Arguments Based on deontology

Arguments based on a Kantian view over the issue of promise
If I were the one in that scenario, I would act according to my friend’s will. Passing his stash of cash to Laetitia is to do what I had promised. 
It seems that to keeping one’s word is obviously a moral obligation. By keeping my word, I am respecting my friend’s will and this is the best way to mourn my friend. 

Utilitarians might say, no, this is not the right thing to do. While the Courtesan Laetitia is not a decent people and have tons of money, your friend’s daughters and former wife are threatened by death. Therefore it seems that the optimal way is to give the money, or, at least some of money to your friend’s former wife. No one knows that you have ever promised that the money would be given to the courtesan. Thus, your reputation would not be hampered. The society as a whole would benefit in your prudent action—two people would be saved. 

However, if the money is given to the courtesan, it is not a moral action. Firstly, Latitia is an indecent woman, giving the money to her would be a waste since she might buy many luxuries. Secondly, she is rich enough, the satisfaction to her produced by Erskin’s money would be much less than to his former wife’s if the money was given to her. Lastly, since your friend is making a bad decision, if you do not help him to do the right thing, your friend’s and your reputation might decline if you insist giving the money to you’re the prostitute. 

Therefore, the right way is to give the cash to his daughter and former wife. 

I would reply that utility is not the issue I am concerning about. Firstly, is there any substance called “society” who are benefiting from my behavior? There exist no society will a free will enjoying the utility I am producing. The concept is an empty metaphor and what actually exist is every individual. Even there exists such a substance named “society”, why should I produce the so-called utility for it? What I am concerning about is my obligation to fulfill my promise. This is the best way to respect the rule and my friend. Otherwise, I am using my friend’s money without his approval, which is pilferage. Yes, I do show sympathy to the tragic condition his wretched former wife is confronting. But that’s does not justify my pilferage. Assuming the existence the substance called “society” and that my behavior might seem to produce larger amount of social utility does not necessarily means that it is my obligation to give the cash to his former wife. It is possible that other people who are more valuable to the society and more wretched than his former wife is also threatened by death. Therefore, it seems that I should give the money to such persons. However, if we further this inference, it is also possible that using the money in other way would produce much more “social utility”. Thus, I should not use the money until I figure out the so-called best way to use the money. 

  I do feel a great pity to know that my friend’s former wife is threatened by poverty or disease. However, breaking my promise is not the sole solution. I might use my money to save her, or, I might give the money to the courtesan and make effort to persuade her to give some money to his wife. However, am I begging the question? Even his former wife have no other access to survive--I am also poor to provide any help, the courtesan is unwilling to help, and no other is going to help her—I should not break my promise. As a poor one, I have tried my best to help her by trying to persuade the courtesan, I would not feel unease to witness the death of his former wife, though it is tragic. The reason is that, every individual is going to confront the contingency. Some contingencies are irresistible, but some are not. What his wife confront is exactly an irresistible one and morality have to accept it. Lastly, the argument that “if I give the money to the prostitute, my friend’s and my reputation might decline” is also ungrounded. Firstly, it is based on the utilitarian inference that the decision to give the money to the courtesan is wrong. However, on the Kantian ground, this action is morally right. Thus, giving the money to the prostitute would do no harm to my reputation and my friends’ if all of the people agree with Kant. 

  
  51Due网站原创范文除特殊说明外一切图文著作权归51Due所有；未经51Due官方授权谢绝任何用途转载或刊发于媒体。如发生侵犯著作权现象，51Due保留一切法律追诉权。