One of the most difficult things to grasp in philosophy is understanding the order of reasoning when it comes to applying a normative system
I need help with a respond to the professor’s comment on my discussion post.
Professor’s Comment:
Hi Sonia,
One of the most difficult things to grasp in philosophy is understanding the order of reasoning when it comes to applying a normative system (utilitarianism, deontology, etc) to a situation (in this case, Uber). It’s very tempting to take any given case and say, “They must be using deontology because of x, y, z.” The truth is, we can squeeze any scenario into a given normative system if we try hard enough. The goal is flip that around, in terms of ethical reasoning – we want to say, “We know X is right based on a utlitiarianist system, therefore Uber is within it rights to do y.” That is to say, the normative system must always be foundational. It is what justifies right/wrong/good/bad and everything must answer to it. Does that make sense?
Paper Format: APA
Answer preview to One of the most difficult things to grasp in philosophy is understanding the order of reasoning when it comes to applying a normative system
APA
350 words
