morality Essay Examples
Kant's "Good Will" essay Immanuel Kant provided a philosophical point of view of the morality of the society.In this work it is very easy to trace Kant’s intension to oppose the "clean" teaching of morality and its degradation to any ethical relativism, which causes this degradation of morality. He tried to create the highest form of estimation of the ethical principles that managed morality? For he believed that the degradation of morality starts from, the impossibility to evaluate what is really wrong or right.
Moral Difference Between Hitting a Computer and Hitting a Person Essay That is to say that if we talk about morality concerning people it may be appropriate to talk about morality concerning computers.It goes without saying that such a behavior towards a friend can be a subject to morality. What about the other victim? Is a computer-violence in this case a subject of morality, too?f this same person really does consider his computer to be “alive”, then the morality of his action is voidable. And as we all know morality concerns only rational persons and not things. And a thing will not ever substitute a person.
morality Essay Topics
The definition of Kant’s “Good will’ and its opposition to happiness.
Morality as a major factor for understanding the difference between hitting a computer and hitting a person.
morality Essay Questions
How does Immanuel Kant define the “good will”? In what way is Kant’s “Good will” opposed to happiness? What is the true philosophical essence of the “good will”.
How can hitting a computer be compared to hitting a person? Is a man who hits a computer able to hit a man the same way? What moral aspect concerns the difference between hitting a man and a computer?
morality Thesis Statement
Kant explains what a “good will” is and what difference it makes in the perception of the moral actions that a person makes.
The computer remains being a “material thing” and does not stand on the same level with a friend and as we all know morality concerns only rational persons and not things; and a thing will not ever substitute a person.