In Utilitarianism and Justice, Smart discusses an example in which the only way for a sheriff to prevent riots in which

In Utilitarianism and Justice, Smart discusses an example in which the only way for a sheriff to prevent riots in which hundreds will be killed is to frame and execute an innocent person. (Smart, 69–70) Explain Kants Principle of Humanity(concisely), and explain what you think it would say about this case of the sheriff, and how thisKantian analysis of the casecompares to what Utilitarianism would sayaboutit.Which viewof this casedo you think is more plausible, and why? In discussing this case, Smart a utilitarian says that he is not happy about what utilitarianism says about it, but he writes: But neither am I happy with the anti–utilitarian conclusion. For if a case really didarise in which injustice was the lesser of two evils (in terms of human happiness and misery), then the anti–utilitarian conclusion is a very unpalatable one too, namely that in some circumstances one must choose the greater misery, perhaps the very much greater misery, such as that of hundreds of people suffering painful deaths. (Smart, 71–72)As part of your answer tothe question “which view do you find more plausible,” explain the issue Smart is raising in this passage, and discuss whether you think the Kantian understanding of morality (using the Principle of Humanity) provides a good answer to Smarts concern.Argue for your view. –If you write on the first topic, you should be citing Smart and the Shafer–Landau article.