Case analysis Coursework Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Case analysis - Coursework Example 2 According to Thomas Hobbes, you should not destroy the revised will. This is because for Hobbes, morally right actions are the actions that are consistent with the law of nature. According to Hobbes, the law of nature is discoverable by reason, and all of us are able to discover it if we reason well. For Hobbes, the law of nature guides all of us and it is the law that enables us to know the morally good and the morally bad actions. In the case under consideration, you should not destroy the revised will because doing so is against the law of nature. This is because one of the precepts of the law of nature is to be honest and to tell the truth. 3 According to Kant, you should not destroy the revised will. This is because for Kant, in is categorical imperative, Kant says that in making moral decisions, we should always choose actions that we would wish to be made into universal laws; in other words, Kant states that in making moral decisions, we should choose actions that we would wish anybody in the same situation, and under the same circumstances, to make (Kant, 18). For this reason, since one would not wish his or her own will to be destroyed when we die, one should destroy another person’s will. Destroying the revised will for Kant, therefore, is morally wrong. 4 Of the above three philosophers, Kant is the philosopher who provides the best, and the most convincing account of what one should do in this case. This is because Kant gives a clear formula of making a moral judgement, i.e. in making moral decisions, act in a manner that you would wish all people in the same situation to act. Plato’s and Hobbes’ account of how one should act in this case are a bit unclear and unconvincing. This is because for Plato, it is not easy to determine an action that is virtuous and that promotes eudaimonia; For Hobbes, also, it is not easy to