Questions 1. Compare and contrast Plato’s and Aristotle’s views on the role of a

By
Responsive Centered Red Button

Need Help with this Question or something similar to this? We got you! Just fill out the order form (follow the link below), and your paper will be assigned to an expert to help you ASAP.

Order Form

Questions
1.
Compare and contrast Plato’s and Aristotle’s views on the role of art, vis-à-vis character
formation. If alive, how would these two thinkers likely assess the character and moral
messages of Medea or Pulp Fiction. Be sure to defend your responses.
2.
Explain what moral subjectivism involves and how either Rousseau OR Nietzsche fits under
this umbrella. Delve into what are some of the standardly raised strengths and weaknesses
of moral subjectivism (and be sure to use your own examples). How would a moral
subjectivist view the various key characters’ behaviors and beliefs in Spike Lee’s Do the
Right Thing? Do you think the moral subjectivist’s responses to the conflict in Lee’s classic
film are good to hold or do they reveal serious flaws with the theory? Do you stand with
moral subjectivism? Why or why not? (Be sure to defend your position)
3.
In previous years, clashes surfaced between the Western value of freedom of the press and
the sacredness of the Muslim religion. Choose one particular example of such a clash and
discuss how an ethical relativist would estimate the situation in contrast with a soft
universalist. What are the merits and downsides of accepting the view of the ethical
relativist? What are the pros and cons of accepting the soft universalist’s stance? (Make
sure to define the key terms of ethical relativism and soft universalism). Where do you
stand on this issue and why?
4.
Unpack Ruth Benedict’s main claims about different cultural practices in her article
Anthropology and the Abnormal. Explain why Benedict’s views are an example of ethical
relativism. If Benedict’s claims are true, what are the consequences for morality? How
might the narrative Possessing the Secret of Joy act as a warning against accepting
Benedict’s position? Can any universal moral values be defended in the wake of the ethical
relativist’s claims? If so, which ones, and why?
5.
Explore the differences and similarities between psychological and ethical egoism. Is either
theory viable? Why or why not? Does Plato’s Ring of Gyges story, or alternatively Tolkien’s
Lord of the Rings, confirm either brand of egoism? Why or why not? (Be sure to go into
enough details of the narrative in question when tying it to the broader theory). If you do
not subscribe to either theory, what would you advocate instead, and why?
6.
Using Ayn Rand’s excerpts as the main launching pad, explain her brand of ethical egoism.
Why does she think that selfishness has unfairly received a bad reputation? What are her
main criticisms of altruism? How does she wield certain narratives to defend her stance?
What are some of the standard objections against her position? Do you think her defense of
ethical egoism is convincing? Why or why not? (make sure to read sections of Rand’s “The
Virtue of Selfishness” and if you have time, watch her interview with Mike Wallace on
youtube).
7.
How does Mill reformulate Bentham’s theory of utilitarianism? Does he offer a better
version of utilitarianism? Why or why not? Does Mill surmount some of the common
objections raised against utilitarianism? Using Saving Private Ryan, Runaway Jury or Extreme
Measures, or the famous trolley dilemma showcased in The Good Place, explore how
utilitarianism can operate. Do you tend to agree or disagree with utilitarianism? Defend
your response.
8.
Using either Le Guin’s “The Ones who Walk Away from Omelas” or Dostoevsky’s The
Brothers Karamazov, discuss what the narrative in question implies about utilitarianism. Be
sure to explain what utilitarianism involves. Do you tend to agree or disagree with such a
depiction? Do you think the merits or weaknesses of utilitarianism are more pressing? Use
concrete examples to defend your position.
9.
Construct a debate between John Stuart Mill (a defender of utilitarianism) and Bernard
Williams (the critic of utilitarianism). Using Williams’ own posed scenario of shooting one to
save nineteen, explore how their conversation would likely flow. Who would you side with
in such a debate and why? Would you pitch in any points of your own?
10.
Delve into Kant’s first formulation of the categorical imperative and explain how it
contrasts with hypothetical imperatives. What does it mean AND how does it apply itself?
What are its various strengths and weaknesses? Using one of the narratives from the
appropriate chapter in the textbook, i.e., 3:10 to Yuma, High Noon, Abandon Ship or
Watchmen, or the film clip The Bridges of Madison County, explain how it presents the use of
the categorical imperative, and whether this approach is a good one to use. Do you find the
first formulation of the categorical imperative a good guide for determining what is right
and wrong? Why or why not?
11.
Explore Kant’s second formulation of the categorical imperative. What does he mean by it
and how does he apply it? How does Kant defend it? What is persuasive about it [if
anything] and what remains problematic? Using one of the narratives from the appropriate
chapter in the textbook, e.g., Abandon Ship, explain how it presents the use of the
categorical imperative, and whether this approach is a good one to use. Does the second
formulation of the categorical imperative act as a good supplement to the first? Why or
why not? Do you find it a good formula to use in certain real-life situations? Why or why not?

How to create Testimonial Carousel using Bootstrap5

Clients' Reviews about Our Services