CASE 1. The Makah tribe claim to have hunted gray whales for more than 2,000 years. They stopped in the 1920s due to a decline in the number of gray whales. Now they want to return to the hunt to provide food for their tribe and to restore the young men’s sense of discipline and pride in their traditions. Pro-ponents of the hunt claim that a majority of the tribe support the hunt, which is expected to take fewer than the five whales they are permitted by law to kill. Tribal leaders claim they will take no pregnant or nursing females. Some Makah elders disagree, however, pointing out that the tribe survived for most of the twentieth century without eating whale meat and claiming that there are better ways to instill pride and discipline. The environmental community argues that the whale hunt is immoral because it violates the whales’ right to exist on the planet. Is it appropriate for nonmembers of the Makah tribe—for example, students in your class—to evaluate the morality of the Makah whale hunt? Explain.
2. In each of the following cases, the behavior illustrated seems to suggest that the people’s values differ significantly from our own. Consider the possibility that, beneath appearances, the values are similar. Develop a plausible explanation for the difference in behavior.
2. Your Written Case Analysis on this case needs to be at least 500 words. One thing you need to do is identify the parties at stake and the moral issues at stake.
3. In addition to talking about the parties at stake and the moral issues at stake in this case, you need to do one more thing. You need to need to analyze this case in terms of two of the following (you pick the two): utility, duties, and rights. Here’s how to do that.
a) If you choose the principle of utility, think about how the happiness of the Makah in favor of whaling is at stake in this case. Also, think about how the happiness of the Makah not in favor of whaling is at stake. Also, think about the happiness of the environmental community and any other significant parties involved. Then explain what, ultimately, the principle of utility would say to do in this case.
b) If you choose duties, think about the duties that pertain to the Makah in favor of whaling in this case. Also, think about the duties that pertain to the Makah not in favor of whaling in this case. Also, think about the duties that pertain to the environmental community and any other significant parties involved. Then explain what, ultimately, you think should be done in this case from the point of view of the duties involved.
c) If you choose rights, think about the rights that pertain to the Makah in favor of whaling in this case. Also, think about the rights that pertain to the Makah not in favor of whaling in this case. Also, think about the rights that pertain to the environmental community and any other significant parties involved. Then explain what, ultimately, you think should be done in this case from the point of view of the rights involved.
