(1) Question:
Are some acts morally obligatory regaurdless of the consequences for human benefit or harm?
(2) Conceptual Clarifications:
morally obligatory- morally responsible to do a certain action or morally binding in conscience.
human benefit- promotes human well-being
human harm- physical or mental damage
(3) Answer:
I believe that there are actions that we are morally responsible for regaurdless of the consequences for human benefit or harm. I believe this because when you feel morally obligated to an action then you normally don't take into account the benefits or the harm that can comes from the consequence of that action. You only feel morally obligated to acts that you view as morally right, you would not feel morally responsible to do an act if it conflicts with your morals. So when you feel the act that you are obligated too is morally right, then you should not have to take into account human benefits or harm. Unless your morals do not include the well-being of others, then you would still feel morally obligated to an act even if it results in human harm. Or if you feel that an act you feel obligated too is in the interest of the greater good or lesser of two evils, even if it results in human harm, then you can feel morally binded to an act regaurdless of it's consequences.
(4) Example:
Say you are driving to class and you are almost to class and you see your friend walking home. You know he lives a good distance away from school and it is a hot day but if you pick him up and give him a ride then you will be late to a very important class you can't afford to be late too. So you decide to not pick him up and go to class because you feel morally obligated to do the right thing and not be late to class and turn in a very important assignment. Now youchoose to do what you felt you were morally obligated too, even thogh letting your friend walk home could lead to human harm, like dehydration or say he gets hit by a car or something.
(6) References:
Ruggiero. (2008). Thinking Critically About Ethical Issues. McGraw Hill.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Blog Assignment # 10
Ethical Decision Making Framework
FOCUS: IDEALS
NAME:
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 inquiry number 10. It is about a police officer, who is on duty, overhearing a victim of a robbery describing the robber to the desk sergeant and realizes that the description of the robber fits his brother exactly but dosen't say anything.
(2) Stakeholders: Name each person, group, organization, etc., that has a stake in this outcome.
The police officer, his older brother, the victim of the robbery, and the police station.
(3) Are the details given sufficient? Why or why not?
No, because the details do not include the sevarity of the crime , what he stole, or if anyone was injured in the robbery.
(4) What additional questions does this inquiry raise?
What did his brother steal? Was anyone injured? Is the victim creditable? Does his brother have a criminal past? Does he, the officer, think this is a one time thing, or will his older brother do it again to someone else?
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
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Prudence: This applies because the officer has time to carefully think about how he will respond to the situation, using his experience as an officer he knows that if he told the sergeant that the description fits his brother, his brother would be arrested.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Justice: This applies because his brother has commited a crime and he should pay his due, the cop should not play favorites and give an unfair advantage to his brother.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Temperance: This applies because the cop should show restraint of one's desire to keep his older brother out of trouble and do his job. he shouldn't let his desires take control over him.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Courage: This applies because courage also includes "turning the mind relentlessly to seek or face the truth."(p.108) The cop should face the fact that his brother might have commited a crime and he knows that he should and can do something about it.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Loving Kindness: This applies because it is a greek word for "love of neighbor"(p. 108) If the cop helps the victim find the robber, his brother, then he would be demonstrating a form of the golden rule: "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you". I am sure if the cop was robbed then he would want someone to help him.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Honesty: Thi definately aplies because it entails being "truthful to others and refusing to mislead or deceive"(p.109) and by the cop not saying anything at all he is not being honest to the victim and telling him the truth.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Compassion: this applies because compassion "is characterized by feelings of pity and sympathy and the desire to alleviate the other person's pain." The cop does not help the victim and shows no compassion for the victim.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Forgiveness: this doesnt rely apply that much. The only way is if the cop told on his brother and the older brother forgives him.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Repentance: This applies if the cop apologizes to his brother for turning him in if he does.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Reparation: This applies the most because it " is undoing the harm we have done to others."(p.109) Like returning whatever was stolen , or by admiting to a person we have lied to what we lied about.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Gratitude: This applies because the older brother could have gratitude to his cop brother for not turning him in.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Beneficence: This is defined as "the performance of good acts for no other reason than that they are good."This doesn't apply to this situation, unless the older brother ends up turning himself in because it is what is right.
* 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.
