Kant

argues
that the moral value of an actio
n is in how well it fulfills our
duties
(which are determined by the
categorical i
mperative).
Alternatively,
Mill
argues
that
the moral value of an action depends on
its
consequences
how
much happiness it produces and how little pain.
Compare these two arguments: w
hat is
the strength of each? What challenges do each present for the other’s arguments?
2.
Socrates
argues that when we fail to do the right thing in a given situation, it is because
of ignorance
.
Aristotle
argues that it is possible to know the right thing to do, but
to
fail to do it.
Briefly explain each
position using what you learned in class. Then,
what does each position have to offer our understanding of
how to become virtuous?
3. First, give a very brief account of the
rationalist
and
empiricist
accounts of knowledge. In other words,
what is the basic argument of each? Then, what does
James’
ar
gument in “The Will to Believe” add to the
discourse?
4
.
Descartes
uses skepticism to strip away all of his unfounded beliefs in order to retain only that which
cannot be doubted. Describe
the two
possible scenarios he presents
that convince
him
that none of his beliefs
are safe from doubt?
Then, what idea does he ultimately argue cannot be doubted?