There are many ethical theories that can be used to determine what is right and what is wrong in any given situation. Some of these ethical theories are better suited to be applied to the dilemma posed within the dialogue between Jennifer and Sandy regarding Brad. Through interpretation of the problem at hand, specifics can be used to determine which theories are more fit in this specific case. So, when analyzing what exactly the conflict in this problem is, it can be shown that both Ayn Rand’s Ethical Egoism, and Emmanuel Kant’s Categorical Imperative are well fit to apply a ethical weighing mechanism to Jennifer’s issue.
The first ethical standpoint that is logical to apply to this situation is the theory of Ayn
Rand’s Ethical Egoism.…show more content… Kantianism is a deontological moral theory that says the right action in a given situation is determined by the categorical imperative. First thing to note about this philosophy is that because it is a deontological theory, it is not concerned with necessarily the consequences, but rather the duty of the person doing an action. The categorical imperative is a command that applies to everyone. For example, the constitution applies to all legal citizens of the United States. This categorical imperative has three formulations that Kant claims mean the same thing. So, when looking at the first formulation, it is stated that moral actions are actions one would wish everyone to do as well. More accurately, it commands that every moral law should be such that one would be willing to allow it to be the case for everyone.
This can be applied to the given problem because the morality of Jennifer’s actions can be determined by how she might feel if she was in Brad’s position. Basically, it would be her duty to analyze the dilemma based on how she would feel in the reverse. Given Jennifer’s implied belief that after a full transition one is not required to reveal prior biological standing it
