Philosophy paper

Answer ONE of the following in a 4-5 page paper. 1. Kant/Aristotle : On pp. 395-396 (from “In the natural constitution of an organized being…” to “…to interfere with the purposes of inclination”), Kant gives an argument (sometimes called “Kant’s function argument”) against the claim that happiness is the ultimate and highest end for any being with reason and will. Explain how this argument is supposed to work, and precisely identify the premises and the conclusion of this argument . It is natural to take this argument as an attempt to refute Aristotle’s central claim that the highest good for us is eudaemonia . What does Aristotle have to say in defense of that claim? Do you think that Kant’s argument works as a refutation of Aristotle’s position? If not, why not? If so, give specific reasons why Aristotle’s “function argument” is unsound. (When discussing Aristotle’s function argument, refer to the version provided on the courseweb site.) 2. Mill/Kant : Kant maintains that “the moral worth of an action does not lie in the effect expected from it” (401) but in the fact that it is motivated by respect for the moral law. Mill, on the other hand, implicitly endorses consequentialism (the claim that what makes actions good is the goodness of their consequences) and maintains that “the motive has nothing to do with the morality of the action, though much with the worth of the agent” (18). Explain how Kant uses the example of an honest shopkeeper to develop an argument for his position, and precisely identify the premises and the conclusion of this argument . What does Mill have to say for his own position? Which view (if either) do you agree with? Why? If you disagree with Kant, give specific reasons why his argument about the shopkeeper is unsound. If you disagree with Mill, explain why you think consequentialism has to be false. Suggestions: 1) Avoid unexplained jargon (e.g. “subjective,” “objective,” etc.) and make sure to make clear the author’s use of unusual terms. 2) Avoid summary comparison. Show differences as well as similarities in any comparisons you make. 3) Avoid merely repeating what was said in lectures and sections. 4) Support your arguments with specific evidence/details from the relevant text or phenomenon. Use (brief) quotations and cite page or section numbers. 5) Keep a copy of your essay.