Human Rights
Please follow instructions!! I have included the book in the attachment.
You are expected to present a clear statement of your position in the thesis and defend your position with clear, logical arguments and thoughtful analysis. You may include arguments for your position, or against objections to it. Opinions are plentiful. Everyone has opinions. It is never enough in philosophy just to have an opinion about an issue. What is important is supporting your point of view with convincing arguments – that is formulating judgements.
In this assignment, worth 20% of your final grade, you are asked to write a 1375 word essay analyzing the issue of human rights in relation to safe water access from an – ethical or moral theory perspective.
The purpose of this assignment is to give you an opportunity to further explore – ethical or moral theory and develop your own position on this issue by examining how one of the four principal moral theories—utilitarianism, deontology, virtue ethics, or the ethics of care—may be best able to address these questions about human rights to access to safe water:
On what basis, if any, may human beings demand water from others? Is demanding water from others the same as having a right to water? Do human beings have a right to take water by force if necessary?
Before you start writing your essay, a helpful way to begin defining your personal position is to think first about the spontaneous perceptions and opinions that come to mind when you consider the issue of access to safe water. Reflect on your point of view and examine your reasons for holding it: Are those reasons strong? How can you express them in a persuasive way? How might someone else criticize your position? Next, decide which of the four moral theories you think can best address these questions in an ethical way.
In your essay, you are expected to provide a summary of the theory you selected, as well as explain why and how that theory can best address these questions in order to work out a philosophical argument in support of your position on the safe water access issue
Required Readings
Wilfrid Waluchow, The Dimensions of Ethics: Chapter 1, Chapter 2, “The Language of Rights” (pp. 42–58), and Chapter 3.
The PLoS Medicine Editors. “Clean Water Should Be Recognized as a Human Right.”
Wilfrid Waluchow, The Dimensions of Ethics: Chapter 2: “Some Basics” (pp. 31–37); Chapter 6: “Utilitarianism;” Chapter 7: “The Deontological Ethics of Immanuel Kant;” Chapter 9: “The Virtue Ethics of Aristotle;” and Chapter 10: “Feminist Ethics.”
In your assignments, you are expected to refer to two credible source in addition to relevant materials in your course texts and unit commentaries. We recommend that you consult these Encyclopedias of Philosophy for information on the relevant topic and/or philosopher for each assignment. Please note that the topic entries in these encyclopedias usually provide a bibliography of recent articles and books on each topic or philosopher.
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy at: http://www.iep.utm.edu/
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy at: http://plato.stanford.edu/
2. Video Viewing
View the UN Video Clip: “Water and Sanitation: A Human Right”.
Utilitarianism is a moral theory that holds that the best action is the one that maximizes overall happiness or pleasure and minimizes overall suffering or pain. Under this theory, the basis for demanding water from others would be the potential for increased overall happiness or pleasure for those making the demand, as well as the potential for decreased overall suffering or pain for those who are able to access safe water as a result of the demand.
However, it is important to consider the potential consequences of demanding water from others, as well as the potential costs and benefits to all parties involved. For example, if demanding water from others resulted in negative consequences for those who are being asked to provide the water, such as financial harm or physical danger, then it may not be justified according to utilitarianism.
In terms of whether demanding water from others is the same as having a right to water, this is a more complex question. Some philosophers argue that rights are inherent to all human beings and cannot be taken away, while others argue that rights are a social construct that can vary depending on cultural and historical context.
Regardless of whether we view rights as inherent or as a social construct, it is clear that access to safe water is a fundamental human need and is necessary for human survival and well-being. As such, it could be argued that all human beings have a right to water, regardless of whether they are able to demand it from others.
In terms of taking water by force, this is a more extreme action and would likely only be justified in situations where there is no other way to access safe water and where the potential benefits of doing so outweigh the potential costs and negative consequences. It is important to consider the potential harm that could be caused to others as a result of taking water by force, as well as the potential long-term consequences of such an action.
