The Derivation of Public Law and Government Levels of Preemption Assignment

The Derivation of Public Law and Government Levels of Preemption - Assignment Example This paper illustrates that the law dictates that public health personnel play the role of promoting and protecting the health as well as protection of the individual's rights in the process of protecting the health. This law is very crucial in creating a boundary between those who seek help from public health workers, since others may abuse their rights towards caring for patients or those in need. For this reason, the public health workers must ensure that they observe ethical values of the population they are serving in a manner that protects their rights. Similarly, they must help the population they serve by promoting and protecting their health since this is the course they undertook. Serving the population is their primary duty, to ensure that the people have a good health, and are free from any illness that might interfere with their well-being. Hence, the rules were derived following the mandate was given to the public health workers in serving the population and promoting t heir well-being. Civil liberties are rights that individuals enjoy and are inevitable under any circumstance. For this reason, public health care laws cannot interfere with them but instead should protect them by giving the necessities required to promote life. One of the civil liberties people enjoy is the right to life, and no public health care law can deny any individual of the right. Because of such civil liberties, public health care laws must work at protecting them since they are above board. The government plays an essential role in controlling and promoting the provision of health care throughout the states. Their role is important because it regulates the health sector as well as the conducts of the different players in the market, such as health professionals. In many cases, the government sets a standard under which all the practices have to align and adhere to. Because of this attempt, governments pre-empt competitiors in some circumstance and become the only player in the market or in healthcare for that matter. This happens because of the supervisory role of the government in the lower level agencies or hospitals with the aim of maintaining order and productivity. Similarly, the pre-emption of the government has made it possible for lower level hospitals or agencies to act within their capacity, making them leave other services for higher agencies or government.

What are the ultimate principles of morals for both Hume and Kant Essay

What are the ultimate principles of morals for both Hume and Kant - Essay Example He goes on to observe that only good will is good sans qualification. Good will is always good in itself and not just for the things that it produces. Will is good if will comes from duty, as well as other moral motives, which do not simply conform to duty. For instance, grocers who give the right change because of fairness, rather than from the fear of being caught, do so from good will. The reasoning goal is not in producing happiness but rather producing will that can be seen to be good in it. The satisfaction of man’s desires, which is happiness, is not determinate enough to use as a workable guide. Good will cannot act as the complete and sole good, although it is the worthy condition of being happy and the highest good. Complete good can only be goodwill combined with happiness. Rationality possesses its own laws of objectiveness. Because man is rational only partially, he experiences the various laws as constraints and imperatives that he is required to follow. These im peratives are grounded on the premise that is valid for all rational beings as such. These imperatives, according to Kant, could be hypothetical, i.e. if one wants to get to end E, then he should do A, or categorical, which is he ought to perform A. Ethics that are based on imperatives that are hypothetical are heteronymous because they involve following laws set by another. Categorical imperatives are hard to understand, although their content is clear. The basic imperative of category states that man acts on principle and these principles can be willed on everybody (Laursen 21). Ethics and morals are autonomous if they are based on categorical imperatives because man follows their own laws. Kant’s supreme moral principle is the universal law formula, which contends that man should act on a maxim that they follow to be used as a universal law (Laursen 23). Kant continues by applying his formula to two duties that are perfect and exception-less. These are not making promises with deceit and not committing suicide, as well as two imperfect duties, which to help those who have needs and development of one’s talents. These ideas can be expressed more loosely in two ways. Firstly, it is to treat all humanity, both you and others, not as a means only, but also as an end in itself (Laursen 23). Secondly, man should act as if one’s action maxim would be turned into nature’s universal law. Kant also connects freedom with morality. According to him, to be free means to follow one’s own principles of rationality rather than following our desires only. This means that one should follow their own legislation and act on maxims that they would follow, rather than the universal laws (Laursen 24). Therefore, freedom is morality. So morality and freedom, ultimately, are the same mystery. It is not possible to explain what free will is. It is only possible to assume what it is and reject all objections against it. Man knows that he/she is free through knowledge of his/her duties. Since probably an individual could have acted in a different way, then one is free. In order for man to recognize himself as free, he needs to see himself as being a member to two worlds. These worlds are a higher intelligible world and a sensible world. Acting in a moral way, therefore, has a supreme moral worth since through it, one participates in an existence of a higher order. This can be perceived as the foundation of human dignity as an end to itself (Laursen 24). Hume, on the other hand, contends that reason and moral sense combine to make our moral judgments. He says that moral sense is essential in making a distinction between virtue and vice,