TEMPLATE
(1) Question:
Whether or not human beings have a natural tendency to do good or evil?
(2) Conceptual Clarifications:
The objective would be to determine whether or not humans can control their tendencies to do good or evil or is it ingrain in us from birth? Are we as humans obligated to do good or are we accepted to do evil based on the fact that we are creatures of the universe as are animals and that some evil actions are simply instinctual as means of survival?
(3) Answer:
I believe that humans do have a natural tendency to do good and evil. I do believe good out weighs the evil tendency more often than not, however we are not perfect beings and therefore are unable resist the temptation to do evil under certain circumstances. I also believe that life experiences can influence those natural tendencies as well. For example: If a person is subject to constant abuse rather it be physical or verbal, that person will likely have more evil thoughts than a person who has had a life full of love and praise. Additionally if a person has seemingly "good luck" in life and rarely experiences hardships that person will more likely have more good tendencies than that of a person who has seemingly "bad luck" and is unfortunate in having good things happen to them making them feel bitter and anger hence having more evil tendencies. Although these factors may play a role in a human beings natural tendencies, I also believe that the human mind is very powerful and can overcome the urges of evil with an innate desire to do so instead of giving in to the strong pull to do evil, however I understand that our minds can trick us into to believing we are doing good when in fact our actions are evil in which case desire alone may not be enough and psychiatric counseling may be beneficial for reiterating our moral values to do good.
(4) Example:
As per the writings of scadapaly good and evil stem from "dichotomy" that is the two-sided or opposite opinions. There were several examples given in this writing such as in/out, up/down, male/female, life/death and of course good/evil. Another example perhaps a more detailed one was the comparison of human tendencies and that of animals. It was written as follows: "Animals do not perceive good and evil. They do not dichotmize their existence. They just exist. They simply perceive reality as it is. They do not question their existence. They simply are."
Humans question everything. We judge everything as being good or bad or being lesser degrees of good or bad (shades of grey). We categorize everything in our existence and invent elaborate systems of symbols to help define the reality we perceive. Examples of such systems would be language, math, and the periodic chart of elements. We further break down atoms into protons, electrons, and neutrons which we break down into quarks which are theorized to break down into superstrings. As for a more personal example I have had many hardships throughout my life which includes growing up in poverty that resulted in being the underdog all throughout school which eventually resulted in becoming a high school drop out. Also having many illnesses that I had to overcome, including cancer that limited me in choosing to better myself as I was unable to go college until later in life, (just to name a few) all of which could have made me a bitter person and possibly having stronger evil tendencies whereas someone I know has had little to no known hardships and has had mostly pleasurable experiences in life (aside from wanting a proposal from a longtime boyfriend) cannot relate and would be more likely to have good tendencies.
(5) Word Count:
Sections 2 + 3 + 4. Must be at least 500 words. Throw those sections into Microsoft Word, and use the Word count function. :) For example, this entire post comes out to 479 words.
(6) Image:
Optional. Find a video or picture that relates to the question.
(7) References:
Ruggiero. (2008). Thinking Critically About Ethical Issues. McGraw Hill.
www.scadapaly.com/dichotomy.htm
*** make sure you add your additional sources here!!!
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Blog Assignment # 5
Blog Assignment #5 (Due Wednesday, February 4)
Whew! You all deserve a break this week. Thank you sincerely for all your efforts and contributions throughout our first 4 weeks; I have witnessed some serious learning and application of knowledge. And so, for your week 5 post, all you have to do is:
1. Find an online resource related to our week 5 readings...a video, web page, song, image, etc.
2. Cite the resource--either link to it and/or clearly list it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qyz3EKj7hw
3. Explain how and why it relates to our readings. Be specific; note which passages from our text most relate & why.
This video relates to the readings because it has the exact same title. It discusses the role of conscience from the right or wrong judgement we make in every day life and also how religion can play a huge role in our conscience . Its uses illustrations, (even though they are drawings), as examples such as the angel and devil on our shoulder that help explain how the decisions we make about whats right or wrong are the role of our conscience. It also depicts how religion plays a part of our conscience by using Christians beliefs as examples. Example: Christians believe that GOD speaks to them on how to make the right decisions, but also how it can be misinterpreted that doing wrong may sometimes be good if they believe GOD tells them too, i.e. murdering prostitutes. It also suggests that our conscience makes us feel guilty when we do something we know is wrong.
