose to travel in a car with drunken, inexperienced, and impulsive driver, it becomes questionable whether he is also culpable for his injuries. Despite Fin’s sobriety and awareness prior to the accident, this does not implicate him, however it becomes debatable whether the outcomes would be alike; with Fin’s extensive injuries and crash itself, if the decisions made on Fin’s behalf were different. Similarly in the story of ‘In My Little Town’, Leigh Charter Jnr also decides to travel with a drunk driver, regardless of the risks. Although his alertness was also compromised by alcohol, he holds some level of responsibility in his death. However, in ‘Shattered’, there are no obvious victims who made poor decisions, due to the situations isolation. Although, it is disputable whether the perpetrator; Peter Hodgkins’ friends who witnessed the accident could have altered the outcome. Though, it was voiced to Peter; “don’t throw a rock at a car, that’s stupid,” (‘Shattered’, 2011) this partly ousts some responsibility, especially due to their intoxication, which is similar to the other stories. However, responsibility is never fully removed from others, as it only takes one person, one conversation, and any one action during the lead to alter the outcome of July 21st 2007, in Kiama, New South

So many people put their lives on the line for the sake of this country. It would be nice if, after all the damages they suffered, there was organization that could help them recover that bit of life they lost in war; that would not mislead them with false promises, or squander their money. The Wounded Warrior Project (WWP) has been one of the best-known organizations providing assistance to Iraq- and Afghanistan- war veterans for the last several years. But as time has gone one the organization has broken down, and is lately the focus of negative media attention after it CEO, Steven Nardizzi and COO, Al Girodano, who were accused of lavishly spending over $800 million in donations to the WWP. The following paper therefore analyzes the background

“Sapere aude!” is the rallying call for Kant’s enlightenment. Translated, it roughly means dare to be wise. Plato, through the voice of Socrates in the dialogues The Euthyphro and The Crito, demonstrates the ultimate example of Kant’s definition of enlightenment. Socrates fearlessly dares to be wise.

Immanuel Kant states that the only thing in this world that is “good without qualification” is the good will. He states the attributes of character such as intelligence, wit, and judgment are considered good but can be used for the wrong reasons. Kant also states that the attributes of good fortune such as health, power, riches, honor, that provide one happiness can also be used in the wrong way (7). In order to understand Kant’s view of moral rightness, one must understand that only a good will is unambiguously good without qualification, it is “good in itself”. To clarify, Kant states that “a good will is good not because of what it effects or

Fifth, I have realized from the story that they portrait or described lawyers as cheaters, dishonest, and immoral. I think that this is not a good example to those young aspiring lawyers to be. I have learned that as of today being a student aspiring to be a lawyer in the future, I would do my best to practice law in a lawful and in a moral way. I would also start to respect the law by putting God first so I would be guided on what is best way to solve without being a distraction to the society. I think that if lawyers do the right thing with good and moral intention then we could have a peaceful society and justice would be given fairly. I have learned that being a lawyer with good moral character is what a lawyer should be proud of and not the multiple numbers of cases he had won because at the end of the day people do not usually care about you but you instead could make yourself proud of what you did.

Prompt: Kant argues that in Groundwork, it is morally wrong to not develop talents: What is his argument and is he correct?

When it comes to guiding our moral actions, I believe that care ethics is the better moral philosophy to follow over Kantian deontology. While both moral philosophies strongly believe in defending the dignity of our fellow man, care ethics believes that nurturance and caring is the best way to defend a person’s dignity, as opposed to Kant who believe that our actions alone determine our dignity and worth. There are a number of reasons why one should choose care ethics over Kantian deontology. The first reason is that, in his moral philosophy, Kant chooses reason over feeling. The second reason is that Kant lacks compassion for the unique situations of others by suggesting that the principle of good is universifiable. The third reason is that Kant ignores how the consequences of our actions affect others. Finally, the fourth reason is that Kant implies that while we should all seek to perfect our moral selves, we are not responsible for the moral growth and perfection of others. Instead, we are merely obligated to help others and promote their happiness.

