Kant differentiates between two types of judgements, those being
Empiricism and Rationalism. Rationalism or analytic judgement depends
wholly on the Law of Contradiction and a priori knowledge. “It expresses
nothing in the predicate but what has been already actually thought in the
concept of the subject, though not so distinctly or with the same (full)
consciousness.” (Fieser & Lillegard, 2005, p. 351) Empiricism or synthetic
judgement which “require a different Principle from the Law of
Contradiction, are made up of both empirical (a posteriori) known through
visual experience… and mathematical (a priori)…they are not empirical yet
some do provide genuine information. (Fieser & Lillegard, 2005, p. 353)
Kant felt the two could be …show more content…
Before the moral or ethical argument of their return can
be discussed, it is important to understand the parties involved and the
rational driving their decision to place themselves in a dangerous situation.
Dr. Brantly attended Abilene Christian University, where he earned
his theologian degree in 2003. Earning his medical degree from Indiana
University School of Medicine in 2009. Brantly and his wife Amber served
as medical missionaries in Monrovia, Liberia, with World Medical Mission,
the medical arm of Samaritan’s Purse. Brantly missionary work was driven
by his faith in God and a desire to make a difference. "He intended to be a
missionary before he became a doctor," friend Kent Smith, an elder at
Southside Church of Christ in Fort Worth, Texas, told CNN. "Eventually, he
decided medical mission is what he wanted to do." (Carter & Hanna, 2014)
He and Amber were together during the mission trip when he became
infected, his wife was spared the disease, and returned to be with her
husband while he recovered
Nancy Writebol and her husband David were in Monrovia, Liberia
when she became infected with the Ebola virus. The Writebol’s had …show more content…
499) When the decision was made to bring back those
Americans affected and infected by Ebola it was based of the law of nature.
This Law speaks to the need of rational consistence. That action preformed
for one, if deemed moral thru rational consideration, must then be
performed for everyone regardless of one’s own personally held beliefs. One
could argue Ebola spreads easier due to the limited resources of the poor
nations. The epidemic could be blamed on cultural differences in the care
and consideration of bodily fluids. The Law of Nature dictates universal
respect of life and an adherence to actions that improve its quality.
Either of these conclusions could be disputed or condemned with the
slight adjustment of one’s moral or ethical lens. In the case of the formula
of End itself, one could argue Dr. Brantly and Mrs. Whitely may not have
sought accolades through national or international sources, they may have
sought them from the church clergy or from God. Another could argue the
good of all would be better served in safeguarding American lives by not
ETHICS PAPER
8
bringing the virus to our shores voluntarily. Furthermore Dr. Brantly
Empiricism and Rationalism. Rationalism or analytic judgement depends
wholly on the Law of Contradiction and a priori knowledge. “It expresses
nothing in the predicate but what has been already actually thought in the
concept of the subject, though not so distinctly or with the same (full)
consciousness.” (Fieser & Lillegard, 2005, p. 351) Empiricism or synthetic
judgement which “require a different Principle from the Law of
Contradiction, are made up of both empirical (a posteriori) known through
visual experience… and mathematical (a priori)…they are not empirical yet
some do provide genuine information. (Fieser & Lillegard, 2005, p. 353)
Kant felt the two could be …show more content…
Before the moral or ethical argument of their return can
be discussed, it is important to understand the parties involved and the
rational driving their decision to place themselves in a dangerous situation.
Dr. Brantly attended Abilene Christian University, where he earned
his theologian degree in 2003. Earning his medical degree from Indiana
University School of Medicine in 2009. Brantly and his wife Amber served
as medical missionaries in Monrovia, Liberia, with World Medical Mission,
the medical arm of Samaritan’s Purse. Brantly missionary work was driven
by his faith in God and a desire to make a difference. "He intended to be a
missionary before he became a doctor," friend Kent Smith, an elder at
Southside Church of Christ in Fort Worth, Texas, told CNN. "Eventually, he
decided medical mission is what he wanted to do." (Carter & Hanna, 2014)
He and Amber were together during the mission trip when he became
infected, his wife was spared the disease, and returned to be with her
husband while he recovered
Nancy Writebol and her husband David were in Monrovia, Liberia
when she became infected with the Ebola virus. The Writebol’s had …show more content…
499) When the decision was made to bring back those
Americans affected and infected by Ebola it was based of the law of nature.
This Law speaks to the need of rational consistence. That action preformed
for one, if deemed moral thru rational consideration, must then be
performed for everyone regardless of one’s own personally held beliefs. One
could argue Ebola spreads easier due to the limited resources of the poor
nations. The epidemic could be blamed on cultural differences in the care
and consideration of bodily fluids. The Law of Nature dictates universal
respect of life and an adherence to actions that improve its quality.
Either of these conclusions could be disputed or condemned with the
slight adjustment of one’s moral or ethical lens. In the case of the formula
of End itself, one could argue Dr. Brantly and Mrs. Whitely may not have
sought accolades through national or international sources, they may have
sought them from the church clergy or from God. Another could argue the
good of all would be better served in safeguarding American lives by not
ETHICS PAPER
8
bringing the virus to our shores voluntarily. Furthermore Dr. Brantly