4. In a separate paragraph, tell me how many points you believe your efforts deserve--in argument form! For example: I think I deserve @ least 20 points for my efforts because I read the chapter found a video that very much relates too the reading and gave example of how it relates. I may not deserve full credit however, because I am late in posting this assignment although I had good reasons and it could not be helped.
Arguable issue: whether or not this post deserves points...if yes, how many?
Conclusion: this post deserves x points
Premises: this post deserves x points because:
(1)
(2)
and so on...
Posted by PurpleBike at 7:46 PM 0 comments
Whew! You all deserve a break this week. Thank you sincerely for all your efforts and contributions throughout our first 4 weeks; I have witnessed some serious learning and application of knowledge. And so, for your week 5 post, all you have to do is:
1. Find an online resource related to our week 5 readings...a video, web page, song, image, etc.
2. Cite the resource--either link to it and/or clearly list it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qyz3EKj7hw
3. Explain how and why it relates to our readings. Be specific; note which passages from our text most relate & why.
This video relates to the readings because it has the exact same title. It discusses the role of conscience from the right or wrong judgement we make in every day life and also how religion can play a huge role in our conscience . Its uses illustrations, (even though they are drawings), as examples such as the angel and devil on our shoulder that help explain how the decisions we make about whats right or wrong are the role of our conscience. It also depicts how religion plays a part of our conscience by using Christians beliefs as examples. Example: Christians believe that GOD speaks to them on how to make the right decisions, but also how it can be misinterpreted that doing wrong may sometimes be good if they believe GOD tells them too, i.e. murdering prostitutes. It also suggests that our conscience makes us feel guilty when we do something we know is wrong.
4. In a separate paragraph, tell me how many points you believe your efforts deserve--in argument form! For example: I think I deserve @ least 20 points for my efforts because I read the chapter found a video that very much relates too the reading and gave example of how it relates. I may not deserve full credit however, because I am late in posting this assignment although I had good reasons and it could not be helped.
Arguable issue: whether or not this post deserves points...if yes, how many?
Conclusion: this post deserves x points
Premises: this post deserves x points because:
(1)
(2)
and so on...
Posted by PurpleBike at 7:46 PM 0 comments
Blog Assignment #4
Friday, January 23, 2009
Blog Assignment #4 (Due Wednesday, January 28)
See former blog assignments for posting instructions. I’m looking for three things this week. For Blog Assignment #4, I want you to demonstrate that
(1) you understand some of the more important things we’ve learned so far,
(2) you’ve read and understood our week 4 readings, and
(3) you can construct short arguments for all of the above. There are THREE parts to this assignment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSIGNMENT PART ONE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some of the most significant concepts we’ve learned about so far are Moral Relativism, the Relationship between Law & Ethics, and the Relationship between Religious Beliefs & Ethics. I’ve constructed a small assignment for each of these topics. The ONE you are expected to complete will depend on your last name. Keep reading.
Last names beginning with A - G: Moral Relativism
1. Paragraph: Explain in your own words what Moral Relativism is—what do people who hold this view believe?
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 Moral Relativism is a good view to hold.
Conclusion:Premises:
(1)
(2)
(3)
Last names beginning with H - P:
Relationship b/n Law and Ethics
1. Paragraph: explain in your own words what the relationship is between laws and ethics.
The relationship between laws and ethics is the making of decisions based on morals and values. Both the law and Ethicist strive to make fair judgements, however Ethicist cannot enforce such reason by what should be done they can only suggest what ought to be done. The law on the other hand can use authority to enforce good behavior.
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.
I think we definitely need ethics even though we have laws because without ethics we would not have laws. It is important to our society that we follow morals and values in which we make our laws or we would not have any consistency to whats right or wrong. Without ethics being a part of the laws their would not be any Justis and many people would suffer the consequences.
