(1) Choose one inquiry, from inquiries 1 - 28 (pages 114 - 117). Indicate which inquiry you chose, and then briefly explain it in your own words:
A young boy gets an expensive gift from his parents and he gives it to his poor friend. (Page 115)
(2) Stakeholders:
Tom, the young boy, Tom’s parents, the boy who received the gift and the parents of the buy who received the gift.
(3) Are the details given sufficient? Why or why not?
I do not believe there is enough information; Tom made the assumption the child was poor and decided to give him his expensive toy. How did base the opinion the boy was poor?
(4) What additional questions does this inquiry raise?
Does tom give away a lot of things to other child? Does he only give things to child he feels is less fortunate than himself. Does he tell his parents that he is giving his toys away or his he hiding it and lying about where the toys are?
STEP TWO: THE RELEVANT CRITERIA
1. Obligations (aka "duties"):
Tom has an obligation to his parents to take care of the toys the give him.
His parents have a duty to raise their child to be kind to others.
Tom’s friends have an obligation to not take advantage of his kindness.
Tom’s friend who receives the toy has an obligation to take care of the toy
Tom has an obligation to his parents to tell them that he gave away the expensive toy.
2. Moral Ideals (aka "virtues"):
Tom displayed temperance by yielding his desire to own the toy and give it to his friend. (Page 108)
Tom displayed agape (loving kindness) and Compassion to his friend by valuing his friend’s desires as he felt sympathetic to these desires. (Page 108)
I believe Tom gets a bit of self gratitude for helping others. (Page 109)
Its hard to say but I believe Toms act displays beneficence even though he does get a bit of self gratitude from being kind and giving away his toy. (Page 110)
It is unclear whether Tom told his parents that he gave the toy away, but I would hope that Tom would display honesty and tell his parents (Page 109)
3. Consequences (aka "outcomes" or "results"): Optional this week
STEP THREE: POSSIBLE COURSES OF ACTION
Alternative #1:
Tom’s parents could find out that he gave his toy away and become upset. They may choose to punish tom by not purchasing anymore gifts for him. He will have to earn them through chores.
Alternative #2:
Tom’s friend may take the toy home and his parents may feel it is inappropriate and make him give the toy back.
Alternative #3:
Tom’s friend when Tom tells him that he may have the toy Tom’s friend may decline the offer hurting Tom’s feelings.
STEP FOUR: THE MOST ETHICAL ACTION
Examine the action taken or proposed and decide whether it achieves the greater good (the most widespread "respect for persons")...if it does not, choose one that will, from your alternatives. Where the choice of actions is such that no good can be achieved, choose the action that will result in the lesser evil.
In this situation Tom showed compassion (Page 108) for his friend by giving him his expensive toy. I believe the best course of action would be for Tom to ask his parents prior to giving the toy away. This would keep Tom from having to make an ethical decision about telling his parent s when they ask where the toy is. Honesty (Page109)
SELF EVALUATION
1. In your own words, describe something new that you learned from this week’s assigned reading material and guidance.
Every Christmas Eve I go to our church for service and we pick a piece of paper as we enter. The words that are one each piece is different, the words are the ones in our text and I now know what they mean. How cool…
2. In your own words, describe in detail some insight you gained, about the material, from one of your classmates' blogs this week.
I took a minute or two to view Ltrain’s- Ethics-blog, I liked the reference to the origin of honesty.
3. Did you post a thoroughly completed post to your blog on time this week?
This week has been crazy I missed work today with a migraine, but I did get my post completed thoroughly and on time.
4. Did you ALSO print this out, so you can bring it to class and earn total points?
I will print this out tomorrow and bring it to class.
5. Of 25 points total, my efforts this week deserve: Insert your JUSTIFIED answer here.
I should get a 23 on this, I asked the professor to publish the assignments early so I(we) could have more time to work on it. I totally underestimated the work load of 5 classes this semester. I pushed this assignment back but I did get the assignment posted on time.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Blog Assignment #9
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSIGNMENT PART ONE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this section, we're going to return for a moment to Chapter 7, to the section that discusses errors that are common in the analysis of moral issues (p. 89). Briefly explain each of the following errors in your own words, as if you were explaining the concept to a friend who had never taken this class (consider who, what, when, where, why, how, when); and then give an example of each one, preferably from your own past experience.
Unwarranted Assumptions: Are jumping to a conclusion without taking the time or putting forth the effort to fully understand a situation. This reminds me of when my old coworker, a female, and I would get lunch together. Most of the time one of us would go out and pick up the food and bring it back to our office occasionally we would go out of the office. I never thought much of this, but some of our coworkers had concluded that our actions were anything but an innocent lunch. They would make snide remarks behind our backs remarking that we should not flaunt and display our torrid affair so openly. I later learned that most of the comments originated from a woman who had been cheated on by her husband in a similar manner. So she felt that was impossible for the opposite sex to have interactions such as going out to lunch without it turning into a full on relationship or affair.
