The Theory of Deontology, Virtue Ethics, and Social Contract Theory

The expectation is that the weekly essay assignments are formal essays. That means an introduction, a main body, and a conclusion. General rule for the main body is that the number of paragraphs corresponds to the number of points being made. I don't think you can answer these questions completely, while adhering to the above, in less than two full pages typed double-spaced.
Assignment E5: Answer ONE of the following.
5A. Compare and contrast Kant’s view of the “good will” with the Socratic Paradox expressed in Plato’s Protagoras. Kant writes ". . . reason is not competent to guide the will with certainty in regard to its objects and the satisfaction of all our wants." How would Socrates react to this assessment? For that matter, how would Bentham, who held that motives are neither bad nor good?
5B. Aristotle’s theory of ethics is difficult to resolve in terms of moral obligations of human beings. A second major approach to ethics is sometimes called a duty ethics (deontology). Should the rightness of human actions be based on laws, principles, or rules of moral behavior? Deontologists, such as Kant, believe ethics should be based on duty and rights, and those ethical theories are often based on social contract theory. Explore the possibility that socially-based moral laws and principles are incompatible with the moral well-being of the individual.
The following is needed for answering question 5A:
"I know that I know nothing" is a saying derived from Plato's account of the Greek philosopher Socrates. It is also called the Socratic paradox. Rather than a strict paradox, the term refers to either of two surprising and unacceptable conclusions drawn from the Socratic dialogues of Plato: (i) the startling consequence of Socrates's association of knowledge and virtue, according to which nobody ever does wrong knowingly; (ii) the view that nobody knows what they mean when they use a term unless they can provide an explicit definition of it. Although this last is sometimes called the Socratic fallacy, this can be regarded as being uncharitable to Socrates, whose concern was not simply with meaning, but more with notions like justice or reason, for which our inability to provide principles may well reflect ignorance and muddle. [On the first issue, see akrasia.] The Socratic Paradox involves: (i) the startling consequence of Socrates's association of knowledge and virtue, according to which nobody ever does wrong knowingly; (ii) the view that nobody knows what they mean when they use a term unless they can provide an explicit definition of it.
You may find the following definitions helpful:
Teleological ethics is a theory of morality that derives duty or moral obligation from what is good or desirable as an end (purpose) to be achieved. Teleology, in general, is the explanation of phenomena in terms of the purpose they serve rather than of the cause by which they arise.
In moral philosophy, deontological ethics or deontology (from Greek δέον, deon, "obligation, duty") is the normative ethical theory that the morality of an action should be based on whether that action itself is right or wrong under a series of rules, rather than based on the consequences of the action.