Assignment 2 Non consequentialethicalanalysis

Weighting: 20%

Submission: You must follow the same instructions as for assignment 1. Remember that an assignment which has a Turnitin Originality Report which shows a text match of more than 10% is not considered submitted and will not be accepted.

This assignment is a continuation of Assignment 1 and you must analyse the same ethicalquestionwhich you defined in Assignment 1. Restate your ethical question from Assignment 1 on page 1 of Assignment 2. You can modify the precise wording of your ethical question drawing on feedback provided in Assignment 1.

a) Identify 3 virtues relevant to the analysis of your specific ethicalquestion. Define each virtue in no more than one sentence. (3 marks)

b) Discuss the morality of the act central to your ethical question by comparison with your 3 chosen virtues. (2 marks)

c) Apply Kant’s categorical imperative by completing the following tasks. You need to support any yes/no answers with relevant discussion.

i) Definea specific rule which authorises the act central to your ethical question. (2 marks)

ii) Definethe general rule which authorises the act central to your ethical question. (1 mark)

iii) Is the general rule inherently self-contradictory? Why or why not?

(2 marks)

iv) Does the general rule violate Kant’s practical imperative or any of Kant’s other absolute moral rules? (2 marks)

v) Is the general rule contrary to its fundamental purpose? (1 mark)

vi) Is the act ethical according to Kant’s ethical system? (2 marks)

d) Provide an ethical conclusion by comparing your conclusions from the act utilitarian analysis in Assignment 1, your virtue ethics and Kantian analyses in this assignment, and drawing on your own ethical conscience. (5 marks)