Conclusion:Premises:
(1)for consistency to do whats right
(2)for justice for all people
(3)everyone would face the same consequences
Last names beginning with Q - Z:
Relationship b/n Religion & Ethics
1. Paragraph: explain in your own words what the relationship is between religion and ethics.
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 ethics and religious beliefs are complementary.
Conclusion:Premises:
(1)
(2)
(3)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSIGNMENT PART TWO
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The week 4 readings cover two chapters in the Ruggiero book, The Role of the Majority View, and the Role of Feelings. Each student must complete BOTH of the following assignments.
The Role of the Majority View
1. Paragraph: Explain in your own words what a Majority View is. Cite your sources.
Majority views is just as it states; that the majority of people in a group or community votes the same on the issues at hand. However, the majorities view isn't always perfect. We must consider what makes up the majority. For example majority can be 1 percent or 49 percent of the group as can 51 or 99 percent. In other words if only that 1 percent votes with either side than majority rules. Ruggiero, pg. 24
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.
The Majority View is not a reliable basis because everyone in the majority may not have all of the facts to make an ethical decision, nor might they be educated about the issue or they might show prejudice to the situation and it only takes that 1 percent to make the final decision.
Conclusion:Premises:
(1)The Majority View is not a reliable basis because they all may not have all the facts.
(2)The Majority View is not a reliable basis because they all may not be educated about the issue.
(3)The Majority View is not a reliable basis because some may show prejudice to the situation.
The Role of Feelings
1. Paragraph: Explain in your own words what feelings are. Cite your sources.
Feelings are each individuals wants likes and dislikes.
Whatever each individual believes is right or wrong.
Feelings are desires and preferences. Ruggiero pg. 33
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.
Feelings are not a reliable basis for ethical decision making because feelings are different for each individual person and what might be good or right to one person may be bad or wrong to another. For example a college student might think it is a good thing to party hard and have fun on the weekend relieving themselves of their duties for a short time, while a person with christian beliefs might see this act as evil and the college student should face damnation. Therefore feelings are not a reliable basis because they are to personalized to be judged fairly.
Conclusion:Premises:
(1)Feelings are not a reliable basis for ethical decision making because they differ for each person.
(2)Feelings are not a reliable basis for ethical decision making because they are to personalized to make fair judgments.
(3)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSIGNMENT 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?
Yes, to the best of my knowledge.
What was easiest / hardest about this assignment?
The easiest part was the readings.
The hardest part was trying to put everything in my own words.
How will you apply what you learned through this assignment to your everyday life?
To always keep an open mind and think things through before making any decisions.
How well do you think you did on this assignment? Explain.
I think I did ok on this assignment. I read the chapters and answered the questions to the best of my ability but I always go away feeling like I should've done a better job.
Posted by PurpleBike at 11:04 AM 0 comments
Blog Assignment #4 (Due Wednesday, January 28)
See former blog assignments for posting instructions. I’m looking for three things this week. For Blog Assignment #4, I want you to demonstrate that
(1) you understand some of the more important things we’ve learned so far,
(2) you’ve read and understood our week 4 readings, and
(3) you can construct short arguments for all of the above. There are THREE parts to this assignment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSIGNMENT PART ONE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some of the most significant concepts we’ve learned about so far are Moral Relativism, the Relationship between Law & Ethics, and the Relationship between Religious Beliefs & Ethics. I’ve constructed a small assignment for each of these topics. The ONE you are expected to complete will depend on your last name. Keep reading.
Last names beginning with A - G: Moral Relativism
1. Paragraph: Explain in your own words what Moral Relativism is—what do people who hold this view believe?
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 Moral Relativism is a good view to hold.
Conclusion:Premises:
(1)
(2)
(3)
Last names beginning with H - P:
Relationship b/n Law and Ethics
1. Paragraph: explain in your own words what the relationship is between laws and ethics.
The relationship between laws and ethics is the making of decisions based on morals and values. Both the law and Ethicist strive to make fair judgements, however Ethicist cannot enforce such reason by what should be done they can only suggest what ought to be done. The law on the other hand can use authority to enforce good behavior.
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.
I think we definitely need ethics even though we have laws because without ethics we would not have laws. It is important to our society that we follow morals and values in which we make our laws or we would not have any consistency to whats right or wrong. Without ethics being a part of the laws their would not be any Justis and many people would suffer the consequences.
