M2 (Avise)

About three years ago, I was at work and noticed something moving in the parking lot. I went outside to take a closer look and it was a dog. This dog looked awful, it had one dread lock of hair and fleas all over its skin. The dog also was very skinny and 90% of her hair was missing. The poor dog looked like it had been on the streets for a few days. I brought the dog inside my office and started feeding her cheese, she acted like she hadn’t been fed in a long time. After giving her some food, I took her to the vet across the street and asked them if one of their dogs had gotten loose. The vet said that wasn’t their dog, but that dog didn’t look good and had been abused. They said she was very malnourished but they would treat the dog and take care of her. I donated 40 dollars and left. Later that day I went back to the vet to check on the dog and they had said a husband and wife came into the vet asking if they had seen a little tan shih zu dog. The vet had said no to this couple even though they knew the dog they were talking about was the one I brought in earlier that day. The vet didn’t do this to be mean, they did this because this dog was a puppy mill dog and it was being treated very poorly at the house of its old owner based on the condition this dog was in. The vet asked me if I would be willing to give the dog a better home and I said I would think about it. After thinking it over that night, I came to the conclusion that she needed a good home and I was going to give her it. I think this is an example of utilitarianism because I chose to save the dog rather then have it go to a shelter, where it most likely would not have been adopted because it was an older dog. In chapter two the book stated ” act utilitarianism, states that we must ask ourselves what the consequences of a particular act in particular situation will be for all those affected. If its consequences bring more net good than those of any alternative course of action, then this action is the right one and the one we should preform (Shaw 51).” I think adopting the dog caused the most amount of net happiness. The vet was happy this dog had a home, the dog was grateful to be loved and cared for, and I was happy I was able to save her life. The original owners may not have been happy that they were unable to find their dog, but it was to the benefit of everyone else that I took ownership of the dog.

Below is a picture of my dog who I named Tibby. The first picture is her about a month after adopting her. The other photo is one that i took of her this evening.


Can it ever be unjust to accumulate wealth?

The video I presented provides information on the utilitarian view. According to our book Mill believed that justice concerns certain rules and rights that are vitally important for human well-being and that the maximization of happiness ultimately determines what is just and unjust. The video illustrates this really well 4:45 in by explaining three core elements of Mill’s Utilitarianism, the information provided also compliments the information in our textbook. When it come to accumulating wealth in can only be seen as unjust if it is done through unjust means such as robbing a bank. This would be taking away from the idea of promoting social well being or happiness. If you approached the above question through the libertarian approach the overall concern for promoting   social well being wouldn’t be held in high regards if any at all. The only restriction for accumulating wealth through the libertarian approach is that one cannot restricts or interfere with anyone else’s liberties. Aside from that one restriction anyone can accumulate as much wealth as they desire without any person, group, or government disturbing you. Nozick’s theory has a similar comparison to being the neutral country of Switzerland in WW2. According to Nozick’s one could accumulate wealth with the limitations being that it would have to be entitled to you earns and have earned them without violating other people’s rights.

M3 (Juan Sebastian)

Is it right for the government give a huge bail out to banks to keep them in business? I think is not right to do that, why do the banks deserve our money if they make the risk choices and if things wouldn’t work out, they should’ve lost their own money not ours. but like …