In this particular assignment, we as a class were presented with a scenario, in which two adults involved in an extramarital affair became witnesses in a murder. The dilemma facing both John and Martha is whether or not to report to the authorities that the suspect they have in custody was not the individual they witnessed committing the murder. Coming forward, however, would uncover their illicit affair and most likely destroy their respective families. In the essay, I will defend what would be Immanuel Kant’s solution to this moral predicament posed by Martha and John’s actions because it contributes the most to living a worthwhile ethical life in this situation, when compared with the other philosophers we’ve discussed this semester. Nevertheless, before this, I will first show how Bentham and Aristotle would resolve the above dilemma.
Jeremy Bentham, the father of Utilitarian Ethics, places great emphasis on the utilitarian goal of maximizing the greatest happiness for the greatest number of individuals. In utilitarianism, pleasure is viewed as an intrinsic good, or the highest level of good one can hope to achieve. To avoid resultant pain at any and all costs is to limit evil itself. With these two principles in mind, without a shadow of a doubt, Bentham
…show more content…
This would mean that John and Martha’s affair would be considered evil by Aristotle, and he would counsel the cheating couple to engage in actions that would lead to them becoming morally good individuals. In order for Martha and John to accomplish this, they would have to act contrary to their character, that being one of an adulterer. One way to do this would be to come clean to their respective families about their affair. Without the secret of the affair hanging over their heads, Aristotle would advise them to inform the police of the important information that they