Conclusion:Premises:
(1)for consistency to do whats right
(2)for justice for all people
(3)everyone would face the same consequences
Last names beginning with Q - Z:
Relationship b/n Religion & Ethics
1. Paragraph: explain in your own words what the relationship is between religion and ethics.
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 ethics and religious beliefs are complementary.
Conclusion:Premises:
(1)
(2)
(3)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSIGNMENT PART TWO
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The week 4 readings cover two chapters in the Ruggiero book, The Role of the Majority View, and the Role of Feelings. Each student must complete BOTH of the following assignments.
The Role of the Majority View
1. Paragraph: Explain in your own words what a Majority View is. Cite your sources.
Majority views is just as it states; that the majority of people in a group or community votes the same on the issues at hand. However, the majorities view isn't always perfect. We must consider what makes up the majority. For example majority can be 1 percent or 49 percent of the group as can 51 or 99 percent. In other words if only that 1 percent votes with either side than majority rules. Ruggiero, pg. 24
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.
The Majority View is not a reliable basis because everyone in the majority may not have all of the facts to make an ethical decision, nor might they be educated about the issue or they might show prejudice to the situation and it only takes that 1 percent to make the final decision.
Conclusion:Premises:
(1)The Majority View is not a reliable basis because they all may not have all the facts.
(2)The Majority View is not a reliable basis because they all may not be educated about the issue.
(3)The Majority View is not a reliable basis because some may show prejudice to the situation.
The Role of Feelings
1. Paragraph: Explain in your own words what feelings are. Cite your sources.
Feelings are each individuals wants likes and dislikes.
Whatever each individual believes is right or wrong.
Feelings are desires and preferences. Ruggiero pg. 33
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.
Feelings are not a reliable basis for ethical decision making because feelings are different for each individual person and what might be good or right to one person may be bad or wrong to another. For example a college student might think it is a good thing to party hard and have fun on the weekend relieving themselves of their duties for a short time, while a person with christian beliefs might see this act as evil and the college student should face damnation. Therefore feelings are not a reliable basis because they are to personalized to be judged fairly.
Conclusion:Premises:
(1)Feelings are not a reliable basis for ethical decision making because they differ for each person.
(2)Feelings are not a reliable basis for ethical decision making because they are to personalized to make fair judgments.
(3)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSIGNMENT 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?
Yes, to the best of my knowledge.
What was easiest / hardest about this assignment?
The easiest part was the readings.
The hardest part was trying to put everything in my own words.
How will you apply what you learned through this assignment to your everyday life?
To always keep an open mind and think things through before making any decisions.
How well do you think you did on this assignment? Explain.
I think I did ok on this assignment. I read the chapters and answered the questions to the best of my ability but I always go away feeling like I should've done a better job.
Posted by PurpleBike at 11:04 AM 0 comments
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Blog Assignment #10
Ethical Decision Making Framework
FOCUS: IDEALS
NAME: Tracy Hundley
STEP ONE: THE DETAILS OF THE CASE
(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: I chose #11 on page 115. The issue of the young boy receiving the expensive gift, then giving it away.
(2) Stakeholders: Name each person, group, organization, etc., that has a stake in this outcome. The eight -year-old boy, his parents and the child he gave the gift to.
(3) Are the details given sufficient? Why or why not? No, we know who, what, when, why, but not where or how
(4) What additional questions does this inquiry raise? What was the gift? Where were they playing? Would the parents be proud of their child or be mad?
STEP TWO: THE RELEVANT CRITERIA
1. Obligations (aka "duties"): Optional this week
2. Moral Ideals (aka "virtues"): See breakdown of ideals below
3. Consequences (aka "outcomes" or "results"): Optional this week
NOTE: Not ALL of the following ideals will apply! Only consider the main ones that you believe apply, in the inquiry you chose. Don't just pick the easy ones to consider, because you didn't take the time to thoroughly read the chapter and learn what each one of these actually means. I will quiz you when we do group work on Thursday.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Prudence:
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Justice:
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Temperance: The eight-year-old boy uses this virtue by putting his own desires aside for the other child's feelings and not being selfish
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Courage: He also uses this virtue by having the courage to do a good deed despite the fact he may be in trouble with his parents
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Loving Kindness: He uses this virtue by following the Golden Rule-"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you".