Oversimplification: Occurs when you attempt to condense the facts of a situation down to a snippet of information. Everyday I perform oversimplification, my wife asks me when I get home, “How was your day?” For the most part my response is “Fine”. My days are full of various projects and business dealings. So how is my response a simple “Fine”? I don’t see the need to go into every detail of my day and re-live it again. My answer is not a way of avoiding her, I would rather spend time with her a discuss things other than work.
Hasty Conclusions: Similar to unwarranted assumptions hasty conclusions occur when a conclusion is rushed or forced with out considering all the relevant facts. My wife asked my son what he would like for dinner. He replied “Grilled Chicken”. She prepared his meal for him and he sat down to eat. Our lives are a schedule black hole, we are always eating late. This night was no exception to that, my son began to eat his meal and he was complaining “It’s too hot”. I told him to wait a minute for it to cool down. He was tired and was ready to eat and get into the bed, so he kept on with “It’s too hot”. Well after a while and numerous revisits to the same old theme “It’s too hot” I felt the chicken to see for myself. The chicken was cold and he continued. I decided that it was time for him to go to bed. Mind you that he had only had one bite of his meal, but I figured he was just too tired and off to bed he went. He was crying as I put him into bed another indicator that he needed to be there. My wife had been upstairs geeing ready for bed while this was happening. I went and told her of the past few minutes and she asked me if I tasted the chicken. I had not I had no reason too, She indicated that she may have put too much pepper on the chicken. I went to the kitchen and sampled it, and my mouth was on fire. I immediately understood what my son was trying to tell me. Unfortunately he was so tired he could not articulate the point that it was not temperature that made his chicken hot it was the insane amount of seasonings that were the root cause of his discomfort. I proceeded to go to my sons side and apologize for what had happened and then I fixed him a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. Whoops.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSIGNMENT PART TWO
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Briefly answer the following "chapter opening" questions, in your own words, based on what you learned by studying chapter eight:
1. What do we do in situations where there is more than a single obligation?
You need to weigh all of the obligations to determine the order of need. Once the order of need is determined you should fulfill the requirements for the highest obligation followed by each of the underlying obligations.
2. How can we reconcile conflicting obligations?
Whenever possible you should work to reconcile each of the obligations. In the time that is not possible you should fulfill the obligations that are most inline with the side you are on.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSIGNMENT PART THREE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. In a nutshell, what is the most important thing, for you, that you learned from this assignment? I
t is extremely important to take the time to become aware of all factors contained within a situation before drawing a conclusion.
2. How will you apply what you learned through this assignment to your everyday life?
As a parent I am constantly learning and adjusting my techniques for how I work with my son. I want to be fair and understanding. The items discussed here will allow me to adjust so I will be able to shape a future for my son that will allow him to be a self sufficient man.
3. What grade do you believe your efforts regarding this assignment deserve?
I should receive maximum credit for this assignment since I believe I have fully met the requirements of the assignment.
ASSIGNMENT PART ONE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this section, we're going to return for a moment to Chapter 7, to the section that discusses errors that are common in the analysis of moral issues (p. 89). Briefly explain each of the following errors in your own words, as if you were explaining the concept to a friend who had never taken this class (consider who, what, when, where, why, how, when); and then give an example of each one, preferably from your own past experience.
Unwarranted Assumptions: Are jumping to a conclusion without taking the time or putting forth the effort to fully understand a situation. This reminds me of when my old coworker, a female, and I would get lunch together. Most of the time one of us would go out and pick up the food and bring it back to our office occasionally we would go out of the office. I never thought much of this, but some of our coworkers had concluded that our actions were anything but an innocent lunch. They would make snide remarks behind our backs remarking that we should not flaunt and display our torrid affair so openly. I later learned that most of the comments originated from a woman who had been cheated on by her husband in a similar manner. So she felt that was impossible for the opposite sex to have interactions such as going out to lunch without it turning into a full on relationship or affair.
Oversimplification: Occurs when you attempt to condense the facts of a situation down to a snippet of information. Everyday I perform oversimplification, my wife asks me when I get home, “How was your day?” For the most part my response is “Fine”. My days are full of various projects and business dealings. So how is my response a simple “Fine”? I don’t see the need to go into every detail of my day and re-live it again. My answer is not a way of avoiding her, I would rather spend time with her a discuss things other than work.
Hasty Conclusions: Similar to unwarranted assumptions hasty conclusions occur when a conclusion is rushed or forced with out considering all the relevant facts. My wife asked my son what he would like for dinner. He replied “Grilled Chicken”. She prepared his meal for him and he sat down to eat. Our lives are a schedule black hole, we are always eating late. This night was no exception to that, my son began to eat his meal and he was complaining “It’s too hot”. I told him to wait a minute for it to cool down. He was tired and was ready to eat and get into the bed, so he kept on with “It’s too hot”. Well after a while and numerous revisits to the same old theme “It’s too hot” I felt the chicken to see for myself. The chicken was cold and he continued. I decided that it was time for him to go to bed. Mind you that he had only had one bite of his meal, but I figured he was just too tired and off to bed he went. He was crying as I put him into bed another indicator that he needed to be there. My wife had been upstairs geeing ready for bed while this was happening. I went and told her of the past few minutes and she asked me if I tasted the chicken. I had not I had no reason too, She indicated that she may have put too much pepper on the chicken. I went to the kitchen and sampled it, and my mouth was on fire. I immediately understood what my son was trying to tell me. Unfortunately he was so tired he could not articulate the point that it was not temperature that made his chicken hot it was the insane amount of seasonings that were the root cause of his discomfort. I proceeded to go to my sons side and apologize for what had happened and then I fixed him a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. Whoops.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSIGNMENT PART TWO
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Briefly answer the following "chapter opening" questions, in your own words, based on what you learned by studying chapter eight:
1. What do we do in situations where there is more than a single obligation?
You need to weigh all of the obligations to determine the order of need. Once the order of need is determined you should fulfill the requirements for the highest obligation followed by each of the underlying obligations.
