First, consider the following harrowing situation: You are a paramedic on the scene of a car crash. A car went over a bridge and fell into the river. The driver of the car was unable to escape from the car and drowned. Based on your examination of the body, the car and so on, you can tell that she did not die instantly, but had tried furiously to escape from the car, as it filled with water. The other members of the family have been notified, and they have now arrived. The husband is devastated and asks you if at least she was killed instantly by the crash, or did she also suffer before she died?
Now, what should you tell him? In considering this question you should contrast (a) a utilitarian, (b) a Kantian, and (c) a virtue ethics approaches. That is, you should say what each of those theories would determine to be the right thing to do here, and then you should say why you side with one of them, or perhaps why you would go another way entirely.
notes:
(a) The paper is due in to Canvas (there will be a drop box there for it) by 11:59 pm on Friday, June 14. The paper must be typed (font size 12, please), double-spaced, and 2-3 pages (1000-1500 words): too long is almost as bad as too short. Late papers will receive no written comments. Very late papers risk receiving no credit.
(b) No research (in particular, no scholarly source) is required for this paper.
(c) A thesis is required. You should be very clear about your thesis early, and then devote the rest of your paper to its defense.
(d) At some point, you should consider an objection to your thesis, or perhaps just a part of it preferably, you will take on the toughest objection you can imagine, and then reply. And bear in mind that, in replying, you might need to concede some ground to the objection. Anyway, a qualified or nuanced reply is often a good way to go, especially if the objection is indeed robust.
(e) The most important part of your paper might well come before you write at all. You should read carefully, and reread, especially once you have a topic in mind. And you should think and rethink, trying to come to grips with your topic. Again, once you feel like you are leaning towards a view, try to imagine the toughest objection you can to that view: and then see what replies to that objection might be available.
(f) As for style, please bear in mind that your writing is here in the service of working through the arguments, not the other way round. Given this aim, you should work at writing clearly and simply: try to be clear and precise, but not to bedazzle or otherwise confuse.
(g) Finally, please sign your paper to indicate both that it is your own paper and that you have proofed it. Unsigned or painfully plainly unproofed papers will receive no written comments.
The Ethical Dilemma in the Aftermath of a Tragic Car Crash
Thesis Statement
In the scenario presented, a utilitarian approach would prioritize minimizing overall suffering, a Kantian perspective would emphasize the duty to tell the truth regardless of consequences, and virtue ethics would focus on compassion and empathy towards the grieving husband. I argue that in this situation, a virtue ethics approach is most appropriate as it prioritizes human relationships and the well-being of the husband amidst his profound grief.
Utilitarian Perspective
From a utilitarian standpoint, the right thing to do would be to assess the consequences of revealing the truth about the wife's final moments. If disclosing that she did not die instantly would inflict additional emotional pain on the husband and family, a utilitarian would likely opt to withhold this information in order to minimize overall suffering. The focus would be on maximizing the greatest good for the greatest number of people involved.
Kantian Perspective
A Kantian approach, on the other hand, would emphasize the moral duty to tell the truth regardless of its consequences. According to Kantian ethics, honesty and integrity are paramount, and one must uphold universal principles of right and wrong. In this case, a Kantian would argue that revealing the truth, even if it causes further anguish, is the morally correct action based on the principle of honesty.
Virtue Ethics Perspective
Virtue ethics, however, places emphasis on character traits and values such as compassion, empathy, and kindness. In this situation, a virtue ethicist would prioritize the emotional well-being of the husband who is grappling with immense grief. The focus would be on fostering human relationships, showing empathy, and providing support during a traumatic experience. Therefore, a virtue ethicist might choose to offer comfort and solace to the husband without divulging the distressing details of his wife's final moments.
Defense of Virtue Ethics
I contend that in this heartbreaking scenario, where a husband is already devastated by the loss of his wife, a virtue ethics approach is most appropriate. Prioritizing compassion and empathy for the grieving individual aligns with the core principles of virtue ethics. By focusing on supporting the husband through his anguish and offering understanding and comfort, we uphold virtues that are crucial in times of intense emotional distress.
Addressing an Objection
One potential objection to the virtue ethics approach could be that withholding information about the wife's suffering may be seen as deceptive or dishonest. In response, it is important to acknowledge that virtue ethics does not advocate for deceit but rather emphasizes the importance of human relationships and well-being. In this context, choosing to protect the husband from further anguish can be viewed as an act of kindness and compassion rather than deceitful behavior.
In conclusion,
while utilitarianism and Kantian ethics offer valuable perspectives on ethical decision-making, virtue ethics provides a nuanced approach that prioritizes empathy and compassion in complex moral dilemmas. Choosing to support and console the grieving husband with sensitivity and understanding reflects the virtues that are integral to human flourishing and moral integrity.