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Honesty:
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Compassion: He uses this virtue by showing concern about the other child's feelings and acting on that emotion to do something to make him feel better.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Forgiveness:
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Repentance:
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Reparation:
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Gratitude:
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Beneficence: He also uses this virtue by the ideal of doing a "random act of kindness".
* Conflicting ideals--consider the relative importance of each; determine which ideal represents the greater good (or the lesser evil). See pages 110-11 for clarification. I think that they are all equally important to the action of the eight-year-old boy. they all tie in together. It took courage to put his own desires aside as well as compassion to enforce the Golden Rule all to do a random act of kindness. The greater good would be that he did follow the Golden Rule and did the right thing although he may reprimanded by his parents.
STEP THREE: POSSIBLE COURSES OF ACTION
Alternative #1: I agree with the child's actions, however he could have ignored the other little boy, kept his new toy and not faced any possible discipline from his parents .
Alternative #2: Erase this sentence & insert your own answer
Alternative #3: And so on...
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.
Tom's action achieves the greater good and should be respected by his friends and most importantly his parents. His selfless act of compassion to feel pity (pg 109) and courage to face the truth (pg 108) by his parents is admirable, especially by a child of his age. As I stated above, he could have ignored the other boy and kept his toy but instead chose to follow the Golden Rule (pg 108) and perform a random act of kindness (pg 110).
SELF EVALUATION
1. In your own words, describe something new that you learned from this week’s assigned reading material and guidance. I learned that the word 'agape' is a Greek word meaning-love of neighbor and that the Golden Rule is found, in some form, in almost every religion. I also leaned the meaning of temperance and reparation.
2. In your own words, describe in detail some insight you gained, about the material, from one of your classmates' blogs this week. Name the blog, and insert answer here.
3. Did you post a thoroughly completed post to your blog on time this week? yes, except for one question
4. Did you ALSO print this out, so you can bring it to class and earn total points? yes
5. Of 25 points total, my efforts this week deserve: I think I deserve most of the 25 points because I read the chapter and answered all of the questions, except one, to the best of my ability.
FOCUS: IDEALS
NAME: Tracy Hundley
STEP ONE: THE DETAILS OF THE CASE
(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: I chose #11 on page 115. The issue of the young boy receiving the expensive gift, then giving it away.
(2) Stakeholders: Name each person, group, organization, etc., that has a stake in this outcome. The eight -year-old boy, his parents and the child he gave the gift to.
(3) Are the details given sufficient? Why or why not? No, we know who, what, when, why, but not where or how
(4) What additional questions does this inquiry raise? What was the gift? Where were they playing? Would the parents be proud of their child or be mad?
STEP TWO: THE RELEVANT CRITERIA
1. Obligations (aka "duties"): Optional this week
2. Moral Ideals (aka "virtues"): See breakdown of ideals below
3. Consequences (aka "outcomes" or "results"): Optional this week
NOTE: Not ALL of the following ideals will apply! Only consider the main ones that you believe apply, in the inquiry you chose. Don't just pick the easy ones to consider, because you didn't take the time to thoroughly read the chapter and learn what each one of these actually means. I will quiz you when we do group work on Thursday.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Prudence:
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Justice:
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Temperance: The eight-year-old boy uses this virtue by putting his own desires aside for the other child's feelings and not being selfish
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Courage: He also uses this virtue by having the courage to do a good deed despite the fact he may be in trouble with his parents
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Loving Kindness: He uses this virtue by following the Golden Rule-"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you".
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Honesty:
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Compassion: He uses this virtue by showing concern about the other child's feelings and acting on that emotion to do something to make him feel better.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Forgiveness:
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Repentance:
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Reparation:
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Gratitude:
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Beneficence: He also uses this virtue by the ideal of doing a "random act of kindness".
