Phil 102 Cage Fighting
Cerritos Community College
“My Critical Reflections on Cage Fighting”
Philosophy 102
Tifarrah Williams
Professor J.A. van de Mortel
January 27, 2015
The morality and legality of cage fighting is a subject that is very tough to argue, specially depending on whom you are conversing with. I, myself, for example choose not to get into this topic with my friends, because they all are obviously for it. This paper will examine my personal thoughts and feelings about this subject against ‘Traits of Moral Principles’ and the ‘Domains of Ethical Assessment’ found in our textbook Ethics Discovering Right and Wrong. I will place these two principles up against cage fighting and at the end will be answering the question: Am I morally for or against cage fighting.
First, lets cover all the traits of moral principles as it applies to cage fighting. “Prescriptivity, which is the practical, or action-guiding, nature of morality” (Pojman & Fieser, 2012, p.7), used to advise people of what to do, cage fighting promotes and condones unnecessary violence to be done to each other as a sport. Then we have universalizability, meaning could it be something that everyone can participate in, and obviously it is because fighters are from all over the world. Overridingness, which states that moral principles come first and can override other types of principles; hence making it legal. Then we have publicity, the moral principles of what cage fighting has to be made public, which it has and has been accepted. Finally we have practicability, is it practical to hit and hurt each other as a sport?
Now lets tie this in with the domains of ethical assessment. We have four major parts of an ethical assessment, which are the action, the consequences, the character and finally the motive. In action we have either an obligatory act or an optional act; whereas, the act is either an obligation to humanity or an option in taking part of the action. Cage fighting is completely
“My Critical Reflections on Cage Fighting”
Philosophy 102
Tifarrah Williams
Professor J.A. van de Mortel
January 27, 2015
The morality and legality of cage fighting is a subject that is very tough to argue, specially depending on whom you are conversing with. I, myself, for example choose not to get into this topic with my friends, because they all are obviously for it. This paper will examine my personal thoughts and feelings about this subject against ‘Traits of Moral Principles’ and the ‘Domains of Ethical Assessment’ found in our textbook Ethics Discovering Right and Wrong. I will place these two principles up against cage fighting and at the end will be answering the question: Am I morally for or against cage fighting.
First, lets cover all the traits of moral principles as it applies to cage fighting. “Prescriptivity, which is the practical, or action-guiding, nature of morality” (Pojman & Fieser, 2012, p.7), used to advise people of what to do, cage fighting promotes and condones unnecessary violence to be done to each other as a sport. Then we have universalizability, meaning could it be something that everyone can participate in, and obviously it is because fighters are from all over the world. Overridingness, which states that moral principles come first and can override other types of principles; hence making it legal. Then we have publicity, the moral principles of what cage fighting has to be made public, which it has and has been accepted. Finally we have practicability, is it practical to hit and hurt each other as a sport?
Now lets tie this in with the domains of ethical assessment. We have four major parts of an ethical assessment, which are the action, the consequences, the character and finally the motive. In action we have either an obligatory act or an optional act; whereas, the act is either an obligation to humanity or an option in taking part of the action. Cage fighting is completely