I am wondering if it is ethical to own a gun? There is this attitude that keeps popping up when I raise this question, that a gun is an object just like any other and that the intent of the individual is what matters most. I can't help and think about situations where the user who owns the gun could be in a situation that gets out of his control or if an accidental discharge happens. I also wonder about the self fulfilling prophecy aspect and the law of attraction. Does owning a gun and thinking that it is a cool device contribute to the inevitability of having to use it. There is also the reality that many of the people who own guns end up using the gun to commit suicide. (I can't find the statistic but it is a staggering number.) Should Vegetarians abstain from owning guns?

Do you consider it ethical, and hence decorous, to use cash when tipping restaurant servers with the express purpose of helping the server avoid paying income tax on the gratuity?

Is it ethical for the civilized nations of the world to research weapons of mass destruction [chemical and biological] for the purposes of warfare? Both Russia and America have stockpiles of small pox a deadly virus that could do considerable damage to humanity. Is it ethical to keep said stockpiles as a precaution, as a counter measure to terrorists and warlike nations? Is it ethical to keep up a chemical and biological arms race through research and weapons development? I find myself wondering how we can fight a war with weapons like Ebola and smallpox. Do you have to become your enemy to defeat them? How far should we go to preserve the West? Are some things not worth the loss of moral standing? Do those that serve and protect our nation states really have to go that far and is it worth it? My concern likely echoes the dilemmas faced by many during World War Two and the question as to whether using nuclear weapons was worth the loss of humanity; either the lives lost or the abstract ideal of...

We often to defend an action by justifying the intentions, but isn’t that the straw man’s fallacy? The question was never ‘were his intentions good,’ or even ‘were the results of his actions good,’ but rather ‘was the action itself good.’ Does the greater good justify a smaller evil, and do good intentions make an evil action good? Can somebody do something that’s bad without being bad in doing it? Take for example, suffering. We generally accept that suffering is evil, but that doesn’t mean that I’m doing something wrong for suffering, does it? Even though suffering by its nature is accepted as bad we don’t consider it ‘sinful’ for me to do so. So, to summarize, my question is: Can an action be evil simply by the nature of its existence?

To what extent should our actions be guided by our theories in ethics?

What is a good ethical decision making model for a professor who has been asked to teach a class outside his qualification? This has been mandated by his supervisor stating he is as qualfied as anybody else at the university and he has the open time.

How relevant is knowledge of moral theory to acting morally? Are philosophers "better" people than non-philosophers? Thanks for your time.

As an Englishman, I share a dilemma with many of my countrymen that we do not have a strong sense of English (rather than British) nationality - in contrast to say the Scots, the Welsh etc. My question is what are the moral arguments for and against the establishment of a clear English national identity. My question is definitely not one geared towards a backward-looking (and hence white Anglo-Saxon) identity, but one that can unite the inhabitants of the country in a sense of pride. If the team prefer to answer with reference to other nationalities then this is fine - it is more the moral principles that I am seeking to understand. Thank You

Is it morally wrong to go to high school if you know for a fact that you are not being taught any relevant information for living morally and responsibly, you know that the assignments are absolutely pointless, and you have the opportunity to benefit the world through becoming a Buddhist monk and through the extensive studying of relevant fields of religion, philosophy and science? Would it be wrong to drop out and join a monastery if you have this opportunity? Please help me.

Is it possible for thoughts to be evil or in some way criminal. For example, suppose I think about committing a crime. I plan it in my mind, and even fantasize about committing the crime. Is this wrong? Is intent to committ a crime wrong?