* Conflicting ideals--consider the relative importance of each; determine which ideal represents the greater good (or the lesser evil). See pages 110-11 for clarification. I think that they are all equally important to the action of the eight-year-old boy. they all tie in together. It took courage to put his own desires aside as well as compassion to enforce the Golden Rule all to do a random act of kindness. The greater good would be that he did follow the Golden Rule and did the right thing although he may reprimanded by his parents.
STEP THREE: POSSIBLE COURSES OF ACTION
Alternative #1: I agree with the child's actions, however he could have ignored the other little boy, kept his new toy and not faced any possible discipline from his parents .
Alternative #2: Erase this sentence & insert your own answer
Alternative #3: And so on...
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.
Tom's action achieves the greater good and should be respected by his friends and most importantly his parents. His selfless act of compassion to feel pity (pg 109) and courage to face the truth (pg 108) by his parents is admirable, especially by a child of his age. As I stated above, he could have ignored the other boy and kept his toy but instead chose to follow the Golden Rule (pg 108) and perform a random act of kindness (pg 110).
SELF EVALUATION
1. In your own words, describe something new that you learned from this week’s assigned reading material and guidance. I learned that the word 'agape' is a Greek word meaning-love of neighbor and that the Golden Rule is found, in some form, in almost every religion. I also leaned the meaning of temperance and reparation.
2. In your own words, describe in detail some insight you gained, about the material, from one of your classmates' blogs this week. Name the blog, and insert answer here.
3. Did you post a thoroughly completed post to your blog on time this week? yes, except for one question
4. Did you ALSO print this out, so you can bring it to class and earn total points? yes
5. Of 25 points total, my efforts this week deserve: I think I deserve most of the 25 points because I read the chapter and answered all of the questions, except one, to the best of my ability.
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:
To assume details about something rather than asking questions pertaining to the subject to fully understand the concept. Example: If someone was inquiring about declawing a cat they might assume that only the claws were removed, however if they were to gather more details they would learn that it involves more than just the simple removal of the claws, but instead the surgery involves the removal of the first joint of each toe. In which case may or may not affect their decision to go through with the procedure.
Oversimplification: When rules are set and then 'fudged' for certain individuals. Example: When all employees are given rules and a select few are exempt from following them because they may be friends with the manager who enforces the rules, then that would be a double standard or oversimplification
Hasty Conclusions: When someone jumps to a conclusion before gathering all the information at hand to make an informed decision. Example: An employee is given a task outside of the normal daily requirements for the job in which she was hired and later is offered additional assistance in completing the task. The employee comes to a hasty conclusion that her employer dislikes her technique and therefore wants someone else to help her.The reality was the employer new the task was difficult and thought the employee was overwhelmed so he offered her some assistance.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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?
We would be expected to weigh out the differences of the situations and side with the most important of the obligations.
2. How can we reconcile conflicting obligations? When weighing out which is most important, we need to be thorough and honest in making the decision and morally correct using ours values to make an intelligent and fair decision.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSIGNMENT PART THREE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. In a nutshell, what is the most important thing, for you, that you learned from this assignment? The importance in knowing all of the details before making a decision or drawing any conclusions.
2. How will you apply what you learned through this assignment to your everyday life? I will think things through looking at more than just one point of view before making a judgement
3. What grade do you believe your efforts regarding this assignment deserve? Justify your answer. I think I deserve full credit on this assignment as I have read the chapter and answered all the questions to the best of my ability.
Posted by PurpleBike at 9:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
To assume details about something rather than asking questions pertaining to the subject to fully understand the concept. Example: If someone was inquiring about declawing a cat they might assume that only the claws were removed, however if they were to gather more details they would learn that it involves more than just the simple removal of the claws, but instead the surgery involves the removal of the first joint of each toe. In which case may or may not affect their decision to go through with the procedure.
Oversimplification: When rules are set and then 'fudged' for certain individuals. Example: When all employees are given rules and a select few are exempt from following them because they may be friends with the manager who enforces the rules, then that would be a double standard or oversimplification
Hasty Conclusions: When someone jumps to a conclusion before gathering all the information at hand to make an informed decision. Example: An employee is given a task outside of the normal daily requirements for the job in which she was hired and later is offered additional assistance in completing the task. The employee comes to a hasty conclusion that her employer dislikes her technique and therefore wants someone else to help her.The reality was the employer new the task was difficult and thought the employee was overwhelmed so he offered her some assistance.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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?
