In James Rachels’ Book, The Element Of Moral Philosophy,

In James Rachels’ book, The Elements of Moral Philosophy, he explains many things in the ninth chapter. He made statement about philosopher who decided the absolute moral rules. It explains in the beginning, there’s no definite answer for moral rules. Again, it’s about belief, cultural, tradition etc. Truman decision of dropping the bomb created conflict, some disagree and others agree. Categorical imperative and hypothetical imperative are explained with Kant’s conceptive on lying. His argument

After reading many moral theories online, anyone could be left wondering what to believe. In the final chapter 13 from “The Elements of Moral Philosophy”, James Rachels outlined what he thought would be a satisfactory ethical theory. James’s theory has much in common with utilitarianism; it takes seriously people’s right to choose and the moral importance of treating people as they deserve to be treated. In this manner, Rachels followed Kant’s emphasis on respect for people. In this final chapter

unselfishly, then something is wrong with psycho-logical egoism. In my opinion this argument is completely wrong and unsound. According to James Rachel, an author of “Elements of Moral Philosophy,” there two main arguments exist against psychological egoism. The first argument can be formulated as such: 1) Everyone always does what they most want to

In James Rachels’ book, The Elements of Moral Philosophy, he expresses ideas within the concluding chapter, “What Would a Satisfactory Moral Theory be like?” that lay an silhouette of every moral approach we have discussed so far and compounding it into a final discussion with a couple of final contentions towards a comprehensive understanding of morality and the approaches we can make as moral guides to make decisions that are virtuous for each class without exception. Rachels’ gives thoughtful

can be examined morally using John Stuart Mill’s theory of Utilitarianism and the Greatest Happiness Principle (GHP) and Immanuel Kant’s Deontology and his Formula of Universal Law (FUL). I will also explain why Kantian Deontology works better as a moral theory in the case of Tom and Mary. In John Stuart Mill’s, “Utilitarianism,” Mill describes his theory as, “… not something to be contradistinguished from pleasure, but pleasure itself, together with the exemption of pain (2001, p. 9).” What Mill is

“What is moral philosophy and what would a satisfactory moral theory be like”? In, “The Elements of Moral Philosophy,” James Rachels states, “Moral Philosophy is the study of what morality is and what it requires of us” (p.1). Still today, the subject of ethics, morality, and the beliefs of what is right and wrong still perplex us, just as it baffled great thinkers since ancient times. Such as Aristotle and Socrates, whom were just some of the greatest philosophers in history. Regarding morality

Chapter 4 of “The Elements Of Moral Philosophy” by James Rachels opens up by raising a question. Does morality hinge on religion and does religion then turn contingent to morality? In 1995, Judge Roy Moore was sued for having the Ten Commandments out in plain view on his desk. The American Civil liberties Union was called to act upon this infringement. The union stated that Judge Moore violated the first amendment, which states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion

Problems with Cultural Relativism James Rachels discusses in his book, The Elements of Moral Philosophy, the various problems that appear when analyzing the implications of cultural relativism. I will begin by explaining what cultural relativism is and the fallacy of the argument for it. Then, I will explain how other objections, such as an indefinite definition of culture and cultural relativism’s incompatibility with moral improvement, raise further problems with the theory. The cultural relativist

In the book, “The Element of Moral Philosophy”, James Rachels explores the several criticisms of Utilitarianism. In this essay, I will touch on these criticisms, outlining the major implications they propose to Utilitarianism. I will also explain why many of the notions proposed against Utilitarianism are self-serving, and instead serve to improve the general good of a minority population, which contradicts the Utilitarian theory of equating moral aptitude to the general good of a majority population

Sweatshop is defined as a factory or workshop, especially in the clothing industry, where manual workers are employed at very low wages for long hours and under poor conditions. Sweatshops also referred to as the “sweat factory”, creates a hazardous and unhealthy working environment for employees such as the exposure to harmful materials, dangerous situations, extreme temperatures and abuse from employers. Sweatshop workers work for long hours, sometimes without taking any breaks, and these workers