I need someone to do  my assignment ASAP

A natural disaster destroys an entire area of a city.

The residents of the area are left homeless and without transportation, and without the necessary food and water to survive until infrastructure can be rebuilt.  Furthermore, the country does not have adequate public or international aid to provide for the displaced residents.  Aid organizations have promised to have food and water to residents within the week, but it is unclear how quickly and safe it will be to get the aid to those in need.

Among this population there is a single mother, Sarah, who has two young children.  After several days, her children are showing signs of dehydration and hunger.  They are in desperate need of clean water and food. 

In a nearby area there is a supermarket owned by a wealthy family, the Jacksons.  Sarah knows this family from years of shopping at their store.  The Jacksons have decided to close the store to prevent thefts because they know that they will not be able to contribute much to the rebuilding effort if they face huge losses of inventory and income.  Sarah is aware that the Jacksons will want to help the community but that they will be unable to do so if their store is looted.  There are no other supermarkets in the area that survived the disaster and other resources cannot be gathered because they are unsafe to consume.

A group of residents is organizing to break into the supermarket to steal food and water.  They will only steal what is necessary to survive. 

Choose three ethical theories that we have covered in this class. For each of the three theories that you choose, describe the way that the theory would have Sarah act in this situation (would she steal or not steal?), provide citations from our reading and supporting evidence for your claim.

Lastly, what would you do?  Based on your decision, which ethical theory would you be following?  Provide citations from our reading and supporting evidence for your claim.

10

10

10

30

What does this theory say that Sarah should do?

30

Support

30

Conclusion

5

What does this theory say that Sarah should do?

30

Support

30

Conclusion

5

30

Support

30

Conclusion

5

Elijah Onderi

Midterm Paper

7/5/20

Ethical Theories

Introduction

Sarah as well as community would be faced with challenges on deciding what is morally ethical as pertaining to the current situation they are in, faced with aftermath of a natural disaster and now they are dehydration and hunger. Sarah would have to act in a particular manner in regards to the following ethical theories

Ethical Egoism

Sarah would steal since this is what is of benefit for herself. The ethical theory of egoism supports the idea that people should act in their own self-interest and maximize benefits for themselves. “The ethical standard of ethical egoism is that what is good for an individual is what produces a net benefit for that individual, and what is bad is what produces a net harm for that individual” (McGraw Hill, 2010, p. 120). This theory even further supports the actions of the Jacksons who acted for self interest by closing their store to prevent thefts since they knew they will not be able to contribute much to the rebuilding effort if they face huge losses of inventory and income. Sarah, even though knowing the Jacksons, has no basic moral obligation to them. If Sarah would not steal, that would be bad because that would cause a net harm to herself which is starvation of her children and maybe death. “Whatever is beneficial for me is morally good, no matter what the effects on others may be” (McGraw Hill, 2010, p. 120).

In regards to ethical egoism, then, it would be concluded that the most moral action for Sarah to take is to steal. This is what will maximize the net benefit for herself by saving the lives of her starving and near dying children. The Jacksons in the first place wanted to maximize their benefits in self-interest by closing their store to prevent thefts which is a justification of this theory which is the natural inclination of being self-interested.

Kantian Ethical Theory

If Sarah was to use the Kantian ethical theory, then she would not steal from the Jacksons. The Kantian ethical theory is a based on two formulations. The first formulation is Act only from those personal rules that you can at the same time will to be moral laws” (McGraw Hill, 2010, p.94).This means then that a person can act on personal rules freely and rationally but if one acts as such, the action ought to be follow the moral laws. The universal moral law is ‘do not steal other people’s property’. This means then that Sarah can not steal from the Jacksons because she has an obligation to respect the moral laws. Moral laws are legitimate “legitimate moral rules or laws place an obligation on everyone regardless of their desires; they are universal” (McGraw Hill, 2010). Even though it would be in the interest or desire of saving her starving children from death, she would not steal since she will be in contrary to the moral law. Moral laws are like commands, “Because moral laws are commands persons universally or absolutely, they must be followed without exceptions” (McGraw Hill, 2010, p. 93).

The second formulation states “Act in regard to all persons in ways that treat them as ends in themselves and never simply as means to accomplish the ends of others” (McGraw Hill, 2010, p.95). Sarah can act on personal rules of going to steal, but she would do so since she would have treated the Jacksons as merely means to accomplish their ends or goals. She must acknowledge that the Jacksons are ends in themselves.

It can be concluded from this theory that, Sarah would not still because she would lose consistency in being ethical in regards to moral laws. She would not also steal from Jacksons since it will be using them as a means to accomplish her ends or ends of others- her children in this case.

Act Utilitarianism

Sarah may also consider stealing in consideration of the theory of ethical Utilitarianism. When considering utilitarianism, Mill argues that “actions are good in proportion to which they tend to promote happiness and bad as they tend to produce unhappiness.” (McGraw-Hill, p. 54). Also, it is states that, “moral agents should maximize net benefit for the greatest number of morally significant beings affected by a certain action.” (McGraw-Hill, p.41). Bethan, also in his argument, then Sarah would have to consider a number of issues in order to act. First, “the agent must consider the number of harms and benefits” (McGraw Hill, 2010, p.45). Secondly, “the duration of each harm and benefit must be considered. A minor pain that lasts for years is more of a harm than a serious pain that is over in a couple seconds” (McGraw Hill, 2010, p.46). When considering these two factors, and the desire to promote happiness and maximize benefit for the greatest number of morally significant beings affected by the cation, then its is the right action for Sarah to steal from the Jacksons.

The harm that Sarah would cause on the Jacksons is minimal and is correctable than the harm of letting the children to starve or even die. It can be concluded that Sarah is justified to steal in order to cause the promote happiness and maximize benefit for the greatest number.

Conclusion

If I were in the position of Sarah, I would steal from the Jacksons store in order to feed the children. I will apply the ethical theory of act utilitarianism which weighs on the benefits and harms and aims at promoting happiness and maximizing benefit it the greatest number of the morally agents being affected by my action of stealing. Stealing is wrong but letting someone die is even worse.

Introduction to Ethical Theory [McGraw Hill, 2010]