2. How can we reconcile conflicting obligations?
Whenever possible you should work to reconcile each of the obligations. In the time that is not possible you should fulfill the obligations that are most inline with the side you are on.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSIGNMENT PART THREE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. In a nutshell, what is the most important thing, for you, that you learned from this assignment? I
t is extremely important to take the time to become aware of all factors contained within a situation before drawing a conclusion.
2. How will you apply what you learned through this assignment to your everyday life?
As a parent I am constantly learning and adjusting my techniques for how I work with my son. I want to be fair and understanding. The items discussed here will allow me to adjust so I will be able to shape a future for my son that will allow him to be a self sufficient man.
3. What grade do you believe your efforts regarding this assignment deserve?
I should receive maximum credit for this assignment since I believe I have fully met the requirements of the assignment.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Assignment #7
Hopefully everyone had a wonderful Valentines Day. As I have mentioned before I love to cook, well I finally got a chance to cater a dinner. My skills were requested from my Mother-in-Law and her friends on Valentines Day at her friend’s house. I prepared a peppercorn filet with sautéed mushrooms drizzled in an alfredo sauce. I put prosciutto wrapped asparagus next to the fillet in the shape of an X. I also prepared zucchini, mushrooms and onions , baked potatoes along with boursin butter (a garlic butter with cream cheese) and French bread.
Dinner went well and everyone complimented the food, and the fact that my wife had been my sous chef for the evening, had given me a sense of accomplishment. (my wife can’t cook so since no one ran to the bathroom I was okay to place a checkmark in the win column) So I packed up my belongings and headed out.
Our son was with us and we walked past a neighbor’s house. I watched as a man started walking out of the house. My wife was waiting for our son to get into the truck as this man got into an SUV parked in the driveway we just passed by. Within moments we heard a commotion from inside the SUV. I turned to look at the source of the noise. The man who only moments ago had climbed into the passenger side of the vehicle was beating the driver in the face with his fists. There was such force that the vehicle was shaking violently. The driver opened the door and partially fell out, his head and upper body were on the ground and the passenger was now atop of him just repeatedly punching him in the face. The driver was crying out for help. My wife was only a couple of feet away and by this point my son was fully inside the vehicle. My wife closed the door of the truck and then she proceeded to yell at the aggressor to stop. I was positioned on the other side of my truck and I contemplated rushing over to get involved to separate the two guys. Part of me wanted to get in the truck and drive away and not get involved in any fashion. I had no idea who these guys were and I decided the best course of action was to call 911.
I was concerned that his attention would turn to my wife or worse my son. I made sure the doors were locked on my truck and I was watching to make sure I would be in his path should he turn. I was on the phone with the dispatcher giving a blow by blow and a description of the guys and the vehicle while I waited on the officers to arrive. During there dispute my wife continued to yell at the aggressor and told him that the police were on the way. He informed her that he did not care that this was his older brother and he needed this. Once the police arrived he surrendered and was arrested for assault.
While I was driving home afterwards I started to ponder… Was it unethical to not attempt to separate the two men in order to assist the man who was begging for help?
I welcome any comments from people who would like to weigh in on this issue.
Dinner went well and everyone complimented the food, and the fact that my wife had been my sous chef for the evening, had given me a sense of accomplishment. (my wife can’t cook so since no one ran to the bathroom I was okay to place a checkmark in the win column) So I packed up my belongings and headed out.
Our son was with us and we walked past a neighbor’s house. I watched as a man started walking out of the house. My wife was waiting for our son to get into the truck as this man got into an SUV parked in the driveway we just passed by. Within moments we heard a commotion from inside the SUV. I turned to look at the source of the noise. The man who only moments ago had climbed into the passenger side of the vehicle was beating the driver in the face with his fists. There was such force that the vehicle was shaking violently. The driver opened the door and partially fell out, his head and upper body were on the ground and the passenger was now atop of him just repeatedly punching him in the face. The driver was crying out for help. My wife was only a couple of feet away and by this point my son was fully inside the vehicle. My wife closed the door of the truck and then she proceeded to yell at the aggressor to stop. I was positioned on the other side of my truck and I contemplated rushing over to get involved to separate the two guys. Part of me wanted to get in the truck and drive away and not get involved in any fashion. I had no idea who these guys were and I decided the best course of action was to call 911.
