Good example of 6 question philosophy essay

Institutor:

Philosophy
John Stuart Mill emphasized on liberalism and the inequality of women in the society. Women posses’ capabilities and intelligence as J. S. Mill believed both men and women have the same mental capacities and the sole reason as to why less participation of women in the science field is a lack of opportunity in the society. It is because of acts such as separate spheres. Women are intelligent in their nurturing force, but this is compared to the General of the military whose nature is to control his servants and to wake up early. J. S. Mill argues and supports liberalism and abolishes inequality, which states that society should educate citizens equally. Ideas of liberalism exemplify by demonstrating that women are not inferior, but are also intelligent in their own fields.
Gilligan argues by stating that both genders might have different moral sensibilities and gender differences may take responsibilities in the stages of moral development. She did a research on women, and concluded that most women think more about the caring thing to do rather than the things the rules allowed. It is by nature that a woman develops in a way that focuses on connections among people; therefore women are not inferior rather they are different. The experiments conducted by another scientist are biased in placing women as inferior creatures. It blocks her way in excelling in the science field, but the real ideology is that women are more intelligent due to their ability to focus more than men are.
I strongly criticize Gilligan in the sense that both men and women in understanding aspects of life, such as education need the stages of development. It is a fact that women are known to acquire virtues such as caring, responsibilities, and having interpersonal connections. These are inborn characteristics and even though the experiment is conducted, the traits will automatically be seen. What she lacked to experiment on is their level of understanding in education, especially participating in the science field, and how to encourage women that they are not inferior in the aspect of education.
Nozick’s theory of entitlement illustrates that if we own ourselves completely it is automatically logical to own what we produce absolutely. This theory is based on the idea that free market exchanges value people as equals and consist of three principles; transfer, acquisition and rectification principles. The theory is against the existence of redistribution taxation because it is inconsistent with self-ownership, hence, an act of in-justly. Taxation takes away some of the owners’ product and gives to another without his consent. Every commodity is the outcome of two variables, human power, and natural resources. To some extent, redistribution taxation is not inconsistent with self-ownership since we do not have control over the resources.
Nozick strongly criticizes Rawls entitlement theory because he argues that the state should necessarily ensure that those citizens who are wealthy continue to be prosperous. He further implies that unequal distribution of wealth and income are acceptable only if the poor are better than they would be under any other distribution. Rawls will defend his theory by suggesting that his they are applicable if only these state powers are essentially consistent with distinct basic rights and freedom, hence, if the less well-off is wealthier when subjected to this distribution than any other than it is justified.
In my opinion, I heavily agree with Nozick theory. It is because it gives opportunity for all citizens to engage in the market exchange, unlike Rawls theory that uplifts the rich only. Rawl’s theory may have an effect on the future of the greater level of capitalism and economic imbalances. Nozick concentrates on what is just for the owner, how the commodities are redistributed, and how the returns justly benefit the owner.
The slave morality originated from the Jewish prophets as they fused the aspects of ‘ rich’, ‘ godliness’, ‘ evil’, ‘ violent’ and ‘ sensuous’ into one entity, and they were the first to identify the word ‘ world’ as cursed word. The concept slavery morality consists of several characteristics such as kindness, patience, humility, and sympathy.
Master morality originates from the power and the wealth, status quo accumulated by a person, the actions conducted and the good values one portrays. It creates its own values and stands beyond good and evil. The characteristics of master morality include; the identification of good, bad recognizes a hierarchy of people, a noble person only recognizes moral duties towards their equals; there are the presence of power, wealth ability and a sense of fullness. They also do not consider the treatment subjected on the people below them as morality.
The worker is alienated from the world that acts as an alien to him. It is by experiencing the world and oneself inactively and as the subject separated from the purpose. In this case, alienation is expressed as work and labor. The worker is alienated by the existence of private property because the object produced stands opposed to it as an alien-being and a power to the producer.
The historian Utilitarian emphasizes on the moral duties and obligations of a man towards the community. He would advise on arresting the homeless man in the view of conducting an obligation to the community to keep the peace and avoid death of the innocent people. He talks about sacrificing oneself in times of need. What he would criticize in this question is why implicate a homeless man who is not aware of the circumstances at hand and not the sheriff himself? It is of good will that he wants to protect the town, but why not volunteer. The historian also emphasizes that the will to do good or just rests in the hands of the person in question.
The historian Kantian would automatically disagree with arresting the innocent homeless man. It is because she strongly emphasizes that lying is always wrong, and even when necessary to save innocent lives it is still equally an in just. In this question, it is an act of in just to implicate on a homeless man without considering where he is comes. Does he have a family? Alternatively, what he has been through to subject him or her in such a horrible situation. Kantian would opt for justice that is conducting an investigation to find the real perpetrator. The truth being hidden that the sheriff knows the murderer makes it more inhuman to implicate an innocent man.
I would criticize the act of arresting the homeless man to prevent the occurrence of chaos in the town. It is because the sheriff knows the murderer insinuating that he or she is within reach even if out of the town. If the perpetrator committed the murder, then how is the sheriff certain that he or she would not commit an in-just to the community again.
Individuals may question what is right and wrong and may abandon the two concepts in the way God has indicated in the bible, but we are aware that what God command us to be truthful and this is one way of showing the right thing to do and say. It illustrates our understanding in a standard of right and wrong that is independent of God’s will. Most people believe that doing right or wrong is limited to what God defines as right or wrong. The connection of morality and religion are different in that doing a moral thing is out of one self-will; a decision made given certain options. On the contrary, religion is following the norms and themes of religious community not choosing your own path.