i need this text to rephrased.

1. What are the roles of reason and impartiality in moral theory? Why are they important? (2pt) Ans. Reason and impartiality are not absolute to any particular group of people, while morality is absolute. Whatever is considered wrong morally within a certain group of people cannot be debated through reason. Morality decides the outcome first and then employs reason to justify it. For impartiality, fairness is given more importance where people are supposed to be treated equally before the law. While morality may apply generally to a particular group of people, the same cannot be said of reason and impartiality because the two take a more individualized approach. These are however important because they help in understanding the moral perception, for example impartiality introduces an aspect of treating people the same, which is a moral issue. 2. What is the basic premise of the Utilitarian Moral Theory? (10pt) Ans. The Utilitarian Approach says that Human Beings are special in many ways, and that morality must acknowledge and accept that. But morality must also acknowledge the fact that we are not the only species’ on Earth, and that we are only one of many inhabiting this planet. The Utilitarian Moral Theory takes an action to be morally right if and only that action gives you the greatest amount of pleasure. When looking at the consequences, one should only look at the amount of happiness received by performing that action; nothing else is relevant. 3. What was the biggest weakness with “Act based” Utilitarianism? (10pt) Ans. There are a couple of cases that show the weakness of “Act based” Utilitarianism. For example, if someone were to be making fun of you behind your back. In this case, someone is making a fool out of you, but you aren’t receiving any unhappiness, as you are not aware of these actions. Another example of a weakness in this theory would be of a promising young pianist breaking her hand. She is unhappy at first because she can no longer receive joy out of playing the piano, but she receives the same pleasure and happiness by watching hockey on TV while her hand is broken. Although the tragedy of her not being able to play again does not go away, she is still receiving the same amount of pleasure by watching TV. For these reasons, the biggest weakness of “Act based Utilitarianism is having the potential to justify any act, and having the difficulty of defining pleasure. 4. Explain how “Rule based” Utilitarianism differs from “Act based” Utilitarianism. (10pt) Ans. “Act based” Utilitarianism is the classic version of the theory which says that actions are to be judged right or wrong solely by virtue of their consequences. In assessing consequences, the only thing that matters is the amount of happiness or unhappiness that is created; everything else is irrelevant. And lastly, each person’s happiness counts the same. “Rule based” Utilitarianism asks the question, “What rules should be followed to maximize our happiness?” Rules that can be established include: not lying, not violating people’s rights, breaking promises, being loyal to friends or providing loving care to ones children. Many more rules such as these can be established, and this is how “Rule based” Utilitarianism differs from “Act based” Utilitarianism. 5. The author describes “multi-strategies” Utilitarianism in the last chapter. How does this version of Utilitarianism differ from previous formulations of the theory? (10pt) Ans. The ultimate goal of “multi-strategies” Utilitarianism is to maximize the general welfare. This theory, however, recognizes that we may use many different strategies to pursue that goal. This version of Utilitarianism differs from the previous formulations because it says we should maximize the interests of all sentient beings by living according to our best plan. The previous formulations of the theory say that one should do whatever brings him/her the most pleasure/happiness, while the “multi-strategies” approach says that we should do what brings everyone the most pleasure/happiness. 7.Kant’s Second Formulation states, “Act so that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in that of another, always as an end and never as a means only.” Explain what he meant by this. Ans. Since we, as people, have goals and desires, other things have value for us as well. Human ends give value to things and non-human animals, which have value only as means to ends. Humans have an “intrinsic worth” since we are rational free agents who are capable of making our own decisions, guiding our conduct by reason, and setting our own goals. For moral goodness to exist, we need rational creatures from a good will from a sense of duty. Without rational beings, the moral dimension of the world would disappear. The last part of the quote says that we must be beneficent toward other people. We must avoid harming them, respect them and their rights, and generally “endeavor, so far as we can, to further the ends of others.” 8. What was the biggest difficulty Kant ran into with his moral theory? (10pt) Ans. The main problem that the Kantian theory has run into is the fact that many people feel that you cannot come with one way through which people act and normally people would be kind to themselves, such that if hurting another would help them, then they would do what is wrong to survive and therefore this theory cannot be sustained I reality. 9.What area of moral thought did the Feminist Philosophers feel was missing in “duty based” or “right action” moral theories? Ans. Feminists believe that there is a male bias incorporated with moral philosophy. According to the Elements of Moral Philosophy, they believe that the concerns of private life are almost wholly absent and that the “different voice” that Carol Gilligan speaks of is silent as well. According to Feminist Philosophers, morality must find a place for love and caring, while decreasing the role of bargaining and calculating. Feminist Philosopher Virginia Held says, “Caring, empathy, feeling with others, being sensitive to each other’s feelings, all may be better guides to what morality requires in actual contexts than may abstract rules of reason, or rational calculation, or at least they may be necessary components of an adequate morality.” This shows what feminist philosophers would like to add to moral theories, and shows what is missing. 10.How is the focus of Virtue Theory different from the “Right Action” theories of many modern philosophers? Ans. Aristotle began by asking, “What is the good of man?” He then answered it by saying, “an activity of the soul in conformity with virtue.” The virtues described by him include: courage, self-control, generosity, and truthfulness. These are the virtues that were thought of when ancient thinkers had the question, “What traits of character make someone a good person?” As time went on, these virtues were changed by the Christians and were called the “theological virtues”. The virtues include: faith, hope, charity, and obedience. According to the book, a theory of virtue should have several components: a statement of what a virtue is, a list of the virtues, an account of what these virtues consist in, and an explanation of why these qualities are good for a person to have. This differs from the “Right Action” theories of modern philosophers because unlike the virtue theory, ethical egoism says that each person should do whatever will promote his or her own interests which goes against the Virtue Theory. This goes against some of the virtues because when doing this, you are not being thoughtful, friendly or generous which are virtues of the Virtue Theory. Along with Ethical Egoism, The Social Contract Theory, Utilitarianism, and Kant's Theory also differ from the Virtue Theory, as they are not theories of virtue, but of rightness and obligation.