I was concerned that his attention would turn to my wife or worse my son. I made sure the doors were locked on my truck and I was watching to make sure I would be in his path should he turn. I was on the phone with the dispatcher giving a blow by blow and a description of the guys and the vehicle while I waited on the officers to arrive. During there dispute my wife continued to yell at the aggressor and told him that the police were on the way. He informed her that he did not care that this was his older brother and he needed this. Once the police arrived he surrendered and was arrested for assault.
While I was driving home afterwards I started to ponder… Was it unethical to not attempt to separate the two men in order to assist the man who was begging for help?
I welcome any comments from people who would like to weigh in on this issue.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Assignment #6
PART ONE
QUESTION #1: If an action that is praised in one culture may be condemned in another, would it be correct to say that all moral values are relative to the culture they are found in?
ANSWER 1A:
The core of the World’s problem this question is. (a little play on Yoda) The World today is at odds, different cultures trying to influence and overpower each other with their own superior cultural moral values. All we have to do is turn on the television and flip a couple of channels; before we run across a news story depicting an example of this. Our county is at war with terrorism, terrorism is caused by terrorists. Who are terrorists? The simple answer is on who inflicts terror, however the terrorists see themselves as liberators. They are liberating the infidels from their own terrible existence. In the process the liberator will be granted heavenly rewards. So, I feel that the question posed before me can be answered as, Yes. Yes, moral values are relative to their respective cultures.
ANSWER 1B:
AI: Whether or not it is correct to say that all moral values are relative to the culture they are found in.
P: Each culture has its own moral values
P: Moral values that differ from the norm of the culture are sometimes viewed in distain
P: As culture evolves moral values evolve as well
------------------------------
C: Therefore, it is correct to say that all moral values are relative to the culture they are found in
QUESTION #2: Isn’t it a mark of ignorance to pass judgments on other cultures or to claim that one culture is better than another?
ANSWER 2A:
Throughout history cultures have passed judgment to the fact one culture is superior to another. I do not feel that it is a mark of ignorance to pass judgment over another culture. To have a mark of ignorance we would need a mark of intelligence to create a contrast. With that where does the mark of intelligence come from, who sets the mark? Does the mark of intelligence live within our own culture? By passing judgment are we walking to the edge of morally reasoning and jumping off into the unknown? Oh to answer a question with more questions. This country was founded by a group of people who viewed there beliefs, culture, better than that of their country. A culture within a culture, if they did not pass judgment against England the United Stated of America would not exist .
ANSWER 2B:
AI: Whether or not it is a mark of ignorance to pass judgments on other cultures or to claim that one culture is better than another.
P: We do not an agreed upon mark for what intelligence truly is.
P: To pass judgment on another culture is no different from passing judgment on a criminal.
P: Passing judgments does not mean to pass a negative judgment.
-------------------------------
C: Therefore, it is not a mark of ignorance to pass judgments on other cultures.
PART TWO
In ancient Rome, Sparta, and China unwanted children were abandoned to die. This practice is considered by most of the moral views of this country today as an unimaginable act. However, this was the practice of a culture and the culture viewed this to be morally acceptable. These cultures were trying to weed out the weak. To put the old adage in more macabre light a cultures chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Their focus was on physical strength for the men and the ability to bear more healthy warriors for the women. At a glance the elders would decide if the child fit into this mold, albeit a very harsh and unforgiving mold, if not a one way ticket to the afterlife awaited the infant. As mentioned above the ability to pass judgment onto another culture and what it considers morally acceptable is, in my opinion is futile at best. These cultures tossed out human life in the pursuit of physical strength but most likely they tossed out the children who had the intellectual aptitude to foster a great nation, we will never know but I can speculate.
Arguable issue: Whether or not it is morally acceptable to abandoned unwanted children to die.
P: The value of human life is not being preserved (value life itself)
P: The intelligence of the culture may suffer (the value of knowledge)
P: Passing judgment at a glance doesn’t allow for true analysis (valuing accuracy)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C: Therefore, unwanted children should not be abandoned to die.
QUESTION #1: If an action that is praised in one culture may be condemned in another, would it be correct to say that all moral values are relative to the culture they are found in?
ANSWER 1A:
The core of the World’s problem this question is. (a little play on Yoda) The World today is at odds, different cultures trying to influence and overpower each other with their own superior cultural moral values. All we have to do is turn on the television and flip a couple of channels; before we run across a news story depicting an example of this. Our county is at war with terrorism, terrorism is caused by terrorists. Who are terrorists? The simple answer is on who inflicts terror, however the terrorists see themselves as liberators. They are liberating the infidels from their own terrible existence. In the process the liberator will be granted heavenly rewards. So, I feel that the question posed before me can be answered as, Yes. Yes, moral values are relative to their respective cultures.
ANSWER 1B:
AI: Whether or not it is correct to say that all moral values are relative to the culture they are found in.
P: Each culture has its own moral values
P: Moral values that differ from the norm of the culture are sometimes viewed in distain
P: As culture evolves moral values evolve as well
------------------------------
C: Therefore, it is correct to say that all moral values are relative to the culture they are found in
QUESTION #2: Isn’t it a mark of ignorance to pass judgments on other cultures or to claim that one culture is better than another?
