• (i) Analyze Cohen’s essay, drawing comparisons/contrasts with Rawls’s egalitarianism and Nozick’s/Hosper’s libertarianism. • (ii) If you were given the choice – from outside the Original Position -- to live your life (presumably with your own family) in either a society based on libertarian principles or one based on Rawlsian principles, which would you choose and why? [20 marks] • Note: a copy of Cohen’s essay willl be provided with the …show more content…
Using either Sandel’s “Callie Smartt (cheerleader)” or Casey Martin (golf cart) example, outline the basic tenets of an Aristotelean approach to justice (in your answer, be sure to show how it differs from modern theories of justice).
Of the four “Negative Evaluations” of Virtue Ethics (see handout), which do you think is the most serious? Why?
Which theory – virtue ethics, utilitarianism, Kantian morality -- in your view, is the most convincing (you must select one)? Why? [20 marks] • Note: the most convincing answers are those that explain the main tenets the theory (e.g. Kantian morality: principle of ends in themselves, good will, worthy of happiness, etc).
The Aristotelean approach would simply be to find the Telos, but beyond that it would also have to find the mean to produce the best possible course of actions bringing it as close to the end(purpose) of the situation. In this case, with callie smart the telos of cheerleading is what had to be determined, which in itself depends on its basis, are they cheering for the crowd or are they cheering for a competition. If it is based on erousment of the crowd then the end would be to get the best excitement out of them, if this is what callie can produce then the best possible course factions would be to allow her to chear, it would be the mean based off 2 vices, one being her not cheering and there are happy …show more content…
IF THIS IS WHAT CALLIE CAN PRODUCE THE THE MOST VIRTOUS DECISION WITHIN THE BASIS OF WHAT THE TELOS OF CHEERLEADING IS WOULD BE TO LET HER