Need help with these 2 Questions and I also need to make a summary.
1.Why do I say that the statement "all robins' eggs are blue" is only probable and not certain knowledge?
2.Should one's motives count more than the results of one's actions?
Please see atttachment. Thank you!
In this solution, I will write it in the form of a letter of advice as there are many ways we could answer the 2 questions you posited above. However, since the attachment you have provided is discussing deontological ethics and Kant's epistemology, we will centre our attention to these subjects and explain questions 1 and 2 based on the tenets of philosophy presented. I am sure that by now you know what ethics is, put simply it is that branch of philosophy focused on exploring what is right and wrong. Put simply, ethics is the 'philosophy of morals' and it addresses questions of morality. I could go into discussing it's varied branches (like meta-ethics, for example) but in this case, I believe that we need to make things simple discussion-wise as it is difficult enough sometimes to remember theorists, philosophers and their concepts. But don't worry, it is not that difficult once you get your bearings and learn to sort viewpoints. Don't let the rather complicated-sounding terminologies daunt you. If ethics is the philosophy of morals, then it critically explores the right and wrong of human action, reaction and thought. Now, on to your questions above. The first one is based on the passage regarding Kant's epistemology - that system by which Kant 'makes sense' of reality as ...
The solution explains ethical concepts in relation to management application - probable and certain knowledge as well as the impact and weight of motives vs. actual results. Using Kantianism, utilitarianism as well as concepts of meta-ethics and knowledge formation, the original problems (see posting) are explored and made easier to understand. A word version is attached for easy printing.