Justice: What's the right thing to do? Essay

Submitted By Jhami
Words: 1544
Pages: 7
Open Document
Justice: What’s the Right Thing to Do?

Harming the Innocent

If I was given only two options: to either kill the one worker, or hit the school bus and kill five or more children, I would no doubt hit the one worker. I would be saving five innocent lives to take away one who put himself at risk. The children had nothing to do with the man falling, therefore, the children should not have to give up their lives because of the mistake the man may have made. Also, if I chose to hit the children, I do not believe that a jury would agree with my choices. I do not believe that a jury would take pity on me for choosing to hit the children over the one man. I believe the more utilitarianism option would be to hit the man as well. Utilitarianism works to maximize happiness and minimize unhappiness. Utilitarianism would see it as better to hit the man because the children have longer lives to live and more happiness to be had. There are more children then there are workers so saving five children would be the better option. Also, if someone chose to hit the children, there would be five grieving families rather than one grieving family. Overall, to minimize unhappiness and maximize happiness in this tragedy would be to hit the fallen man and let the children live out happy lives.

If I was put in a situation where I had to either bomb a plant and kill ten thousand innocent civilians, or let them survive and have the plant they live next to possibly kill fifty thousand innocent civilians later, I would ultimately chose to let the ten thousand civilians survive and try to think of a different tactic to stop the plant. There is no reason to kill ten thousand innocent civilians when there has to be another way to stop the plant later on from making bombs and killing fifty thousand. If you know already that later on the plant will be making bombs, then now you have a heads up to make a plan to stop the plant without mass killing. If I had no choice to stop the plant any other way but killing the innocent civilians, I would choose to do so to save the fifty thousand people later. I would only kill the ten thousand innocent civilians if I knew 100% that the plant would be killing fifty thousand later. Utilitarianism would say to bomb the plant and kill the innocent civilians because that is the option that would maximize happiness and minimize unhappiness. By bombing the plant, you are saving five times the amount of people that you killed. There are more people that are being saved which means there is more happiness. Although there are ten thousand grieving families, there could have been fifty thousand grieving families so there is also less unhappiness by bombing the plant.

Even though it is against human morals, if put in the situation, I would torture the man until he gave up information about the bomb. I would give the man a certain amount of hours to give up information without force, and then after that I would resort to torturing him to give up the information. If the man gives up information, thousands could be saved in the big city of New York. Even though the man is being tortured, he is not going to die and might even serve less time for giving up the information. If you do not torture the man, thousands are going to die while the man who may have planted the bomb is sitting in a room knowing that he was successful. The theory of utilitarianism would say to torture the man to give up information about the bomb because that is the choice that would have the greatest amount of happiness and least amount unhappiness. Thousands of people would continue to live their lives and be happy while one man and his family are unhappy because of the choices he made himself.

If the man would not give up information about the bomb unless an innocent member of his family is tortured, I would think of a different way to get information. I wouldn’t harm one of his innocent family members because of choices he made. Although I would
Show More

Related Documents: Justice: What's the right thing to do? Essay

Justice What's The Right Thing To Do Analysis

In the 2009 book, “Justice: What’s The Right Thing To Do?”, by Michael J. Sandel, he claims that society needs to be more engaged in civil life. By openly expressing one’s opinions, there’s a greater chance that backlash and resentment can be prevented from building up. All throughout history, people have been expressing their opinions on different civil matters such as Women’s rights and the current issues on gun control. I agree that it’s important to openly express one’s opinions and beliefs…

Words 1025 - Pages 5

Tom Robinson Trial

Atticus, a defense attorney for Tom Robinson, did. He had to face many difficult challenges like the Finch family's reputation and the protection of his family while protecting Tom Robinson. Tom Robinson is a black man who committed a crime he didn't do, which is why it is such an important case to Atticus. Tom is innocent and should not be convicted of this crime. Some could argue that it was worth it to take a stand for good because it is in his conscience to protect him, but the dangers that his…

