En anglais

Duties, moral limits and competing obligations

Personal & Social Development · Ethics & Philosophy · ages 16-18

Name ______________________ Date ____________

Taking a stranger's wallet for a charity drive treats the owner merely as a means. What explains that objection?
- It gives the charity less money than it could raise
- It gives the charity money it has not earned
- It uses the owner's money without their agreement
What does duty-based ethics ask beyond looking at results alone?
- Whether the act respects moral duty
- Whether the act increases happiness
- Whether the act suits your feelings
For Kant, a good will has moral worth only when its action succeeds.
Circle one: True False
A council can stop a riot either by framing an innocent resident with fabricated evidence or by making an honest public appeal. Both would stop the riot, but framing would also protect more property. Which response fits Kant's moral limit?
- Use the honest public appeal.
- Frame them to protect property.
- Frame them if voters approve.
Someone freely agrees to help with a plan. Does that agreement alone settle every duty-based concern about the plan?
- Yes, because agreement settles all moral concerns
- No, because other moral duties can still apply
- No, because cooperation always uses people as tools
You promised to meet a friend, but someone nearby urgently needs help. How would Ross approach the competing duties?
- Keep the promise despite the emergency
- Judge which duty matters most here
- Follow the easier course of action
What difficulty remains when Ross uses judgment to weigh competing duties?
- People may disagree about which duty is weightiest
- Public votes must decide every conflict
- Every duty must carry exactly the same moral weight
A student says a false promise passes Kant's test because everyone could make one. How would Kant challenge that reasoning?
- The rule passes if most people approve
- The rule passes if its use brings enough total happiness
- Its universal use undermines the trust it needs

Answer key

For grown-ups. Fold this page away before handing over the rest.

Duties, moral limits and competing obligations W1-mt_Mwtr4NwfUE-s1

It uses the owner's money without their agreement · The owner has no say in contributing. The charitable goal does not remove the objection to taking their property without agreement.
Whether the act respects moral duty · Duty-based ethics asks what obligations and moral limits apply. A beneficial result alone does not settle whether an act is permitted.
False · Kant gives good will unconditional worth. Acting from duty does not lose that worth because the intended result is not achieved.
Use the honest public appeal. · Framing the innocent resident uses that person merely to secure a public benefit. Kant's strict limit rules out that means despite the extra property protected. The honest appeal avoids the stated violation.
No, because other moral duties can still apply · Consent respects a person's choice, but other duties can still constrain the plan. Cooperation does not automatically treat someone merely as a means.
Judge which duty matters most here · Ross considers the duties and circumstances. Urgent help can outweigh keeping the promise, while missing the promise can still call for an explanation.
People may disagree about which duty is weightiest · Ross offers an approach to conflicts, but applying it requires judgment. People can disagree about the relevant facts or the weight of the duties.
Its universal use undermines the trust it needs · Kant asks whether the rule can be consistently universalized. False promising relies on trust in promises that its universal use would undermine.