Using Utilitarianism, answer the following 2 questions. The more detailed you can be in your answer, the better. 1) You are a paramedic. One day you are sent to a car accident where two adults and three small children are seriously injured. On the way, your ambulance passes the scene of another accident, which to your surprise involves your pregnant wife who is seriously injured. You are the only paramedic available for both accident scenes. What would a Utilitarian do, and why? How would your decision change if you were a Rule Utilitarian? /5

2) You are walking with your young child alongside a busy road. Your child sees a puppy across the street and runs into traffic toward the puppy. Luckily, you’re able to grab your child’s arm and pull them safely back onto the sidewalk. You’re upset with your child, so you decide to spank and discipline them. Would a utilitarian say it is ethical to spank the child? Why or why not? How would your decision change if you were a Rule Utilitarian?

Using Utilitarianism

1. A Utilitarian would attend to both accidents, perhaps, starting from the accident scene involving his wife, depending on the degree of seriousness, because he is also personally attached and emotionally involved in the second accident.  Since, he is committed to achieving the greatest good for the greatest number, he would be focused on giving equal attention also to the first accident scene in order to ameliorate the sufferings of the victims, of course, after having given some attention to the wife and others involved in the second accident.

As a Rule Utilitarian, the decision would change to attending to the first accident scene first (in order to produce the greatest happiness to the greatest number and follow laid down rules like first-come, first-served) and then following up with the second involving his wife.  But, as a human being that is emotionally attached and involved, his wife remains a priority no matter the rules.

2. Utilitarian, by definition, operates based on three principles of giving the greatest happiness to the greatest number of people, thinks that his actions are judged right by their ability to promote happiness, and ensures that equal happiness is given to all persons.  Therefore, a utilitarian would not say it is ethical to spank the child in the first place.  Spanking the child does not engender happiness for the child nor for the parent.  He would instead use the occasion as a teaching moment to instruct the child on road etiquettes and dangers.

A Rule Utilitarian would not even attempt to scold the child not to talk about spanking because the rule says, "do not spank a child."

Explanation:

Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that focuses on outcomes and justifies actions based on their ability to produce the greatest happiness for the greatest number.  It also regards everyone's happiness as equal and important.  The Rule Utilitarian goes some steps forward to base their decisions on whether the utilitarian follows the set rules in achieving the rightness of actions.

This ethical theory were developed by English philosophers and economists like Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill between the 18th and 19th century.

where is the rest of the question. this isn't making sense. can you upload a picture of the question?

answer; ///relational devaluation;