Question 1: You have the opportunity to lie in order to (presumably) save a life.
You cannot predict the exact outcomes of your decision, of course. Taking a
Kantian stance, do you think that Kant would approve of your decision? Would it
be a moral decision, for Kant? Why? (You should engage with Kant’s categorical
imperative.)
Suggestions: The Kantian perspective: the CI is notoriously rigid in its design, so
on the face of it, Kant would not approve of lying to, presumably, save a life. The
hard part is to justify your answer. You need to engage with the CI (whichever
formulation you find is most appropriate here) and demonstrate in-depth
understanding of how Kant’s CI works. Definitely consider the connection
between moral decisions and consequences. Ask yourself this: where does Kant
stand on the consequences of one’s moral actions? You can give an example if you
wish. But try to think like a philosopher, that is, beyond the surface of such
declarations as “I would 100% lie to save a life.” or “I would never ever lie.”
Question 2: Reconstruct (not copy and paste!) Sartre’s argument stating that
existence comes before essence and explain how this is related to his thesis that
God is of no consequence and we, humans, are abandoned. (Since the topics of
abandonment and freedom are very big topics in existentialism and in Sartre’s
philosophy, in particular, focus on how Sartre argues about it in the text.)
Suggestions: Since this question is based on the text; it’s a matter of
following the text itself and making sure that you understand all the
connections Sartre makes between the human condition and God, and
the human condition and abandonment, respectively. You can talk about
the paper-knife example, or the cogito principle; anything that illustrates
Sartre’s understanding of existence preceding essence. As far as why
humans are abandoned, and how God fits into all this, you can propose
(and justify!) that God, existing or not, has nothing to do with the human
condition. The human condition is one that presupposes responsibility
for the other and this comes with certain sentiments (such as despair, for
example). Explain why that is the case. You can also link abandonment
to Sartre’s notion of freedom.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.