Comparative Analysis
I. A description of how either a Kantian deontologist or a utilitarian would respond to the Heinz dilemma, not both! Take care to identify what conclusion the deontologist or utilitarian would come regarding the case, as well as the principles that either would adhere to in coming to this conclusion. Provide a clear account of why stealing the medicine would or would not violate the categorical imperative, or why stealing the medicine would or would not maximize utility.
II. A description of how either a virtue ethicist or a care ethicist would respond to the Heinz dilemma, not both! If you discuss virtue ethics, be sure to draw on Aristotle’s ideas. Take care to identify what conclusion the virtue ethicist or the care ethicist would come to regarding the case, as well as the principles that either would adhere to in coming this conclusion. Provide a clear account for why stealing the medicine would or would not be virtuous, or why stealing the medicine would or would not be caring.
III. An analysis of which mode of reasoning principled (e.g. deontological or utilitarian) or unprincipled (e.g. virtue-based or care-based) we should use to assess the case.
IV. A statement that ultimately identifies what Heinz should have done. Your thesis needs to be stated in terms of the ethical theories that you have discussed in I and II above.
V. Note that submissions should be 1) double-spaced and 2) formatted according to MLA standards. This includes appropriately cited in-text citations, as well as complete bibliography. For more information on writing argumentative essays, please carefully read the writing guide.
VI. Your submission should be between 1000-1300 words, with a minimum of 900 words.
ANSWER
Comparative Analysis
Ethics is a significant factor in society, and it determines how one is judged or respected in the community. Ethics is described as the principles or rather proposition that controls one’s behavior and character within a societal setting. Ethics deals with morals and virtues expected from an individual; they tell what is considered just or unjust or good or bad from someone’s behavior. Ethics are mainly categorized into three main groups; virtue ethics, consequentialist ethics and duty based (deontological) ethics. Each category describes ethics differently. This article discusses societal ethics based on various principles and theories regarding Heinz’s acts.
Heinz was in a critical condition, and the only drug that could his wife was around $2 000. He could not raise the required amount and opted to break into the druggist laboratory to get the medicine and save his wife. Utilitarianism theory emphasizes actions that lead to happiness or pleasure and discredits actions that lead to harm or unhappiness. The idea denotes that an act is right if it results in the happiness of many people within a societal setting. A utilitarian would regard Heinz’s acts as good ethical behavior since he acted to save his wife’s life, and that would prevent society from mourning, thus promoting happiness in so many people (Chowdhury and Mohammad, 1-16). The druggist acts of doubling the drug’s price and refusing to give it out on credit even when someone’s life was on the line. Utilitarianism is based on three principles; everyone’s happiness is equal, actions are regarded as right so long as they promote happiness and wrong so long as they cause unhappiness. Finally, pleasure or happiness is the only thing that has natural value. In this context, stealing the medicine would not violate the subject theory since it resulted in saving someone’s life, hence happiness at long last.
Virtue ethics is a philosophy that Aristotle assisted by other ancient Greeks developed. The philosophy is described as the quest to and urge to understand and live a moral life with moral characters. The philosophy assumes that virtue is acquired through practice; it emphasizes on honesty and generosity of an individual. It further narrates that exercising good habits like generosity and honesty makes a virtuous and moral person. Living a moral life guides a person to better resolve ethical challenges and complexity within a societal setting. In the context of the subject case, a virtue ethicist would consider the druggist’s actions as unethical since his actions are against the morals of honesty and generosity as discussed in the philosophy. Stealing the medicine would be regarded as virtuous since it depicts dishonesty and immoral behavior from the druggist (Jordan Karen and Kristján, 1205-1229). Heinz was honest and declared his motive clearly before taking the rough route of stealing the drug from the laboratory. The druggist acts are immoral and not generous, thereby making Heinz’s actions virtuous. The core principles used in this context are honesty and generosity.
The utilitarian theory would be vital in assessing the subject case study since it advocates for many people in society. It emphasizes actions that promote joy and peace in the community; leaving Heinz’s wife to die would result in a sad situation in society. Thus, stealing the drug saved the occurrence of such a tragic circumstance. The care-based mode of reasoning would be vital in assessing the study since it advises on meeting another person’s needs, mainly where they are stationed. The care-based logic encourages caring for people and helping them when called upon. Ethics of care shows denotes that there is moral importance in the vital aspects of relationships and dependencies in human life.
The utilitarian theory emphasizes keeping a happy society at all costs. Although Heinz opted to steal the drug, he would have made a relatively moral decision and taken an action that would not result in violence in society. One of the best approaches he would have done was to temporarily trade one of his valuable assets in exchange for the drug instead of stealing it. The druggist displayed a self-centered character and showed that he didn’t care about the happiness of community members who needed his assistance. The druggist should have accepted the offer Heinz had and allow him to pay the balance at a later date upon agreeing. His actions were rather inhuman and full of a cold heart. Heinz did not choose to steal the drug as a first decision but instead opted for it when he had no other option left.
From virtue-based reasoning, Heinz was honest with his quest to acquire the drug though the druggist showed a selfish act against what the philosophy advocates for. Virtue-based logic calls for the promotion of transparency and an act of generosity when called upon. Under any circumstance, anyone would expect that the druggist would consider helping Heinz since it was a matter of life and death. The druggist had no shame that he had monopolized the drug cost and hiked to suit his interests regardless of who gets hurt. Heinz’s attempt to plea and beg for assistance fell on selfish ears. From societal ethics and morals, stealing the drug was a bad idea and would result in conflicts between the two parties (Osei-Tutu and Janewa, 207). Heinz should have opted for a different approach to ensure he obtains the drug through the proper means instead of breaking into the druggist’s laboratory.
A utilitarian and virtue ethicist might consider Heinz’s acts as right, but that does not change the fact the act was against society’s morals and standards. The druggist might have all the rights to use the drug in any manner that he likes but refusing to reconsider his stand when someone’s life is at stake portrayed a mean and selfish character. In summary, Heinz ought to have acted ethically to maintain peace and harmony the society. Generosity, honesty, and happiness, as discussed above, show that the druggist’s acts of refusing to negotiate with Heinz are immoral, thereby making Heinz’s actions acceptable within the context of the theory and philosophy.
In conclusion, good ethical behaviors are vital to developing relationships in society. Determination of whether an act is moral or not is entirely dependent on the circumstance under discussion and on the parties involved. Bad behavior can be considered ethical depending on the occasion and motive behind the subject act. Some of the evil deeds that happen in society result from failure to understand one another. Simultaneously, some are due to one’s ignorance and selfishness, as displayed in the above case study. Good ethical behaviors are paramount in working environments and society at large. Happiness, honesty, and generosity are vital aspects that contribute to a peaceful community where respect and care run across everywhere.
Works Cited
Chowdhury, Mohammad. “Emphasizing morals, values, ethics, and character education in science education and science teaching.” MOJES: Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Sciences 4.2 (2018): 1-16.
Jordan, Karen, and Kristján Kristjánsson. “Sustainability, virtue ethics, and the virtue of harmony with nature.” Environmental Education Research 23.9 (2017): 1205-1229.
Osei-Tutu, J. Janewa. “Humanizing Intellectual Property: Moving Beyond the Natural Rights Property Focus.” Vand. J. Ent. & Tech. L. 20 (2017): 207.
