Miller, Kant, and Aristotle on fostering relationship between Great grandpa and his grandson Essay

Making moral decisions put up be difficult roundtimes and it is non easy to reach a certain conclusion. Philosophical decisions ar much to a big(p)er extent complex and rent time to evlaute decisions in life. Rather, the abstract thought behind a moral decision is much more intricate, requiring a medley of sources to arrive at a decision. Take, for example, a situation in which a start out has to decide whether or not to comfort a race between his three year onetime(a) password and his sons dying capital grand render.Is the son having a alliance with his large grandfather worth risking the pain his son would have to endure delinquent to his great grandfathers death? Or, would the pain be likewise scarring and ruin the life of such a boyish mind? To supporter resolve his dilemma, the father capability turn to the philosophical giants manufacturing plant, Kant, and Aristotle. mill would throw to foster the alliance. However, to arrive at this decision, certain as sumptions were made. Mill would advise to foster the relationship if the great grandfather would live a couple more years.Mills basis for moral decision making rests on whether the sum of either delectations outweighs the sum of all pains. Thus, in order for Mill to agree to foster the relationship, it must be stated that the relationship between the great grandfather and the son is a cheeseparing healthy relationship and that the death does not cause any permanent or digest psychological damage on neither the son, nor the father, nor the great grandfather. After all, Mills theory demands that one take into account the sum of all the pleasures and all the pains.Also, the son might also gain the power to handwriting with death with this relationship. Mill would then consider good results from this relationship. Therefore, if everyone receives more pleasure from the relationship between the great grandfather and the son than pain (even later on death) then Mill would advise to f oster the relationship. Kant, on the other hand, discards the imprint of consequences. Kants advice in this situation is harder to decipher because his theory is based on internalization and motivation.Kant would agree to foster the relationship if the fathers motivation for the relationship is purely the relationship in itself. In other words, it requires that the father be treating the great grandfather as an end rather than as a means. If the father wants to foster the relationship merely because he feels it might result in a larger endowment for his son, then Kant would no longer advice fosterage the relationship. Furthermore, Kant might support fostering a relationship if the fathers decision to not foster a relationship was to avoid the pain of death.The inverse is also true. Kant might advice asking the great grandfather (not the three year old son, for he is too young to reason) whether he would like a relationship with his great grandson. Then, the father would be treat ing him as an end, not as a means. It is also important to take into consideration whether it is a fathers duty to foster a relationship between a great grandfather and his son. Kants advice that holds assuming that both the great grandfather and son are more often than not good and the relationship that would form between them is also good.In summation, Kants theory bases itself on internal motivation. As he himself stated, oftentimes, the layers are too difficult to peel to arrive at the true motivation. Aristotle would advise fostering some relationship with the father (this would be the virtuous mean). Aristotle would argue that not fostering a relationship and fostering too much of a relationship would be two extremes. Aristotle advises that one must find a mean in between the two extremes and that is the right relationship. Moreover, Aristotle believes that morality can be learned through observation.Therefore, a three year old child would have much to gain from the experien ce of an 84 year-old great grandfather. This relationship might help the son reach his human purpose, or excellence. Once again, Aristotle would only advise any relationship if the relationship is good and both the great grandfather and the son enjoy it. Perhaps a better approach to arriving at a decision requires a gang of both Kants and Aristotles philosophy. The decision continues to run on the assumption, of course, that both the great grandfather and the son are good people and that a good and healthy relationship would thus form.The decision to foster a relationship must first be decided based on the motivation. In other words, a relationship should only be fostered if the father wants a relationship only because of the relationship and not as a means of achieving a greater good. However, fostering too much of a relationship might force unnecessary pains. Thus, a mean of some relationship should be followed. For example, a relationship of one hour on the weekends might be ben eficial. For, once a relationship would form, it would not be strong enough to completely devastate any party involved.