ANSWER 2A:
Throughout history cultures have passed judgment to the fact one culture is superior to another. I do not feel that it is a mark of ignorance to pass judgment over another culture. To have a mark of ignorance we would need a mark of intelligence to create a contrast. With that where does the mark of intelligence come from, who sets the mark? Does the mark of intelligence live within our own culture? By passing judgment are we walking to the edge of morally reasoning and jumping off into the unknown? Oh to answer a question with more questions. This country was founded by a group of people who viewed there beliefs, culture, better than that of their country. A culture within a culture, if they did not pass judgment against England the United Stated of America would not exist .
ANSWER 2B:
AI: Whether or not it is a mark of ignorance to pass judgments on other cultures or to claim that one culture is better than another.
P: We do not an agreed upon mark for what intelligence truly is.
P: To pass judgment on another culture is no different from passing judgment on a criminal.
P: Passing judgments does not mean to pass a negative judgment.
-------------------------------
C: Therefore, it is not a mark of ignorance to pass judgments on other cultures.
PART TWO
In ancient Rome, Sparta, and China unwanted children were abandoned to die. This practice is considered by most of the moral views of this country today as an unimaginable act. However, this was the practice of a culture and the culture viewed this to be morally acceptable. These cultures were trying to weed out the weak. To put the old adage in more macabre light a cultures chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Their focus was on physical strength for the men and the ability to bear more healthy warriors for the women. At a glance the elders would decide if the child fit into this mold, albeit a very harsh and unforgiving mold, if not a one way ticket to the afterlife awaited the infant. As mentioned above the ability to pass judgment onto another culture and what it considers morally acceptable is, in my opinion is futile at best. These cultures tossed out human life in the pursuit of physical strength but most likely they tossed out the children who had the intellectual aptitude to foster a great nation, we will never know but I can speculate.
Arguable issue: Whether or not it is morally acceptable to abandoned unwanted children to die.
P: The value of human life is not being preserved (value life itself)
P: The intelligence of the culture may suffer (the value of knowledge)
P: Passing judgment at a glance doesn’t allow for true analysis (valuing accuracy)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C: Therefore, unwanted children should not be abandoned to die.
Monday, February 2, 2009
Blog Assignment #5
This Video can be seen at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_HqvE6uye1Y
I found this video and I feel that it demonstrates majority view in a good light. Majority view is flawed and is faulty yes, but in this case where he is describing the need for an ethical code of conduct for CEO's it is relevant. Since starting this class I have really noticed a difference in the way I look at situations. Ethics is a compass to steer us in a direction where good sound judgment will prevail. With the CEO dilemma I feel that this Majority View is a one of the times that would be the exception to the rule. Also within the context of this video it shed light on the fact CEO's could be guided by a conscience that would steer them towards a morally acceptable path as a CEO. The Ruggiero books refers to shapers of our conscience as Natural Endowment and Social Conditioning. Its stands to reason that some current CEO's we not very fortunate to have they consciences molded into proper moral compasses.
Arguable issue: whether or not this post deserves 25 points
Conclusion: this post deserves 25 points
Premises: this post deserves 25 points because
1) the attached video is relevant to our class
2) the points made regarding the video refer back to our reading and how it applies
3) the post was published on time
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Blog Assignment #4
Part One
1. Paragraph: explain in your own words what the relationship is between laws and ethics.
Laws and ethics are tightly related yet completely separate and unique different. The relationship they share is one where Ethics can exist without law however; law cannot exist without ethics as ethics are an underling part of law. Laws are created to enforce a particular ethical viewpoint that a group of people believe is in the best interest of the rest of society. Laws are a reflection of societies view point at a given spot in time. As time progresses so do the laws this is due to the driving ethical forces behind those laws alter with the shifting of ethical view.
2. Paragraph & Link: Find one online resources related to this topic—not Wikipedia. Explain in a brief paragraph what you learned about this topic through the resource you found; include the link at the end of your paragraph.
3. Argument: Compose a short argument, in “argument elements” form. I’ll provide the arguable issue; you provide the rest. Make sure each of your premises is a complete sentence, and that your argument doesn’t break any of the rules listed in the first chapter of the Rulebook for Arguments:
Arguable Issue: The arguable issue is whether or not we need ethics, given that we already have laws.
Conclusion: We need ethics even though we already have laws.
Premises: We need ethics even though we already have laws because,
(1) Laws are derived from ethics and
(2) Laws are constantly changes due to altered ethical viewpoints and
(3) People tend to be bound by ethics more so than laws.
Part Two
The Role of the Majority View
1. Paragraph: Explain in your own words what a Majority View is. Cite your sources.
Majority view is when a portion greater than 50% agree upon an issue. Just because the greater portion agree doesn’t mean they are correct. This happens because a vast majority of the majority does not take the time to fully evaluate the subject prior to passing their vote. Although their intentions are to support what they believe in they lack the knowledge to do so. These individuals are driven by their “Gut” using their gut feeling is what they feel is the best resource needed to pass judgment. As mentioned in “Thinking Critically About Ethical Issues” the majority view at one point was women lacked the intelligence to vote, so they were not allowed to. This majority view has since become a minority view.