-The conflicting ideas are loving kindness, which is when the cop protects his brother, and justice
which the cop knows if he tells on his brother he could serve jail time. So the brother decides to act like he doesn't here the victim to choose the lesser evil.
STEP THREE: POSSIBLE COURSES OF ACTION
Alternative #1: The cop tells the seargent that the description fits his brother perfectly and they bring his brother in.
Alternative #2: The cop goes to his brother and ask him if he did it and to turn himself in.
Alternative #3: The cop gets his brother and the victim together and work an agreement that if the brother returns what he stole then the victim will drop charges.
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.
The best course of action that can be taken would be for the cop to tell the sergant that the description fits his brother.This shows the most widespread respect for persons. It follows the ideals of: honesty," being truthful to others..."(p.109), by telling the sergeant and the victim the truth. Justice, by having the crime not go unpunished. Courage by "turning the mind relentlessly to seek or face the truth"(p.108) that his brother might have committed this crime. And compassion by the cop's "feelings of pity and sympathy and the desire to alleviate the other person's pain."(p.109) In this case, the victim's pain.
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 courage could also be emotional by turning the mind to see the truth.
2. In your own words, describe in detail some insight you gained, about the material, from one of your classmates' blogs this week.
I didn't look at another classmate's blog.
3. Did you post a thoroughly completed post to your blog on time this week?
Yes I did.
4. Did you ALSO print this out, so you can bring it to class and earn total points?
By the time I get to class on thursday I will have it printed out.
5. Of 25 points total, my efforts this week deserve: 25, because I spent alot of time on this post and I read the chapter completely and quoted the book in some of my responses.
FOCUS: IDEALS
NAME:
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 inquiry number 10. It is about a police officer, who is on duty, overhearing a victim of a robbery describing the robber to the desk sergeant and realizes that the description of the robber fits his brother exactly but dosen't say anything.
(2) Stakeholders: Name each person, group, organization, etc., that has a stake in this outcome.
The police officer, his older brother, the victim of the robbery, and the police station.
(3) Are the details given sufficient? Why or why not?
No, because the details do not include the sevarity of the crime , what he stole, or if anyone was injured in the robbery.
(4) What additional questions does this inquiry raise?
What did his brother steal? Was anyone injured? Is the victim creditable? Does his brother have a criminal past? Does he, the officer, think this is a one time thing, or will his older brother do it again to someone else?
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
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Prudence: This applies because the officer has time to carefully think about how he will respond to the situation, using his experience as an officer he knows that if he told the sergeant that the description fits his brother, his brother would be arrested.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Justice: This applies because his brother has commited a crime and he should pay his due, the cop should not play favorites and give an unfair advantage to his brother.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Temperance: This applies because the cop should show restraint of one's desire to keep his older brother out of trouble and do his job. he shouldn't let his desires take control over him.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Courage: This applies because courage also includes "turning the mind relentlessly to seek or face the truth."(p.108) The cop should face the fact that his brother might have commited a crime and he knows that he should and can do something about it.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Loving Kindness: This applies because it is a greek word for "love of neighbor"(p. 108) If the cop helps the victim find the robber, his brother, then he would be demonstrating a form of the golden rule: "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you". I am sure if the cop was robbed then he would want someone to help him.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Honesty: Thi definately aplies because it entails being "truthful to others and refusing to mislead or deceive"(p.109) and by the cop not saying anything at all he is not being honest to the victim and telling him the truth.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Compassion: this applies because compassion "is characterized by feelings of pity and sympathy and the desire to alleviate the other person's pain." The cop does not help the victim and shows no compassion for the victim.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Forgiveness: this doesnt rely apply that much. The only way is if the cop told on his brother and the older brother forgives him.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Repentance: This applies if the cop apologizes to his brother for turning him in if he does.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Reparation: This applies the most because it " is undoing the harm we have done to others."(p.109) Like returning whatever was stolen , or by admiting to a person we have lied to what we lied about.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Gratitude: This applies because the older brother could have gratitude to his cop brother for not turning him in.
* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Beneficence: This is defined as "the performance of good acts for no other reason than that they are good."This doesn't apply to this situation, unless the older brother ends up turning himself in because it is what is right.
* 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.
-The conflicting ideas are loving kindness, which is when the cop protects his brother, and justice
which the cop knows if he tells on his brother he could serve jail time. So the brother decides to act like he doesn't here the victim to choose the lesser evil.