We would be expected to weigh out the differences of the situations and side with the most important of the obligations.
2. How can we reconcile conflicting obligations? When weighing out which is most important, we need to be thorough and honest in making the decision and morally correct using ours values to make an intelligent and fair decision.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSIGNMENT PART THREE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. In a nutshell, what is the most important thing, for you, that you learned from this assignment? The importance in knowing all of the details before making a decision or drawing any conclusions.
2. How will you apply what you learned through this assignment to your everyday life? I will think things through looking at more than just one point of view before making a judgement
3. What grade do you believe your efforts regarding this assignment deserve? Justify your answer. I think I deserve full credit on this assignment as I have read the chapter and answered all the questions to the best of my ability.
Posted by PurpleBike at 9:
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
1. Explain what “to give an argument” means in this book.
Giving an argument according to Anthony Weston, can be explained as giving solid evidence to backup your claim.
2. What are the reasons Weston gives in support of his claim, “arguments are essential”? Weston states that without an argument, your reasoning for your conclusions would in fact be no more than simple disagreements with no support to prove your point. Also he encourages arguments to analyze points on both sides to determine which conclusion holds the most weight.
3. Explain why many students tend to “write an essay, but not an argument”. It is not always understood what is expected in following the rules of a good argument, therefore , without the proper knowledge it is unlikely you will make a good argument but instead merely write essays.
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".
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.
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.
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 definitely do not deserve the full 25 points for this assignment. My answers are short, not answered well, and some are not answered at all. I struggle with the issue of argument often as i am not one who speaks my mind. This is one of my biggest down falls that I would like to over come & I am hopeful that this class will help me with this issue.
Giving an argument according to Anthony Weston, can be explained as giving solid evidence to backup your claim.
2. What are the reasons Weston gives in support of his claim, “arguments are essential”? Weston states that without an argument, your reasoning for your conclusions would in fact be no more than simple disagreements with no support to prove your point. Also he encourages arguments to analyze points on both sides to determine which conclusion holds the most weight.
3. Explain why many students tend to “write an essay, but not an argument”. It is not always understood what is expected in following the rules of a good argument, therefore , without the proper knowledge it is unlikely you will make a good argument but instead merely write essays.
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".
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.
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.
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 definitely do not deserve the full 25 points for this assignment. My answers are short, not answered well, and some are not answered at all. I struggle with the issue of argument often as i am not one who speaks my mind. This is one of my biggest down falls that I would like to over come & I am hopeful that this class will help me with this issue.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Blog Assignment #2
1. Were the questions on the Moral Sense Test difficult to answer (psychologically, emotionally, conceptually, technically, etc.)? Why or why not? Do you think your responses to the Moral Sense Test questions were consistent? Does this matter?
I did struggle somewhat with my answers to the Moral Sense Test questions but not necessarily because I found them to be hard fore say, but rather that i attempted to analyze each one from different points of view. I do think my answers were consistent for most of the questions but not all of them due to the different moral issues each presented. I do believe that consistency is important in many aspects, however these questions were based on your overall judgement of different scenarios and therefore may not always be so forthright.
2. Should people always follow the law? Why or why not? When might one be justified in NOT following the law? Give examples.
Ethically and moral we should always follow the law. It is the only means we have to keep the peace and be justified, however I do agree that under certain circumstances breaking the law is justifiable. An example of this would be in a case of a battered woman. If the woman is fearful of her life and is undoubtedly going to die at the hands of her abuser, she may kill her partner in self defence, in which case should not be judged as harshly as a heartless murder, as she committed the crime out of fear and not because she is evil and merely plotted to take a life.
3. In your own words, explain what "social convention" means. Give examples.
4. Should people always follow the conventions of their society? Why or why not? Give examples.
For the majority of the time it may be understandable to do what is socially expected of us, however occasionally a situation may arise when we may have to step outside of our comfort zone and do something that may be looked down upon. Such may be so if you live in a religious community in which it is unacceptable for a same sex couple to adopt a child. The couple would be under heavy scrutiny although it is strictly the communities desire to not have the couple adopt because of their choice of sexuality and not because it wouldn't be in the best interest of the child.