2. Argument: Compose a short argument, in “argument elements” form. I’ll provide the arguable issue; you provide the rest. Make sure each of your premises is a complete sentence, and that your argument doesn’t break any of the rules listed in the first chapter of the Rulebook for Arguments:
Arguable Issue: The arguable issue is whether or not the Majority View is a reliable basis for ethical decision-making.
Conclusion: The Majority view is not a reliable basis for ethical decision making.
Premises: The Majority view is not a reliable basis for ethical decision making because
(1) Even though everyone else says that it okay does not make it okay and
(2) The Majority view should not replace a persons own ethical views and
(3) Ethical decision is too important to just go unquestioned along with the majority view.
The Role of Feelings
1. Paragraph: Explain in your own words what feelings are. Cite your sources.
Every person has an internal sense that makes them happy or sad and this sense is what creates our feeling. These feeling help us determine what is right and wrong by how we react to the thought of an action. But just because one persons feelings say that an action is right, does it make the action right? In our reading “Thinking Critically About Ethical Issues” there is a mention where a boy causes mischief “because I felt like it”. If all of society accepted that we could do whatever we desired just because we felt like it would cause social chaos.
2. Argument: Compose a short argument, in “argument elements” form. I’ll provide the arguable issue; you provide the rest. Make sure each of your premises is a complete sentence, and that your argument doesn’t break any of the rules listed in the first chapter of the Rulebook for Arguments:
Arguable Issue: The arguable issue is whether or not our feelings are a reliable basis for ethical decision-making.
Conclusion: Feeling are not a reliable basis for ethical decision making.
Premises: Feeling are not a reliable basis for ethical decision making because
(1) An ethical decision may actually go against what makes us feel good and
(2) feelings can cause us to act irrationally and
(3) feelings of a individual do not always agree with the social ethical views.
Part Three
The ability to express yourself in your own words is essential in this class. Did you put everything in your own words this time?
I was very careful to interpret the reading and use my own words to answer the questions. With some of the questions I quoted the required reading and cited the title of the book used.
What was easiest / hardest about this assignment? Creating the arguments was the easiest part of this assignment.
I found that searching the internet to find information about ethics and law was difficult, I would find something I felt was relevant only to have it turn out to be totally useless.
How will you apply what you learned through this assignment to your everyday life?
I am hoping to apply this in two parts of my life. One is with my wife, we tend to have arguments and not the kind we are learning about in class actually they are not that bad. I would like to take a different approach to our everyday disagreements might add a little spice. The other is in my professional career when it comes time to discuss the pros and cons of a new proposal or project.
How well do you think you did on this assignment? Explain.
With all things considered I feel I did fairly well on this assignment. I was diligent to keep in mind the rules for the arguments and to refer back to the reading while answering the other questions as well as using quotes from the reading.
1. Paragraph: explain in your own words what the relationship is between laws and ethics.
Laws and ethics are tightly related yet completely separate and unique different. The relationship they share is one where Ethics can exist without law however; law cannot exist without ethics as ethics are an underling part of law. Laws are created to enforce a particular ethical viewpoint that a group of people believe is in the best interest of the rest of society. Laws are a reflection of societies view point at a given spot in time. As time progresses so do the laws this is due to the driving ethical forces behind those laws alter with the shifting of ethical view.
2. Paragraph & Link: Find one online resources related to this topic—not Wikipedia. Explain in a brief paragraph what you learned about this topic through the resource you found; include the link at the end of your paragraph.
In this article the author describes how ethics and laws are intertwined and function together. However, the focus on ethics and laws as separate entity is very difficult. There are times in which laws that were based on ethical issues of one era no longer apply in another and the laws need to be revisited and updated to reflect the current ethical views. The debate behind the relationship of ethics and law has been around for centuries and will most like continue far into the future.
http://www-hsc.usc.edu/~mbernste/tae.ethics&law.herrera.html
3. Argument: Compose a short argument, in “argument elements” form. I’ll provide the arguable issue; you provide the rest. Make sure each of your premises is a complete sentence, and that your argument doesn’t break any of the rules listed in the first chapter of the Rulebook for Arguments:
Arguable Issue: The arguable issue is whether or not we need ethics, given that we already have laws.
Conclusion: We need ethics even though we already have laws.
Premises: We need ethics even though we already have laws because,
(1) Laws are derived from ethics and
(2) Laws are constantly changes due to altered ethical viewpoints and
(3) People tend to be bound by ethics more so than laws.
Part Two
The Role of the Majority View
1. Paragraph: Explain in your own words what a Majority View is. Cite your sources.
Majority view is when a portion greater than 50% agree upon an issue. Just because the greater portion agree doesn’t mean they are correct. This happens because a vast majority of the majority does not take the time to fully evaluate the subject prior to passing their vote. Although their intentions are to support what they believe in they lack the knowledge to do so. These individuals are driven by their “Gut” using their gut feeling is what they feel is the best resource needed to pass judgment. As mentioned in “Thinking Critically About Ethical Issues” the majority view at one point was women lacked the intelligence to vote, so they were not allowed to. This majority view has since become a minority view.
