1) Appealing to specific rules, policies, standards, codes, etc. ("professional ethics") Problem: not all cases/issues have a correspondent policy or procedure; in some cases, policies conflict with one another, may be out-of-date, etc.
2) Appealing to general principles, theories, frameworks, etc. ("philosophical ethics") Problem: it is often unclear which principles, theories, frameworks, etc. should apply to which cases and/or how they should be applied
● Is duty alone really sufficient for determining "moral worth"?
- What if, e.g., I act "in accordance with duty" but end up seriously harming others?
● Can Kantian ethics handle conflicting obligations?
- What if, e.g., I was forced to choose between my obligation to protect persons from harm and my obligation to tell the truth? - between breaking a promise to person-A and lying to person-B?
● Is Kant right to hold universal law above over our particular personal relationships?
- Don't we have stronger obligations to, e.g., family, loved-ones, neighbors, friends, etc. than to complete strangers?
● Kant's moral theory maintains that the moral subject is both rational and free. What does this suggest or imply about the moral status of non-rational or non-autonomous agents (like, say, certain young children, persons in comas, the elderly, the mentally disabled)