Skip to Content

What is the survival lottery quizlet?

The Survival Lottery is a thought experiment in Ethics created by philosopher John Harris in his 1971 book The Survival Lottery. In the experiment, individuals are required to race for their lives – through random drawing, some are required to die in order to save the lives of others.

The concept of the Survival Lottery states that in a population of people with a fixed level of resources, it is more ethical to choose whom to save through chance than through personal criteria. In order to preserve the health of the population as a whole, members of the population are subjected to a lottery to determine who should survive and who should die.

The underlying idea is that by randomly selecting a population to die, a person’s right to life as an individual is more respected than if a person were to be positively singled out and sacrificed for the greater good.

The concept has led to much discussion in ethical debates, arguing for and against the Survival Lottery concept. It is sometimes used as a thought exercise in college courses such as philosophy and bioethics.

How does Harris respond to the third parties proposal which states that we should only sacrifice those who are already sick and dying?

Harris responds to the third parties proposal by rejecting it as unethical and untenable. He argues that such an approach would be immoral and by sacrificing those who are already sick and dying, we would be creating a situation in which suffering becomes a threshold for sacrifice.

Harris points out that by accepting the ill and the dying as those who must suffer most, we would be creating a dangerous and unacceptable precedent of viewing those with pre-existing conditions as disposable.

He explains that intentionally inflicting suffering in order to benefit other people should never be considered a legitimate option and doing so would be in direct conflict with our moral principles.

Finally, Harris argues that this proposal does not offer a fair balance between the interests of those who are ill and those who are healthy, and instead implies that those who are facing sickness are somehow less valuable than others.

Is the lottery ethical?

The ethicality of the lottery is a debatable topic. Advocates of the lottery argue that it generates funds for public programs and services and provides an opportunity for low-income citizens to become financially independent.

On the other hand, opponents believe that the lottery encourages gambling, exploiting vulnerable individuals and potentially causing financial hardship.

The lottery has been around for centuries and is still operating in many countries today. However, its ethicality can depend on the regulations and restrictions that are in place in the jurisdiction and the social context.

For example, in places with limited access to employment, people might appreciate the chance to win large sums of money and the lottery might provide a charity function so the proceeds can be given to the community.

In terms of considerating the ethicality of the lottery, it is important to evaluate the regulation and how it is implemented. Comprehensive regulation should be in place to prevent fraud, protect vulnerable persons and minors, and to ensure that the proceeds of the lottery are directed back to the citizens or public services.

It is also crucial to examine the impact of gambling addiction and how to prevent it. There should be measures in place to ensure that people are educating themselves on responsible gaming.

Ultimately, the ethicality of the lottery depends largely on its rationale, the regulation it is subject to, and the social context surrounding it. In order to minimise any potential harm, it is important that the lottery operates in an ethical and responsible manner, with enforcement of strong regulations and restrictions.

How the lottery is an example of a utilitarian monster?

The lottery can be seen as an example of a utilitarian monster, as it represents a trade-off between the potential benefit of winning large sums of money and the potential risk of losing large sums of money.

From a utilitarian perspective, it is considered a monster because it serves no purpose other than to generate revenue for the state and create the illusion of an opportunity to improve one’s life. The lottery manipulates and exploits people’s desire for wealth, preying upon the most vulnerable among us.

The lottery also encourages irrational behavior by making it all too easy to throw money away in pursuit of a chance at something greater.

Furthermore, the lottery does not necessarily benefit those who are most in need. Eleven states do not allow for the lottery to allocate funds specifically to targeted social programs, so there is no guarantee that those funds will actually reach those most in need.

Furthermore, data suggests that those who play the lottery are generally poorer people looking to escape poverty, but they are often just spending money they can ill afford to, setting them up for deeper financial trouble.

Overall, the lottery is an example of a utilitarian monster because it manipulates people for its own financial gain and offers no real long-term solution to their financial situation.

Is Derek Parfit a utilitarian?

