Introductions / Conclusions Write an introduction to the following question referencing any points you think you would use in the essay: How effective is Deontological Ethics at moral decision making?

Introductions / Conclusions Is Kantian Deontology a good basis on which to make moral decisions? An introduction should make it explicitly clear what you are going to argue in an essay and how you are going to argue it. IT SHOULD NOT BE VAGUE. The mark-scheme asks for clear intent – here is the time to show it: This essay will argue that whilst Kantian Deontology has reasons for which it could be considered a “good” basis on which to make moral decisions, it is flawed in the application of the categorical imperative and the problem of duties clashing. Despite there being some attempt to respond to these issues, it is the authors opinion that there has been no real way of overcoming the problems. This essay will therefore conclude that Kantian Ethics is not a good basis on which to make moral decisions.

Introductions / Conclusions How effective is Deontological Ethics at moral decision making? Swap whiteboards with the person next to you. Check to see if they have included the following: Clear understanding of what is being asked – have they referenced the question somewhere in their introduction. Clear intent – is it clear what they will be arguing? Clear method – is it clear what ideas they will be using to support their argument? Have they done any of the following: Vagueness – Just mentioned arguments without it being clear how they will fit into the essay? Pointless facts – Have they included a lot of random information about the theory without stating why it’s important? Indecisiveness – Have they left it open as to where the essay will be going?

Introductions / Conclusions Write a conclusion to the following question referencing any points you think you would have used in the essay: Is the categorical imperative useful for making moral decisions?

Introductions / Conclusions Is Kantian Deontology a good basis on which to make moral decisions? Similar to your introduction – a conclusion should NOT BE VAGUE. It should be clear, given what you have covered what your conclusion will say and there should be no surprise for the reader involved. You should avoid introducing any new information and instead use it as a final, succinct way of answering the question. To conclude, Kantian Deontology has some strengths when it comes to making moral decisions. It makes a sharp distinction between duty and desire so people don’t get the two mistakenly intertwined. It also accounts for motive and intentions in moral decision making. Unfortunately, the theory also faces some damning criticisms such as the issues with practical application which is struggles to overcome. Also, there is the issue of clashing/conflicting duties which is not combatted adequately by W.D Ross, who undermines the role of rationality in Kantian Ethics. Therefore despite it’s strengths, Kantian Deontology is not a good basis on which to make moral decisions.

Introductions / Conclusions Is the categorical imperative useful for making moral decisions? Swap whiteboards with the person next to you. Check to see if they have included the following: Answered the question – Does their conclusion contain a clear answer to the question? Clear intent – Have they explained how they came to this conclusion? Clear method – If they’ve mentioned an opposing view have they made it clear why they’ve shown it’s not correct? Have they done any of the following: Vagueness – Have they just listed arguments / points they’ve covered? New Information – Have they started to explain an argument as if they’d not mentioned it before? Indecisiveness – Have they not given a clear opinion on where they fall in relation to the question?

Mini-Test Answer the following questions on paper as best you can, you have 15 minutes: What is a hypothetical imperative? (3 marks) What is the second formulation of the categorical imperative? (3 marks) Explain how we should use the first formulation of the categorical imperative to make moral decisions (5 marks) Explain the difference between acting in accordance with duty and acting out of duty according to Kant (5 marks)

Answer the following questions on paper as best you can, you have 15 minutes: What is a hypothetical imperative? (3 marks) What is the second formulation of the categorical imperative? (3 marks) Explain how we should use the first formulation of the categorical imperative to make moral decisions (5 marks) Explain the difference between acting in accordance with duty and acting out of duty according to Kant (5 marks)

Task selector (choose wisely!) If anything in your notes doesn’t make sense, or you’re missing anything – now’s your chance to ask me! If you can’t remember the key points: Go through the handout and take notes on the key points. Create your own flashcards of key points. Learn them, then test yourself. With a partner, use your notes to quiz each other. Jot down on your whiteboard anything you get wrong, then look it up and learn it If you can remember the key points, but not the evaluative stuff: Create a diagram to show how the whole theory fits together. Read through your notes on the strengths and weaknesses and make a big table of them How effective is deontology as a way of making moral decisions? Use your notes to help you write a conclusion, considering arguments on both sides If you can remember everything: Create an A3 mindmap of everything we’ve done on Kant: key points, details and evaluation From memory, create a table of Kant’s strengths and weaknesses, then add responses / evaluation. Write the transcript of a debate between Kant and an opponent, discussing how effective his theory is for making moral decisions If you’ve done all this, do the same tasks for utilitarianism!