Charlotte Logan
2019 AS Questions
Explain Kant’s distinction between acting in accordance with duty and acting out of duty
(5 Marks)
Kant’s deontological moral belief is that the only morally wealthy actions are those which act out of
duty. Acting in accordance with duty would be when the person does what the duty would be when
the person does what the duty commands them to do but has not recognised their duty or acts for a
reason other than solely duty (love) so has alternate motives to do things. On the other hand, a
person acting out of duty would do what the duty commands of them as well as understanding that
it is their duty. Someone acting in accordance with duty is not acting out of good will whereas, a
person acting out of duty acts out of good will as they are motivated by their duty. The good will is
the will that is motivated by duty, which Kant argues is means that it chooses in accordance with
reason. A person acting in accordance has an action, thus has no moral worth as the motive was not
correct. However, the action out of duty has moral duty. Finally, an action out of duty is autonomous
(acting in accordance with one's moral duty rather than one's desires.) whereas an action in
accordance with duty is acting heteronomously.
Explain how Aristotelian virtue ethics might be applied to the box issue of simulated killing
(12 Marks)
Virtue ethics is an agent centred (focused on yourself) theory focused on what makes the agent
morally good or bad rather than a specific act. It addresses the question of what sort of person
should I be? Both the act itself and the agent’s intentions are important. Within virtue ethics the
most important thing is that we develop positive character traits (virtues) such as courage,
generosity and honesty. Simulated killing is virtual killing that can be through a video game or role-
playing. If pretending to be a killer makes us less virtuous (less sensitive for example) then it is the
wrong thing to do. This means that playing the killer needs to be avoided.
Are utilitarians correct when they say that it is morally right to maximise utility?
(25 Marks)
40 Minutes
Over 40 Minutes
Additions from answer written previously
Utilitarians believe that the best decision is the decision that maximises utility and creates the
greatest net value of utility, utility is the property of an object or action in virtue which tends to
produce happiness. Jeremy Bentham was a utilitarianist and used a Felicific calculus to measure the
quantity of the pleasurable sensations. The Felicific calculus is used to calculate the amount of
pleasure an action will lead to whilst discounting pain. John Mill developed Bentham’s ideas and
used the higher and lower pleasure scheme to measure the quality of the pleasurable sensations.
There are three types of utilitarianism – act, preference and rule. Act utilitarianism understands
happiness in terms of the balance of pleasure over pain. Preference is a theory that we should
maximise happiness in terms of the satisfaction of people’s preferences. Rule is the idea that the
right act is that act that complies with those rules which, if everybody followed them, would lead to
the greatest happiness. Throughout this response I will express my opinion on how I find that
utilitarians are incorrect in their beliefs that maximising utility is morally right, whilst also
understanding counter arguments.
2019 AS Questions
Explain Kant’s distinction between acting in accordance with duty and acting out of duty
(5 Marks)
Kant’s deontological moral belief is that the only morally wealthy actions are those which act out of
duty. Acting in accordance with duty would be when the person does what the duty would be when
the person does what the duty commands them to do but has not recognised their duty or acts for a
reason other than solely duty (love) so has alternate motives to do things. On the other hand, a
person acting out of duty would do what the duty commands of them as well as understanding that
it is their duty. Someone acting in accordance with duty is not acting out of good will whereas, a
person acting out of duty acts out of good will as they are motivated by their duty. The good will is
the will that is motivated by duty, which Kant argues is means that it chooses in accordance with
reason. A person acting in accordance has an action, thus has no moral worth as the motive was not
correct. However, the action out of duty has moral duty. Finally, an action out of duty is autonomous
(acting in accordance with one's moral duty rather than one's desires.) whereas an action in
accordance with duty is acting heteronomously.
Explain how Aristotelian virtue ethics might be applied to the box issue of simulated killing
(12 Marks)
Virtue ethics is an agent centred (focused on yourself) theory focused on what makes the agent
morally good or bad rather than a specific act. It addresses the question of what sort of person
should I be? Both the act itself and the agent’s intentions are important. Within virtue ethics the
most important thing is that we develop positive character traits (virtues) such as courage,
generosity and honesty. Simulated killing is virtual killing that can be through a video game or role-
playing. If pretending to be a killer makes us less virtuous (less sensitive for example) then it is the
wrong thing to do. This means that playing the killer needs to be avoided.
Are utilitarians correct when they say that it is morally right to maximise utility?
(25 Marks)
40 Minutes
Over 40 Minutes
Additions from answer written previously
Utilitarians believe that the best decision is the decision that maximises utility and creates the
greatest net value of utility, utility is the property of an object or action in virtue which tends to
produce happiness. Jeremy Bentham was a utilitarianist and used a Felicific calculus to measure the
quantity of the pleasurable sensations. The Felicific calculus is used to calculate the amount of
pleasure an action will lead to whilst discounting pain. John Mill developed Bentham’s ideas and
used the higher and lower pleasure scheme to measure the quality of the pleasurable sensations.
There are three types of utilitarianism – act, preference and rule. Act utilitarianism understands
happiness in terms of the balance of pleasure over pain. Preference is a theory that we should
maximise happiness in terms of the satisfaction of people’s preferences. Rule is the idea that the
right act is that act that complies with those rules which, if everybody followed them, would lead to
the greatest happiness. Throughout this response I will express my opinion on how I find that
utilitarians are incorrect in their beliefs that maximising utility is morally right, whilst also
understanding counter arguments.
