Questions pertaining to whether certain actions are morally right or morally wrong are never easy to settle. There are various moral theories that try to address the question, divine command theory, virtue ethics, ethical egoism, cultural relativism, to name just a few. There is, of course, not much agreement among moral philosophers as to which is correct. There is, however, much agreement on what is actually morally right or morally wrong. The merits of a particular moral theory will depend (in part) on whether or not it can account for actions most of us consider to be right. This paper analyzes three different moral theories: Immanuel Kant’s categorical imperative, John Stuart Mill’s utilitarianism, and Kwame Appiah’s cosmopolitanism. After a short description of each theory, the question of whether or not it is morally right to vaccinate children against bad diseases such as measles and mumps is asked of each of them.
Immanuel Kant’s Categorical Imperative The distinction between two kinds of imperatives – those that provide instruction for attaining a specific goal and those that apply regardless of one's goal – is at the core of Kant's moral theory. The latter are called categorical imperatives, and they are to be followed at all …show more content…
After all, most people would not like their children suffering from terrible diseases. But unless everyone is immune from a disease as contagious as measles, just one person contracting it can set off a chain reaction that leads to many others catching it. Being given a choice between a world in which everyone is immune against bad diseases such as measles and mumps as children – thus preventing them from ever contracting these terrible illnesses, and a world in which children are not vaccinated against such diseases – thus putting everyone in danger of contracting them, every person would choose the first
Immanuel Kant’s Categorical Imperative The distinction between two kinds of imperatives – those that provide instruction for attaining a specific goal and those that apply regardless of one's goal – is at the core of Kant's moral theory. The latter are called categorical imperatives, and they are to be followed at all …show more content…
After all, most people would not like their children suffering from terrible diseases. But unless everyone is immune from a disease as contagious as measles, just one person contracting it can set off a chain reaction that leads to many others catching it. Being given a choice between a world in which everyone is immune against bad diseases such as measles and mumps as children – thus preventing them from ever contracting these terrible illnesses, and a world in which children are not vaccinated against such diseases – thus putting everyone in danger of contracting them, every person would choose the first