Utilitarianism & Kantianism in Boomerang Movie by Ellia Kazan Discussion This paper should be 2-3 pages. All references should be properly documented. Usin

Utilitarianism & Kantianism in Boomerang Movie by Ellia Kazan Discussion This paper should be 2-3 pages. All references should be properly documented. Using MLA guidelines, properly document any references or ideas that are not your own. WARRNING: DO NOT USE WIKIPEDIA IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM. WIKIPEDIA IS NOT A LEGITIMATE SOURCE. ANY USE OF WIKIPEDIA WILL RESULT IN A GRADE OF ZERO. USE ONLY TRUE PROFESSIONAL SOURCES. The purpose of this paper is for you to intellectually explore a topic, issue, problem, or figure relevant to our course material. The readings from our course should be the primary “source” that you utilize. Practice standards of good writing. Have a clear thesis. Devise evidence for your thesis. Make a sound, logically constructed argument. Proofread vigorously. Correct English grammar is expected.

Topics: choose one

(1) What theory of the meaning of life, as presented in our text (chapter 10), do you find most compelling. Why? (Hint: Think about any of the figures discussed, Tolstoy, Stace, Russell, Camus, Nagel, as well as the film Amelie (2001) by Jean-Pierre Jeunet.)

(2) After Reading chapter 9, consider the film Boomerang!, (1947) by Elia Kazan. How does this film argue in favor of Kantianism and radically against Utilitarianism? Consider the readings in our text. Use your own mind to formulate a response. (Hints: Think about Kant’s view of persons and the respect that we owe them as members of the moral community. Think of the accused man and the district attorney’s decision to defend him. What possible consequences might the district attorney face by defending the innocence of the accused? Why would Kant recommend such a defense? Why would Utilitarian recommend against such a defense.)

(3) After reading chapter 8, consider the film Detour (1945) by Edgar Ulmer. Is Al Roberts a victim of “moral luck” (–as described in chapter 8 of our text–)? Are the arguments for moral luck strong or weak? Is there any sense in which Moral Luck might be legitimate? How is it a threat to ethical theorizing in general? (Hint: Think about the notion of moral responsibility and the conditions that are typically required for full responsibility. Think of Al’s situation. How much is he to “blame” for his predicament?)