Morality In “Queen Vs. Dudley And Stephens” Essay

1. In the case of Queen vs. Dudley and Stephens, was the killing of the cabin male child, Richard Parker, morally wrong? Relate your answer to adept or more of the following ethical theories Aristotelian ethics, Hobbesian ethics, Utilitarianism, or Kantian ethics. Be sure to spread a summary of the main points of the theory, as well as drawing out its implications for the case.In the case of Dudley and Stephens, the gain of Richard Parker can non be justified as cosmos morally permissible. Our society functions on certain base principles, one of them cosmos that there are near things which are forbidden, that particular meets or measures can never be correct due to their nature. Murder is an action which qualifies as being fundamentally wrong, it can never be verbalise that murder is the right thing to do, because no matter the context, murder is in no way a morally permissible course of action. time it is true that all of the crew members would most certainly receive die d if Parker had not been slain, that is still not enough debate to have permitted the murder. Even if the boy had been consulted on the matter and he had subsequently granted his consent, the act of murder still cannot be justified. There is no situation so horrific (excluding warfare and self-defense) to warrant the voluntary taking of another human beings life. Although the crew had already gone numerous days without every form of nourishment, murder was still not the proper course of action. The boy was near death, and perhaps if they had waited just another day he would have died naturally, and then they could have used his body.This standpoint of murder never being the right decision is supported by Aristotles theory of law ethics. His theory states that we should live our lives according to principles of virtue and morality, and this will pop off to an attainment of happiness. Aristotle says that not all of our actions should be virtuous, as an extreme add of anything wo nt bring happiness, but rather we should live to a mean between evil and morality. He believes that through our ability to reason and choose our actions we will reach that mean position and balance our lives to a point of happiness. While the theory does allow us to choose some actions which are not moral