Words 581 - Pages 3

Criminal Justice System Analysis

Discussion Board Responses The criminal justice system is working but there are some situations that shows it needs some changes. Certain things are happening in the world in which would cause the criminal justice system to change. Specifically instances in which reports like crime rates and statistics proves that there needs to be a difference in the criminal justice system I would make stricter gun laws and come up with harsher punishment for those who violate the laws. I would come up with equal…

Words 799 - Pages 4

Notes On Business Ethics

1/9/2013 Business Ethics Unit 1 I. Ethics is the study of the right (good) using reason, analysis, synthesis, and reflection A) Ethics ≠ morality (just requires that you know someone else’s opinion) Can explain using reason B) Universal Rule guiding behavior Applied to every decision II. Steps in process A. Identify proposed action (what is right/wrong?) B. Identify important dimension of the decision (varies by rules) C. Decide if the action is ethical 1. Ethical tests…

Words 4576 - Pages 19

Barn Burning By William Faulkner: Literary Analysis

erroneous of burning Mr. Harris’s barn. Sarty still looks at Mr. Harris as the enemy. Sarty knows what’s right from wrong, so sticking up for his father creates an internal conflict within Sarty which is interesting. This internal conflict is important because it helps the reader understand that Sarty is having trouble between loyalty to his father, and loyalty to justice and doing the right thing, by telling the court that his father is guilty for burning Mr. Harris barn. While in the court room…

Words 1046 - Pages 5

Theme Of Discrimination In To Kill A Mockingbird

Everyone has been treated poorly or mistreated for doing the right thing. This happens almost everyday and people are discriminated upon for reason we cannot see. In Harper Lee's "To Kill a Mockingbird" many innocent people fall victim to this and are punished for the events they cannot control. Equality is the only solution to this problem and it can be seen and demonstrated by Atticus, attempting to do the right thing but knowing that he had no chance. To begin, Tom Robinson, a pretty significant…

Words 758 - Pages 4

Being Able To Stand Up Against Injustices

bullying prevention expert (¨Do You?¨). Being able to stand up against injustices is the most important act a person can undertake in today’s society. This includes standing up for your beliefs, your rights, and for others. It can be as simple as saying hello and smiling at a victim of bullying. You don’t have to become an activist, but you should be able to speak up about what’s right. First of all, standing up for what you believe in is a great way to promote justice. For example, Malala Yousafzai…

Words 634 - Pages 3

Michael J. Sandel's Justice: The Right Thing To Do

individuals in the public domain should be valued. An excerpt from Michael J. Sandel’s book entitled Justice: What’s The Right Thing To Do? fundamentally asserts that for the sake of the common good, citizens should openly address moral disagreements on matters of public policy. Indeed, society must encourage candid public discourse on moral and religious matters in order to uphold the American right to freedom of speech, which reflects what it means to live in an American democracy, and promote the…

Words 461 - Pages 2

Comparing Act 1 Scene 5 Of Hamlet And The Lion King

King, directed by Roger Allers and Rob Minkoff. The way that the directors choose to stage the conversation between King Hamlet (Mufasa in The Lion King) and Hamlet (Simba in The Lion King) determined if the major theme of the story was revenge or justice. The biggest difference between the two scenes that determined the overall theme of the story lies in the message from each ghost. In Laurence Olivier’s version, the ghost…

Words 643 - Pages 3

Democratic Citizenship Paragraph Essay

associated with democratic citizenship is justice. Having a fair and reasonable justice system helps keep our citizens in order and safe from harm. Creating laws for what’s right and wrong keeps society balanced and in order. For example things that are illegal are made illegal to protect citizens. To take it to an extreme, killing or harm on a person is illegal. If this law is broken there are major penalties like long jail time. We also value voting rights. Our society provides us with the freedom…

Words 340 - Pages 2