2. Argument: Compose a short argument, in “argument elements” form. I’ll provide the arguable issue; you provide the rest. Make sure each of your premises is a complete sentence, and that your argument doesn’t break any of the rules listed in the first chapter of the Rulebook for Arguments:
Arguable Issue: The arguable issue is whether or not the Majority View is a reliable basis for ethical decision-making.
Conclusion: The Majority view is not a reliable basis for ethical decision making.
Premises: The Majority view is not a reliable basis for ethical decision making because
(1) Even though everyone else says that it okay does not make it okay and
(2) The Majority view should not replace a persons own ethical views and
(3) Ethical decision is too important to just go unquestioned along with the majority view.
The Role of Feelings
1. Paragraph: Explain in your own words what feelings are. Cite your sources.
Every person has an internal sense that makes them happy or sad and this sense is what creates our feeling. These feeling help us determine what is right and wrong by how we react to the thought of an action. But just because one persons feelings say that an action is right, does it make the action right? In our reading “Thinking Critically About Ethical Issues” there is a mention where a boy causes mischief “because I felt like it”. If all of society accepted that we could do whatever we desired just because we felt like it would cause social chaos.
2. Argument: Compose a short argument, in “argument elements” form. I’ll provide the arguable issue; you provide the rest. Make sure each of your premises is a complete sentence, and that your argument doesn’t break any of the rules listed in the first chapter of the Rulebook for Arguments:
Arguable Issue: The arguable issue is whether or not our feelings are a reliable basis for ethical decision-making.
Conclusion: Feeling are not a reliable basis for ethical decision making.
Premises: Feeling are not a reliable basis for ethical decision making because
(1) An ethical decision may actually go against what makes us feel good and
(2) feelings can cause us to act irrationally and
(3) feelings of a individual do not always agree with the social ethical views.
Part Three
The ability to express yourself in your own words is essential in this class. Did you put everything in your own words this time?
I was very careful to interpret the reading and use my own words to answer the questions. With some of the questions I quoted the required reading and cited the title of the book used.
What was easiest / hardest about this assignment? Creating the arguments was the easiest part of this assignment.
I found that searching the internet to find information about ethics and law was difficult, I would find something I felt was relevant only to have it turn out to be totally useless.
How will you apply what you learned through this assignment to your everyday life?
I am hoping to apply this in two parts of my life. One is with my wife, we tend to have arguments and not the kind we are learning about in class actually they are not that bad. I would like to take a different approach to our everyday disagreements might add a little spice. The other is in my professional career when it comes time to discuss the pros and cons of a new proposal or project.
How well do you think you did on this assignment? Explain.
With all things considered I feel I did fairly well on this assignment. I was diligent to keep in mind the rules for the arguments and to refer back to the reading while answering the other questions as well as using quotes from the reading.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Blog assignment #3
1. Explain what “to give an argument” means in this book.
“to give an argument” means to present a set of reasons to support a conclusion. Many times a conclusion will need to be supported by a good set of reasons. These reasons will be the basis for the audience to draw their own conclusion from. The hope is that the set of reasons will lead the audience to the desired conclusion the one supported by the reasons. To affect a good argument the reasons should be able to explain and defend the conclusion.
2. What are the reasons Weston gives in support of his claim, “arguments are essential”?
One of the reasons Weston gives is arguments are essential in order to discover which view is more desirable than another. Views are not equal and require different types of reasons to support them. Some views will require strong reasons to sway the audience while other will not require such strong arguments. Arguments that are well supported by convincing reasons use those same reasons to explain and defend it.
3. Explain why many students tend to “write an essay, but not an argument”.
Many students when they embark upon the task of writing an argument they will construct highly developed statements based upon their own view and skip over any reasons that support their views. When finished their work has fashioned into an essay instead of an argument paper. Many students when writing a paper have not had to question their own beliefs or those of others they have just had to expound upon the hard facts of the subject presented.
4. Construct two short arguments (one "for" and one "against") as modeled in the Week 3 Assignment section in Blackboard. Put each one in "elements form".
Arguable issue: Whether or not employers should allow employees to work on homework while at work.
Conclusion: Employers should not allow employees to work on homework while at work.
Premises: Employers should not allow employees to work on homework while at work because
(1) doing so prevents the employee from performing their daily duties,
(2) doing so make employees who do not have homework feel like they pick up the slack which can lead to animosity, which in turn can lead these employees to be under productive, and
(3) doing so fosters an environment where employees do not respect the workplace creating an unprofessional environment.
Arguable issue: Whether or not employers should allow employees to work on homework while at work.
Conclusion: Employers should allow employees to work on homework while at work.
Premises: Employers should allow employees to work on homework while at work.because
(1) doing do allows the employee to feel appreciated,
(2) doing so is likely to make the employee willing to go above and beyond to help the employer succeed, and
(3) doing so presents the employer in a positive manner to prospective employees.
5. Review the seven rules in chapter one. Briefly discuss how your argument demonstrates that each rule was applied, in the construction of your arguments above.
By using the “Elements Format” I was able to adhere to Rule 1 distinguish premises and conclusion.
