Argumentation English Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Argumentation English - Essay Example It uses theoretical justifications, such as Kant’s Fundamentals of Metaphysics, along with historical examples, such as the failings of intellectuals in history to live up to their high-minded ideals, to demonstrate that every person must be responsible for fighting evil, and that intellectuals are not better equipped to lead than others. Doing what is morally right is one of the things humans of any ilk concern themselves with most. People want to do the right thing in raising their children, want to be good citizens of their country and their world; politicians want to create fair political systems, and philosophers want to seek out the idea of an objective right, to make being a good human being as clear and simple as possible. There are many important ways of dealing with the question of what is morally right to do, and many questions that must be asked. ... ind of question than other people, which could lead people to believe that they would be better equipped to perform leadership tasks, which could make the whole process of moral ambiguity simpler. A person should be expected to fight against evil wherever they see it, because the consequences if people do not function this way are dire, and intellectuals should not lead because of their ability to understand good and evil, because they do not necessarily have the propensity to lead better than other people. Some would argue that it is completely unfair to expect people to fight evil even when loved ones could suffer because of their fight. They would argue that it is up to heroes to fight against all odds, and against threats to themselves and others, but that this simply cannot be expected of normal human beings – their love for kith and kin can (or even should) overshadow their desire to fight evil (Zimbardo, 2007). They believe this because it is comforting and simple; figh ting evil is hard, and a lot of us want to believe a loved one would do evil to save us, because of our self-centred outlook on the world. This, however, is a fundamentally flawed way of viewing the world. Part of the problem is that, as Kant’s fundamental’s of metaphysics touches on – any moral code must be universal, it cannot apply to some and not to others (Kant 1845). Furthermore, the imagined effects of a world in which this philosophy is followed shows that the consequences could be dire. Finally, this kind of thinking can create a diffusion of responsibility, the assumption that someone else will fix a problem, which can and does lead to real world tragedies. One of the biggest problems with this kind of thinking is that it cannot be a universally applicable moral code. A moral