Overview and Instructions
If you have not done so, be sure to read the
Case Analysis Structure Overview
1. Explain the case at hand back in your own words.
o This should be no more than one paragraph. It’s just a quick summary so I know how you’re understanding the case.
2. Explain the theories of the two philosophers that are assigned in that particular week.
o This should be where you show that you understand the arguments of the philosophers that are covered in a particular topic. So if you’re writing on the Welfare Case Analysis, you’d explain the arguments of Walzer and Murray.
o This should be completely neutral — just a succinct presentation of the arguments that isn’t influenced by or that mentions the case.
o This should be at least two paragraphs, and probably more like four.
3. Present an argument applying the philosophers’s arguments to the case at hand.
o Here you should take the work you did in task two and apply that to the story. So if you were writing on Welfare, you might say that Walzer’s theory would give the aide to person X because of reason Y and then justify that. You’d then do the same with Murray.
o This should be at least two paragraphs, and could easily be four.
4. Present an argument explaining why one philosopher has a better solution to the case at hand.
o Do to this you need to explain what you think a successful solution to the case would demonstrate and then show hoe one of the philosophers does this better than the other.
o This should be two paragraphs.
5. Explain what you would do and why.
o This should be exactly one paragraph.
In this case analysis you have five tasks:
1. Give a clear and concise explanation of the case at hand.
2. Give a thorough, philosophical exegesis of the relevant aspects of Bradley’s and Peikoff’s arguments. (Click here for some tips on how to do a successful exegesis.)
3. Present an argument applying the relevant philosophers to the case at hand. This should include an argument justifying in which world each philosopher would place Jim and why.
4. Present an argument explaining why one of the philosophers can be viewed as offering a more successful solution to the case at hand.
5. In no more than one paragraph, explain what solution you would propose for Jim.
Case
Consider Jim. Jim has worked in middle management his entire life. He had the option of paying into his company’s managed healthcare system but decided he wanted to keep the money instead and invest it in case he ever needed acute medical treatment. Unfortunately, on his 40th birthday, Jim decided to buy a red Corvette with that money. 6 months later, Jim went to a doctor to see why he was feeling so awful. The doctor diagnosed Jim with emphysema, diabetes, and kidney failure. All three of these conditions are the result of Jim’s lifestyle choices: smoking, poor eating and exercise habits, and excessive drinking. These conditions are chronic and will require treatment for the rest of Jim’s life including cutting-edge lung and kidney treatments and weekly meetings with a nutritionist, endocrinologist, cardiologist, etc.
Options
Here are the two possible healthcare “worlds” for Jim (he must be “placed” in one of them):
A. Participate in a universal healthcare system, paid for by income taxes, which doesn’t provide Jim with the latest and greatest medical technology but does meet basic standards of care.
B. Participate in a pay-for-service system, which allows Jim to pay for whatever treatment he wants and/or can afford but will not treat him unless he pays for the service.
