¶ … Emperor's Club: Kantian, utilitarian, and Aristotelian views According to Kantian ethical principles, Mr. Hundert should have allowed the grades of his four students to remain as they were, and not altered them. A Kantian ethical schema suggests that a person should behave as if he is setting a law for all time, not merely reacting to the specifics of a situation. A Kantian philosopher would say teachers cannot subjectively change grades simply because they believe that a particular student emotionally 'needs' to win more than another student. Hundert allowed his personal feelings for Bell and Bell's improvement as a student to influence his decision-making, and hurt another student in the process. However, from a utilitarian standpoint, by showing Bell the importance of hard work and moral activity, a great service is done to society because Bell is the child of a powerful man, and will likely grow up to be a powerful adult. Also, from the point-of-view of the school, it is important to keep Bell's father happy to ensure his son...

As a result, Hundert should not be influenced by his sense that Bell 'needs' to win more than Blythe. However, an Aristotelian might also suggest that an obsession with only having three contestants is arbitrary to some degree, and Hundert could simply have declared that the scores between the third and fourth candidate were so close, both Bell and Blythe should be allowed to compete. This would be the most ethical option, since all four boys' labor would be honored. From a utilitarian perspective, it would ensure that Blythe would not be hurt, but Bell's new change of character would be reinforced. Only a Kantian might object that changing the rules about competing one year would mean that the rules were meaningless, and an infinite amount of new students could be added to the competition…