CAN I BRING POISON ONTO A BUS?

Rights and Responsibilities

A) brief summary
o Nancy, whilst holding a box of poison in a bus, is confronted by other passengers. She
explains to them that the poison does not affect 95% of people and is non-lethal. She also
explains that it is imperative that she travels to where she needs to be and that the bus is
the only form of transportation should could take.

B) explain your intuitive response

o What Nancy is holding, can hypothetically be called a cold. Colds are, usually non-fatal,
have varying percentages from person to person on whether they will be affected by it or
not. I think the term poison is harsh. If someone on the bus was visibly sick, they most
likely wont be asked to leave the bus, so why should Nancy? Theres an inconsistency
with accepting the same effects from a cold or flu but not accepting being in proximity to

a slow release poison.

C) Explain how your intuitive response compares to moral theories via Morality

Barometer.
o

Comparing thoughts to the Morality barometer, I, firstly, think that Nancy should be
allowed to get on the bus, and also, that people dont have the right to insist that other
people never do anything that might cause us (mild) harm. My thoughts are similar to the

authors. I dont think it is wrong to travel while sick.

D) make and defend a claim about the consistency of your moral reasoning

ARE WE REALLY SORRY THAT HITLER EXISTED? -Ethical Impasses

A) brief summary
o In this hypothetical situation, a Time Traveler argues with his wife about whether his wife
thinks that it is morally acceptable to be sorry for the holocaust or rather be sorry her own
existence.

B) explain your intuitive response

o I believe the two matters are unrelated as they do not logically go hand in hand. I believe
that one can be sorry that something terrible occurred for ones existence, while being
o

accepting of their own existence. (Its not directly thier fault, for example)
There, generally, was no choice in the matter of existing, or of historic events taking
place. It really boils down to whos life do you value more, the millions of jews who
died, or the millions of people who exist now. People who dont exist as a result of
something happening or not happening will exist in a different form; you cannot reclaim

a life, but you can still make a new one.

I wouldnt know if my existence was the result of something bad happening or not. It

does not matter. I exist or I do not. If I dont exist there is nothing to worry about.
C) Explain how your intuitive response compares to moral theories via Morality

Barameter
o

I do not regret my existence; I also am sorry that tragedies in this world occur. This
mental reasoning is more in line with example B, Im sorry that you suffered. However,

if the tragedy did not occur and I dont exist, I wouldnt know that I didnt exist.
D) make and defend a claim about the consistency of your moral reasoning

IS IT WRONG FOR EVIL PEOPLE TO DEFEND THEMSELVES? Crime and Punishment

A) brief summary
o In Stangrooms hypothetical situation, he imagines a situation in which a radical
organization, of which has commited many atrocities, is confronted and trapped by their
opponents, namely law enforcement. The organization members, cannot escape and will
face death if they dont defend themselves, however if they do defend themselves, they
o

will injure police and bystanders.

Stangroom proposes the question of morality in whether the organization members
defend themselves or not.

B) explain your intuitive response.

o I believe that the organization members should not defend themselves in order to protect
the lives of the innocent. The animals. They have already commited attoricites and
disrupted society. They should be removed from society because they dont fit in (as
radicals, by definition). I firmly believe that people have the right to believe in whatever
theyd like, however acting upon those beliefs with intent to harm others is a different
o

matter. If you take away the ability for someone else, then that is wrong and evil.
If the organization members fight

C) Explain how your intuitive response compares to moral theories via Morality

Barameter
D) make and defend a claim about the consistency of your moral reasoning