Respond to another students' posts and argue against each position, using utilitarianism, egoism, or virtue ethics to support your position. Include ethics-related terms in your response, and support the response with references to the week's readings. "From a Kantian ethical perspective, Kevin Carter had a moral duty to help the starving child depicted in his Pulitzer Prize-winning photograph. According to Immanuel Kant's categorical imperative, individuals must act only according to that maxim by which they can at the same time will that it should become a universal law (Matthews, 2019). In other words, if Carter were to universalize the action of not helping someone in dire need while being able to, this would result in a world where moral duty toward others is ignored, which is logically and ethically unacceptable. Kant's second formulation of the categorical imperative also emphasizes that we should treat humanity, whether in ourselves or others, always as an end and never merely as a means to an end. If Carter captured the image of the child but failed to assist, he may have treated the child as a means to professional gain, rather than acknowledging the child's inherent dignity and moral worth. I do agree with the Kantian position, as it places moral obligation above personal or professional benefit. While photojournalism plays a vital role in raising awareness of global issues, Kantian ethics reminds us that we cannot sidestep moral responsibility in pursuit of that