The author of the paper “The case against hurting others” seeks to evaluate issue of hurting others through the eyes of philosophers Thomas Nagel and Immanuel Kant. On the context of hurting others, Nagel presents a moralistically sensitive stance…
The focus is on the concept of “How would you like it if someone did that to you?” (Nagel, 1987. p. 64). The point emphasized by Nagel here is that a person should endeavor to step into the shoes of the other individual. Then the perspective of reality would become evident, and perhaps, the action could be avoided. He further argues that people fail to appreciate the viewpoint of the other person because their own orientation about the facts is not only specific, due to being a different person altogether . Kant on the other hand, almost refers to the doing of these acts as an act of duty, wherein a person would be internally compelled to undergo a task. He feels that it is important to take heed of situation as a consequence of one’s internal drive, instead somebody from the outer world forcing an action. Nagel also tends to believes that the concept of majority is a more generalized concept, and cannot be left at the whims of individuals. Universal good, though is not clearly defined, yet it exists as unison. It is only for a person to explore the same in appropriate conditions and circumstances, whereby the true inner persona of the individual will come out. In the context of hurting others, this is a very important stance, the fact remains, that of there is a concept of universal good, then a person should not harm others in the first instance. Therefore, he should make that realization earlier in, and should begin to establish the norms that would help him world....
Nagel also tends to believes that the concept of majority is a more generalized concept, and cannot be left at the whims of individuals. Universal good, though is not clearly defined, yet it exists as unison. It is only for a person to explore the same in appropriate conditions and circumstances, whereby the true inner persona of the individual will come out. In the context of hurting others, this is a very important stance, the fact remains, that of there is a concept of universal good, then a person should not harm others in the first instance. Therefore, he should make that realization earlier in, and should begin to establish the norms that would help him live appropriately in the world.
The reality is that the integrity of the will is imperishable. In the perspective, the meaning can be inferred in the same line. The will alone can have no integrity - it has to be linked with man himself, as per Kant. Therefore, again extrapolating the fact that the mind is sure to dominate the proceedings of life, despite what course of actions are to be taken, the case against hurting people becomes clear. The soul as an entity can never destroy, as it is the true emblem of existence for man - his distinguishing factor. These factors give an intrinsic line of reasoning for the person who is about to or intends to harm somebody. When the established pattern of thought is already present, then the person will automatically restrain himself from doing the superfluous.
The concept of uniformity of behavior and thought has always triggered the minds of people who want to dwell into the science of what humans may do in a particular scenario. However, it is interesting that ...
Cite this document
(“The case against hurting others Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.net/philosophy/300054-moral-essay
(The Case Against Hurting Others Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 Words)
“The Case Against Hurting Others Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 Words”, n.d. https://studentshare.net/philosophy/300054-moral-essay.
Some consider it against God and nature, other believe that such marriages will eventually destroy our family system. The controversy over same sex marriages is popular because the society itself has not accepted homosexuality. Due to religious influences people still think that homosexuality in unfavorable terms.
Polite words do the job of a Public Relations Manager. In the story, “The Use of Force” by William Carols Williams relates to the exertion of physical superiority over others, not through physical force, but by verbal slangs. The principle question is: is it ethical to hurt someone assuming that it contributes to his own good?
It is argued that the benefits of being in possession of a gun or a weapon outweigh the harm it may cause. With the legalization of guns in the United States, crime rate has notably reduced. Cases of rape and assault are not as high as before. It has been advocated that if these guns are in the hands of loyal and law abiding citizens, crime rate can reduce considerably.
Utilitarianism is divided into to two. Act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. In act utilitarianism, the theories and opinions of function pertains to particular act while in rule utilitarianism, it pertains to universal, common, and wide ranging tenets.
The story goes on to describe Tough's experience at a concert and his quest to experience the infamous "mosh pit" that the youth of his generation seem to be so obsessed with. Throughout Tough's descriptions, Freud's beliefs outlined in his work, "Civilization and It's Discontents" seem to be proven true.
This paper focuses on “An Animal’s Place”, an important article dealing with the rights of the animals and the author introduces the arguments of Peter Singer concerning animal’s liberation, which is simple and difficult to argue against. According to the author, no one in the world enjoys complete equality and some people are smarter, better looking, and more gifted than others.
Utilitarianism is based on the “general happiness principle” or the “principle of utility” (PU). Actions are moral if they promote general happiness, and they are wrong if they will reduce general happiness. Among several actions, the right action promotes
According to this principle, either the employer or the employee can terminate the agreement with or without a reason. However, the employer cannot dismiss the employee for an illegitimate cause.
According to common law exception on good faith and fair dealings, John cannot
cting tendencies.” The girl has fear of becoming fat and this is the reason she purges all the food she consumes as well as goes on a diet which basically demands her to eat next to nothing. This neurosis behavior is however a problem of the culture as Horney indicates in her
According to many people, tying the knot is the surest way to ensure social stability, bring up children and avoid sexual anarchy. Thus, changes in the nature of marriage in the form of higher divorce rates and cohabitation without marriage are often portrayed as an indication of social decay.
2 Pages(500 words)Essay
GOT A TRICKY QUESTION? RECEIVE AN ANSWER FROM STUDENTS LIKE YOU!
Let us find you another Essay on topic The case against hurting others for FREE!