No, Derek Parfit is not a utilitarian. Though he was heavily influenced by utilitarianism, he rejected traditional utilitarianism in favor of his own theory of morality known as “Reasons Responsiveness”.

This theory of morality is based on the idea that the moral worth of an action or decision should be based on the reason for which it was chosen. It rejects traditional utilitarianism’s focus on maximizing utility or happiness for all people, asserting instead that some individual instances of utility may be sacrificed in certain circumstances in order to bring about a higher overall value.

Parfit has instead embraced a form of consequentialism based on reasons-responsiveness, which views the moral worth of an action based on the reasons which it is chosen and the results of that action.

He also argues that rights and obligations are more important moral considerations than utilitarian calculation.

Is Kai Nielsen a utilitarian?

Yes, Kai Nielsen is a utilitarian. Utilitarianism is a moral theory developed in the 18th century by Jeremy Bentham and later expanded upon by John Stuart Mill. It states that the right action is the one that produces the greatest balance of pleasure over pain, or brings about the greatest good for the greatest number of people.

Nielsen is a proponent of rule utilitarianism, which states that the rules, laws, or principles that govern a society should be those that provide the greatest balance of pleasure over pain for the members of that society.

He argues for the principle of utilitarianism to be applied to politics, economics, and civil ethics. Specifically, Nielsen believes that economic systems should be assessed based on the total pleasure they provide, the opportunity they offer for personal autonomy, and the extent to which they protect life and prevent suffering.

As a utilitarian, he also believes in the moral status of animals, further arguing that morality should provide everyone, including animals, with equal consideration and respect.

What is utilitarian theory example?

Utilitarian theory is a consequentialist ethical theory that states that the most ethical choice is the one that produces the most positive outcome, or the greatest amount of good, for the most amount of people.

This theory places emphasis on the fact that actions should be judged by the effects they produce. A simple example of utilitarian theory in action is a policy that reduces the cost of public transportation.

This policy helps increase access to transportation, allowing more people to commute to work, school, etc. Additionally, this policy has a positive environmental impact as it reduces the number of cars on the road.

This makes fewer emissions, helping to reduce the effects of climate change. Utilitarian theory states that this policy is the most ethical choice because it produces the greatest good for the most amount of people.

Why did tessie get stoned in the lottery?

Tessie was a participant in the Annual Village Lottery, which was a tradition in the small village of which she was a part. It was a dark, superstitious ritual, which involved the whole village gathering and performing a lottery by drawing stones from a black box.

The winner was then subjected to a terrible fate – being “stoned” – as each person in the village threw a stone at them. It was believed that this would appease the gods and bring luck to the village, as they did not wish to anger them by sparing the victim.

For Tessie, this meant her participation in the lottery brought her ultimate misfortune as she was chosen and thrown stones at until she was killed.

What is ironic about the story the lottery?

The story The Lottery is ironic because although it is presented as an average small-town event, the tradition of stoning a member of the community to death is the outcome of the lottery. The idea that something that is supposedly full of excitement, merriment and joy leads to the death of a member of the town is ironic.

There is a further irony in that the villagers seem to accept this as a necessary means of ensuring prosperity. Despite the attempts of Mrs. Adams and others to question the tradition, nobody shows any moral outrage at the idea of taking a life this way, not even the victim’s husband.

The final irony is that the reader is aware of the consequences of the lottery whereas the townspeople are not. They seem to accept the result of the lottery as if it is completely unavoidable.

What does the black box symbolize?

The black box has become a powerful symbol of many different things over the years. In aviation, it is the physical flight recorders or “black boxes” that are found on aircraft and are used to record data relevant to investigating an aircraft accident.

In this setting, the black box is symbolic of safety and protection as it helps aviation officials discover what happened and prevent future aircraft accidents.

In business, the black box has become a popular metaphor for a process or system that is mysterious, obscure, or unintelligible—namely, a system (either natural or man-made) whose methods and inner workings are complex and unknown.