When businesses are selling their products or services, they often use different motivational techniques to motive their customers to purchase more products or services. Sometimes, businesses use a combination of multiple techniques to attract more customers. Three most effective techniques are: scarcity, exclusivity, status figures. After understanding all three of these techniques, the essay then will introduce Kantian perspective and arguing from a Kantian’s perspective, why all three of those techniques are morally impermissible. Some techniques are coercive and some are deceptive. Either way, those techniques are morally impermissible according to Kant.

Experimentation in humans wouldn't be ethical to Kant. If we take into account the four categorical imperatives, which are the basis of Kant’s moral theory, experimentation on humans will violate the principle of humanity; treating a person as a merely means to an end and not as an end to themselves. Now, I haven't used the word “never” because I think that Kant’s moral theory would approve experimentation as long as the interest of the experiment is of interest to the participants involved. For example, if I am a cancer patient and a treatment that hasn't been tested has a probability of an eighty percent chance to improve my current situation, I would definitely participate. This hypothetical but real world situation that I just stated would

Immanuel Kant I can understand his saying do what you can the same time let it be a universal law. So therefore whatever you do let it make sense and be fair that everyone could do and most likely be legal. Like helping people homeless people for instance I think if everyone offers a homeless person a hand with clothes and food that would be fair. Like you wouldn’t have to go out your way to help them you could give them a shirt that you no longer want, or of food item anything inside your cabin, a roll of toilet paper and that wouldn’t be too much on your end unless its your last. However, if everyone would do that would could it would help a person in need many of us waste money on a daily basis on things we really don’t need. It would be

“There is no possibility of thinking of anything at all in this world, or even out of it, which can be regarded as good without qualifications, except a good will.” (Kant, pg.7 393). No other thing that may appear good can be unqualifiedly good, as even “Talents of the mind…Gifts of power…[Other] qualities…Have no intrinsic unconditional worth, but they always presuppose, rather, a good will, which restricts the high esteem in which they are otherwise rightly held.” (Kant, pg.7 393-394). So Immanuel Kant introduces the public to his Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, which results not in simply a grounding work, but one that is utterly groundbreaking. This opener, wholly devoted to the establishment of the importance of will and intention, notes the guiding characteristics of a good will. As enumerated previously, Kant recognizes the plausible potential positivity of plenty concepts, but remains of the mind that none of these are good in themselves without the efforts of a good will to guide and restrict them in a manner that perpetuates their positivity.

Philosophy can be defined as the process of thought in the essence of life, which contributes to the properties, and the cause and effect of its natural cycle that includes humans and the universe. Ancient philosophers discussed their justification of the knowledge claims, all of them in a different perspective. Throughout the time new theories and philosopher express their thoughts, arguing to questions and methods used to achieve the answers and the certainty of their knowledge acquisition. In this case, Immanuel Kant known as German idealist talks about the used rationalism or empiricism as the justification of knowledge, it contemplates the phenomenal and noumenal world and exemplifies his theory using the categories of understanding.

I have heard about censorship many times, but did I ever think about it seriously? No! Censorship is a suppression of speech or other public communication that is considered objectionable, harmful, or sensitive as determined by the government. It involves content that is harmful to the public and children who can easily watch the harmful subject through one click. Censorship can be on the largest level or on a local level where one could want to control only one community or a person. The government makes some laws that dictate how a person or a government cannot abuse any rights or freedoms. In democratic countries, people have rights to express their feelings and freedom of speech. So the question here is weather censorship

Supervision skills are now acknowledged as a crucial competency for all psychologists (APA, 2011). The National Association of School Psychologists (NASP, 2011) has called for experience with supervision making it necessary for supervisors to demonstrate well-developed clinical skills. Although, this ability alone does not guarantee aptitude in supervision. Understanding of the best practices in supervision, the competence to create an effective supervisory relationship, expertise with supervisory approaches, and competencies in guiding the process of supervision to foster professional development for supervisees’ are also essential (Harvey & Pearrow, 2010). Quality supervision not only improves the development of the