1. ) Evaluate the following case using a) Kant\'s theory and b) Utilitarianism.
ID: 3510509 • Letter: 1
Question
1. ) Evaluate the following case using a) Kant's theory and b) Utilitarianism. Then, c) provide an overall recommendation. "Harold Smith is a 27-year-old man who used to live a dangerous lifestyle. He liked nothing more than an extreme thrill, such as diving off a cliff into swirling water. He lived alone and had few friends. He worked as a guard for an armored vehicle company, a job he tolerated. is close to his parents and would visit them frequently. They continually tried to get him to live a more standard, less dangerous lifestyle. He seemed to enjoy their prodding but simply smiled in response. He recently broke his neck in a diving accident. He was quickly brought to an emergency room and intubated because he could not breathe on his own. Within a few days, it became clear that he was permanently paralyzed from the neck down. Without a ventilator he would quickly die. Harold began to insist that his ventilator be removed, saying that he would rather be deacd than live in a paralyzed state. His parents, however, instructed the health care team to not remove the ventilator. The attending physician understands Harold's objections but believes there is a small but significant chance that Harold will soon become independent of the ventilator and that he will adjust to his situation and find a way to make a meaningful life for himself, as so many others have done before him. In short, his physicians think it best not to remove the ventilator until Harold has psychologically adjusted to his new condition. After three weeks, Harold continues to demand that his ventilator be removed" (Jones & Demarco, 2016)Explanation / Answer
Kant's theory of hormonal changes in men depended on the secretion of hormones according to emotional levels. He, therefore, suggested some ethics that men should maintain to control these hormonal secretions. According to his philosophy, a person must always perform acts that are in line with his safety and that aims at reaching a certain goal.
In Harold's case, his craze for diving from a cliff into swirling water was neither safe nor had an ethical goal. He was too adventurous and lead to a neck injury and may have damaged his trachea for which he had to be put on ventilation. So according to Kant's theory, Harold is both reckless(he acts according to his whims that cannot be imitated and is not appreciated in the society) and his action does not have a goal.
Harold's case in the light of 'Utilitarianism' when run through the CI(Categorically Imperative) procedure has to seen from his parents' decision angle. They have to act according to X(Ask the doctor not to act according to Harold's decision).
Y- His parents have taken this decision to protect their son's health.
Z- There action is more human than their son.
Where Harold is concerned when his action is passed through the CI procedure
X- His decision is wrong.
Y- It is not for his wellness.
Z- His decision is not human which the doctor knows and therefore keeps him on ventilation so that he gets used to and adjusts to the new condition.
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.