In this sense, the black box indicates something that could be either a great benefit or a great risk to people dependent on the knowledge and wisdom of the entity controlling it. It symbolizes a lack of transparency in the way something works—and consequently, a lack of trust on part of the stakeholders.

In general, the black box can be seen as a representation of knowledge and wisdom that are unexpressed but implied. It is a reminder that we don’t always have access to the full workings of something or the complete picture.

The black box can also be thought of as a symbol of hidden secrets, of uncertainty and mystery. It can signal a sense of the unknown and can make us feel uneasy or unsettled.

Is the story The Lottery morally justified?

No, the story The Lottery is not morally justified. The story illustrates a deeply disturbing, far-reaching and seemingly arbitrary tradition that ends in an innocent person’s death. This act is seen as the most unspeakable and merciless form of oppression in the human race, and it is not morally justifiable.

The story emphasizes the idea that tradition and obedience can sometimes create an oppressive environment, where death is not only accepted, but also blindly obligated. It suggests that those in power can use tradition and obedience to manipulate and control people, and the end result is often horrifying.

The Lottery is ultimately a cautionary tale, warning against blind obedience, the power of tradition, and the dangers of blindly following authority.

What is utilitarianism in ethics?

Utilitarianism is an ethical system which views the notion of what is “good” or “right” as related to one’s capacity to maximize overall utility (or “net benefit”) for the greatest number of people. As such, utilitarian ethics focuses on the consequences of our actions rather than the inherent nature of an action.

Prominent British philosopher Jeremy Bentham is credited with first introducing the utilitarian concept with his publication entitled simply An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation.

The character of utility, Bentham argued, would ultimately determine whether a particular action was right or wrong. He coined the phrase “the greatest good for the greatest number” to express this notion, and soon after the term “utilitarianism” was born.

Utilitarianism emphasizes the notion that an action can only be deemed “ethical” or “moral” if it results in a higher degree of net benefit for the majority of people affected as a result of the action.

The idea is to determine the action with the greatest overall net benefit for people. Cases under this ethical system are judged based on the immediate and long-term consequences of an action, rather than on any pre-conceived notions of morality that an action may be associated with.

While utilitarianism is often interpreted as a simple “cost-benefit” analysis of an action, it can be more accurately thought of as an action with the goal of achieving the greatest overall good for the greatest number of people.

As such, it is a highly influential ethical framework with broad relevance across a diverse range of disciplines such as economics, politics, and law.

What criticism is The Lottery?

The Lottery by Shirley Jackson is a story that has been widely discussed, analyzed, and critiqued since it was first published in 1948. The story is often seen as a criticism of tradition and rituals, as well as society’s willingness to blindly adhere to traditions regardless of their troubling implications.

The Lottery can be seen as a commentary on the dangers of blindly following tradition, as the village inhabitants persist in carrying out an annual lottery in which a member of the village is stoned to death despite the harm it causes to its participants.

The protagonist Mrs. Hutchinson is portrayed as a typical housewife who is unaware of the sinister implications of the lottery until it is too late. Her husband is steeped in the tradition of blindly following the lottery, which is symbolic of the way people can naively follow traditions without reflection or questioning.

Critics have also argued that the lottery is a metaphor for the way humans succumb to mob mentality, often following oppressive and destructive traditions without question or fear. It could also be seen as a comment on the dangers of blindly holding onto traditions even as ideas and customs evolve.

The Lottery has aroused a lot of debate about the implications of human nature and the importance of questioning tradition and society’s customs. It has remained popular across generations and has been interpreted by critics in many different ways.

Why are people afraid of change in town The Lottery?

People are afraid of change in the town of The Lottery because their entire way of life has centered around following the same lottery tradition for centuries. The lottery has become a source of comfort, security, and familiarity for them, and the idea of change is daunting and frightening.

On top of this, the punishment for disobeying the tradition is severe, so there is a real fear of the repercussions if someone should go against the grain. Additionally, the townspeople are so entrenched in their traditions that they are likely unable to conceive of any alternate way of life, so for them, any change seems far too risky and dangerous.