5. Should people always follow their own principles? Why or why not? Give examples.
I believe people should stay true to themselves and not change who they are as a person. Many times people give into peer pressure and change who they are inside just to be accepted in society. The overwhelming need to fit in often changes how we think, act and even how we feel about things and about other people.If only we could be more strong and stand firm on what our true feelings are then maybe we would learn from each other and not be so judgemental. Peer pressure is probably most known in high school when everyone wants to be popular and cool. Unfortunately, most of the time being cool is going out of they're way to hurt others. Although many times adults are put in awkward positions at wk as well, in which someone may step on others to get promoted and move to the top.
6. Explain in your own words the difference between socially acceptable, legally acceptable, and morally acceptable.
Wanting to be accepted is human nature. Being socially accepted is probably the most sought after form of acceptance. People want to be accepted for their appearances, sexual preferences and their individuality. Being legally acceptable is also important as people may commit crimes by accident or as I discussed previously, a crime may be committed out of self defence in which neither of these should hold the same punishment as a serial killer. Lastly morally acceptable is perhaps best recognized by religious groups as these people are committed to to the right thing in society by reasons of their faith.
7. Out of 25 points, how many points do you feel your work on this assignment deserves? Justify your answer. I only deserve 20 points as I failed to answer all of the questions. However I did answer most of them and did so to the best of my ability.
I did struggle somewhat with my answers to the Moral Sense Test questions but not necessarily because I found them to be hard fore say, but rather that i attempted to analyze each one from different points of view. I do think my answers were consistent for most of the questions but not all of them due to the different moral issues each presented. I do believe that consistency is important in many aspects, however these questions were based on your overall judgement of different scenarios and therefore may not always be so forthright.
2. Should people always follow the law? Why or why not? When might one be justified in NOT following the law? Give examples.
Ethically and moral we should always follow the law. It is the only means we have to keep the peace and be justified, however I do agree that under certain circumstances breaking the law is justifiable. An example of this would be in a case of a battered woman. If the woman is fearful of her life and is undoubtedly going to die at the hands of her abuser, she may kill her partner in self defence, in which case should not be judged as harshly as a heartless murder, as she committed the crime out of fear and not because she is evil and merely plotted to take a life.
3. In your own words, explain what "social convention" means. Give examples.
4. Should people always follow the conventions of their society? Why or why not? Give examples.
For the majority of the time it may be understandable to do what is socially expected of us, however occasionally a situation may arise when we may have to step outside of our comfort zone and do something that may be looked down upon. Such may be so if you live in a religious community in which it is unacceptable for a same sex couple to adopt a child. The couple would be under heavy scrutiny although it is strictly the communities desire to not have the couple adopt because of their choice of sexuality and not because it wouldn't be in the best interest of the child.
5. Should people always follow their own principles? Why or why not? Give examples.
I believe people should stay true to themselves and not change who they are as a person. Many times people give into peer pressure and change who they are inside just to be accepted in society. The overwhelming need to fit in often changes how we think, act and even how we feel about things and about other people.If only we could be more strong and stand firm on what our true feelings are then maybe we would learn from each other and not be so judgemental. Peer pressure is probably most known in high school when everyone wants to be popular and cool. Unfortunately, most of the time being cool is going out of they're way to hurt others. Although many times adults are put in awkward positions at wk as well, in which someone may step on others to get promoted and move to the top.
6. Explain in your own words the difference between socially acceptable, legally acceptable, and morally acceptable.
Wanting to be accepted is human nature. Being socially accepted is probably the most sought after form of acceptance. People want to be accepted for their appearances, sexual preferences and their individuality. Being legally acceptable is also important as people may commit crimes by accident or as I discussed previously, a crime may be committed out of self defence in which neither of these should hold the same punishment as a serial killer. Lastly morally acceptable is perhaps best recognized by religious groups as these people are committed to to the right thing in society by reasons of their faith.
7. Out of 25 points, how many points do you feel your work on this assignment deserves? Justify your answer. I only deserve 20 points as I failed to answer all of the questions. However I did answer most of them and did so to the best of my ability.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
