Moral Dilemma Under The Justice

By Author: tomas
Total Articles: 35
Comment this article

Copyright by Tomas. Wearing the most beautiful Sterling Silver Jewelry, joining the ranks of popular 925 Silver Rings, present the charm of your own such as Silver Fashion Jewelry, in order to add new life of fun. Please click 925jewelry Online store.Professor pointed out that this is because the students now have to consider not only the result of the conduct, must take into account the behavior itself. The professor cited the case of a real 19th-century England, the four crew members crashed in order to survive, more than ten days after drifting at sea, we decided to kill the one that has been dying boy, by his blood and the body to sustain life. Triggered the students on the discussion of utility maximization of the utilitarian, utilitarian standard is: most people's best interests.
This discussion is very interesting, the problem is no clear answer, although in theory the extreme inference, must make a choice or choices. However, this inference is related to our lives, many practical ...
... issues, such as fairness, justice, equality, individual rights, social welfare. To be honest, for Professor Sander's problem, I can hardly make their own choices, such as the circumstances under which most people can't save. Utilitarian view that utility maximization is the justice, in order to maximize the overall well-being, can the expense of minority interests. The liberal believes that each of us are masters of their own, independent nature of individual rights, if the interests of the majority at the expense of the minority, this is only the individual as a social tool, and therefore unjust.
Some students suggested that life and death in the face of difficulties at a time when access to the boy in the agreement, or by drawing lots to determine who die, then the moral is not a problem. This is why we have become familiar with the procedural justice, but the students of confusion still exists, that is, it still morally wrong.
Interestingly, liberal Nozick advocates minimal government, opposed to paternalistic legislation, opposed to moral legislation, opposed to using taxes to achieve redistribution, and whether Bill Gates and Michael Jordan's tax levy to help the poor, most students take is in favor of the attitude, although they also recognize that, from individual rights, the more tax the rich is a sign of intimidation and theft, but there is no redistribution would be no social justice, because Bill Gates and Michael Jordan in the social activities gain wealth, they should be back to society, so after the tax is not mandatory community agreed to, but for the social stability, but also for the rich make more money.
Obviously, the starting point for students is to emphasize the results of utilitarianism but it can not explain the long-term results, since the tax may be made to pay the rich do not wish to efforts to reduce the wealth of society as a whole. Professor Zander did not give a definite answer, the students of the debate seems to have no results, but lead to further thought. This discussion may make you realize that freedom and equality, individual rights and social well-being and may never in contradiction, there is no social policy can always be applied, one needs to do is to constantly adapt to find the balance. This is the merits of democratic elections, decision-makers of different power, adopt different policies, and the community to retain the most important choice.
Looking back to our community, probably is not a utilitarian vision, nor is it liberal vision. But the reality is that our social life, both the lack of social welfare, but also the lack of individual rights. For example, the mandatory relocation of violence, resulting in bloodshed and death, seem to be unable to stop. In most cases, removal is often not for public purposes, but to build commercial housing, are purely market behavior, but individual local governments have to use public power to support the removal of violence, against the rights of individual citizens, while the appreciation of land and housing, but again assigned to the hands of the government and developers. And individual citizens are taking increasingly violent forms of protest, like the recent demolition of the officials who killed as Liaoning Yang Yi. Without a social security, and no individual rights to protect society, but returned to a natural state, the way to resolve disputes can only rely on violence.
Harvard students to discuss for us, as good is nowhere near the. To the rule of law as they did in the discussion of a just society comfortably behind the moral dilemmas, we must first address the issue of democracy the rule of law itself, so that the convergence of power, so that the dignity of the people, or talk about fairness, justice, and is of no use, the result can only a dog in the manger, because we have been split in two trams, half of which crashed into the fork on the individual, half crashed into orbit that five people.