Ethics

Answering Question1   Why is it hard to explain the two views on killing and letting die as consistent with one another. (Max.150 words)
       
The problem with saving several people against killing another is a moral issue that can be explained differently by different people. It questions whether one supports the trolley incidence case or the transplant. A person taking the view that many lives are worth saving by wasting one (the trolley incidence) values life as individual elements, beneficial differently and hence differently needed in society. The person who values one life as several meet death, is basing on the view that life is important intones as it is in multiples. Need such people value each life as a preserve and never a compromise I any case. Whereas the first category will question their actions to let so many lives go to waste due to inability to waste one, the second will be comfortable with such an action.
               
Answering question two Do you think that there is a morally important difference between killing and letting die Produce an original example to support your view. (150 wads)
     
Yes, there is a morally important difference between killing and letting die. A persons dimension will influence action whether to kill or let die. An example can be given of a father who had three sons who were sick and needed urgent surgery .But it was only the father who had such organs needed by each. The father was old and sick and normally complained that his age would take him away sooner before he saw better things in life. It happened that one day the father was admitted in the same hospital with the sons. The doctor doing the minor surgery on the dad gave him tablets to make him asleep so not to feel pain. While the dad was asleep the doctor thought, Why not kill this old man and save his young boys He killed the old man. Such is a moral view of killing.
           
Answering question three Outline the sort of rationale a classical utilitarian might take I considering the case of the spare-parts surgeon (100 words)
       
A  Classical utilitarian person takes the view that a person who is about to die should offer hisher organs to those who are in need of them to. Heshe may also hold the view that  organs in our body that are in twos where one is a spare for the other( like kidney) should be freely donated as we may never use them in life. They will however not agree to a person donating an organ for which they too are in need of. They will disagree with an action which puts a persons normal functionality at a risk.