The flow of the reasons is in a sequence order where from one action leads into or cause the following reason adhering to Rule 2 present your ideas in natural order.
My premises supported my conclusion which adheres to Rule 3 start from a reliable premises.
My reasons were straight forward and utilized common terminology adhering to Rule 4 be concrete and concise
I did not use statements that would invoke an emotional response adhering to Rule 5 Avoid loaded language
Contained within my reasons I uses the same terms throughout making the reasons easy to follow which adheres to Rule 6 Use consistent terms
The arguments were fairly simple which did not cause there to be a misinterpretation of the words adhering to Rule 7 Stick to one meaning for each term
6. Review the three rules in the appendix named, “Definitions”. In your own words, discuss how you took these rules into consideration as you constructed your arguments.
I made a point to utilize vocabulary that would not be misunderstood or have a double meaning. Since I did not use terms that could be contested I did not have to worry about clarification. My arguments did not rely on definition to sustain the reasons.
7. Good posts demonstrate:
•Sincere reflection, effort, and analysis
•Answers that are substantial (at least one large paragraph each)
•Consistent mention, citation, and integration of the assigned readings (explained in YOUR own words, though)
•Correct spelling, grammar, and punctuation
•Correctly titled posts!
How many points do you honestly feel your post this week deserves? Justify your answer.
I feel this post deserves full credit as i did all the assigned reading. I put forth a
good effort to apply what was is in the readings into my arguments.
“to give an argument” means to present a set of reasons to support a conclusion. Many times a conclusion will need to be supported by a good set of reasons. These reasons will be the basis for the audience to draw their own conclusion from. The hope is that the set of reasons will lead the audience to the desired conclusion the one supported by the reasons. To affect a good argument the reasons should be able to explain and defend the conclusion.
2. What are the reasons Weston gives in support of his claim, “arguments are essential”?
One of the reasons Weston gives is arguments are essential in order to discover which view is more desirable than another. Views are not equal and require different types of reasons to support them. Some views will require strong reasons to sway the audience while other will not require such strong arguments. Arguments that are well supported by convincing reasons use those same reasons to explain and defend it.
3. Explain why many students tend to “write an essay, but not an argument”.
Many students when they embark upon the task of writing an argument they will construct highly developed statements based upon their own view and skip over any reasons that support their views. When finished their work has fashioned into an essay instead of an argument paper. Many students when writing a paper have not had to question their own beliefs or those of others they have just had to expound upon the hard facts of the subject presented.
4. Construct two short arguments (one "for" and one "against") as modeled in the Week 3 Assignment section in Blackboard. Put each one in "elements form".
Arguable issue: Whether or not employers should allow employees to work on homework while at work.
Conclusion: Employers should not allow employees to work on homework while at work.
Premises: Employers should not allow employees to work on homework while at work because
(1) doing so prevents the employee from performing their daily duties,
(2) doing so make employees who do not have homework feel like they pick up the slack which can lead to animosity, which in turn can lead these employees to be under productive, and
(3) doing so fosters an environment where employees do not respect the workplace creating an unprofessional environment.
Arguable issue: Whether or not employers should allow employees to work on homework while at work.
Conclusion: Employers should allow employees to work on homework while at work.
Premises: Employers should allow employees to work on homework while at work.because
(1) doing do allows the employee to feel appreciated,
(2) doing so is likely to make the employee willing to go above and beyond to help the employer succeed, and
(3) doing so presents the employer in a positive manner to prospective employees.
5. Review the seven rules in chapter one. Briefly discuss how your argument demonstrates that each rule was applied, in the construction of your arguments above.
By using the “Elements Format” I was able to adhere to Rule 1 distinguish premises and conclusion.
The flow of the reasons is in a sequence order where from one action leads into or cause the following reason adhering to Rule 2 present your ideas in natural order.
My premises supported my conclusion which adheres to Rule 3 start from a reliable premises.
My reasons were straight forward and utilized common terminology adhering to Rule 4 be concrete and concise
I did not use statements that would invoke an emotional response adhering to Rule 5 Avoid loaded language
Contained within my reasons I uses the same terms throughout making the reasons easy to follow which adheres to Rule 6 Use consistent terms
The arguments were fairly simple which did not cause there to be a misinterpretation of the words adhering to Rule 7 Stick to one meaning for each term
6. Review the three rules in the appendix named, “Definitions”. In your own words, discuss how you took these rules into consideration as you constructed your arguments.
I made a point to utilize vocabulary that would not be misunderstood or have a double meaning. Since I did not use terms that could be contested I did not have to worry about clarification. My arguments did not rely on definition to sustain the reasons.
7. Good posts demonstrate:
•Sincere reflection, effort, and analysis
•Answers that are substantial (at least one large paragraph each)
•Consistent mention, citation, and integration of the assigned readings (explained in YOUR own words, though)
•Correct spelling, grammar, and punctuation
•Correctly titled posts!
How many points do you honestly feel your post this week deserves? Justify your answer.
I feel this post deserves full credit as i did all the assigned reading. I put forth a
good effort to apply what was is in the readings into my arguments.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