STEP THREE: POSSIBLE COURSES OF ACTION
Alternative #1: The cop tells the seargent that the description fits his brother perfectly and they bring his brother in.
Alternative #2: The cop goes to his brother and ask him if he did it and to turn himself in.
Alternative #3: The cop gets his brother and the victim together and work an agreement that if the brother returns what he stole then the victim will drop charges.
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.
The best course of action that can be taken would be for the cop to tell the sergant that the description fits his brother.This shows the most widespread respect for persons. It follows the ideals of: honesty," being truthful to others..."(p.109), by telling the sergeant and the victim the truth. Justice, by having the crime not go unpunished. Courage by "turning the mind relentlessly to seek or face the truth"(p.108) that his brother might have committed this crime. And compassion by the cop's "feelings of pity and sympathy and the desire to alleviate the other person's pain."(p.109) In this case, the victim's pain.
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 courage could also be emotional by turning the mind to see the truth.
2. In your own words, describe in detail some insight you gained, about the material, from one of your classmates' blogs this week.
I didn't look at another classmate's blog.
3. Did you post a thoroughly completed post to your blog on time this week?
Yes I did.
4. Did you ALSO print this out, so you can bring it to class and earn total points?
By the time I get to class on thursday I will have it printed out.
5. Of 25 points total, my efforts this week deserve: 25, because I spent alot of time on this post and I read the chapter completely and quoted the book in some of my responses.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Blog 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?
I believe that all moral values are realitive to the culture they are found in. A huge part of ethics is your personal experiences and your upbringing, and an individual's culture helps shape a person's morals. So to say all moral values are relative to culture would be an accurate statement. One culture may look at what another culture's customs are and say that the action is unethical, but that same cultures view on the same subject may be viewed unethical or unmoral by some other culture. For example, in some cultures they have arranged marriges, which is a celebrated and common action. In other societies they see this as unmoral and unusual.
P:Moral values are heavily influenced by an individual's upbringing.
P: There are many different views on one action varying by each different culture.
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?
It is a mark of ignorance to pass judgements on other cultures or to claim that one culture is better than the other because your view on a culture is influenced by your own personal experiences and ethics. An individual may say that one culture is better because it has better moral values, but someone else may view the same values differently and not agree with the individual.To pass judgement on other cultures is also a mark of ignorance because your not taking into account the other culter's moral views and customs. So basically if you were to say one culture is better than others, then that is your own belief shaped by your own ethical standards, and it would be ignorant to push your own believes on others by passing judgement on them.
P:An individual's view on a culture is influenced by their own personal experiences.
P:To pass judgement , you wouldn't take into account other culture's moral views or customs.
C: Therefore, it is a mark of ignorance to pass judgments on other cultures
-Part Two-
In some cultures, mutilation is considered an appropriate punishment for certain crimes. For example, if a man is caught stealing then his hand is choped off. Since such a punishment is not heard of in our culture, we tend to consider it morally insupportable and unethical. I belive that if cut a man's hand off for stealing it is unethical because you should never have a right to mutalate and cut another person's hand or body part off. Jail time is an adequate and more ethical punishment for the crime.
Arguable issue: Is mutilation an appropriate punishment for certain crimes?
P: Mutilating another human is wrong, no matter what.
P:Jail time is an adequate and more ethical punishment for certain crimes.
P:The severity of the punishment does not fit the crime.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C:Mutilation is not an appropriate punishment for certain crimes.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Blog Assignment #5
1.http://ezinearticles.com/?Ethics---The-Conscience-for-Decision-Making&id=876450
2. This is a great website that relates conscience to ethics. It says that, "without conscience serving as a standard of measurement, ethics disappear." The site also talks about questions you should ask yourself before making an ethical decision, for example, "Is the decision consistent with organizational values and culture or my own personal system of ethics?"The answers to the list of questions on this site will clearly identify the ethics of a decision relative to your own personal standards. So to sum it all up, a person's conscience is the main force that drives us in all the ethical decisions we make.
3.Arguable issue: whether or not this post deserves points...if yes, how many?
Conclusion: this post deserves 23 points.
Premises: this post deserves 23 points because:
(1)This is a great site that offers some great information tht relates conscience to ethics.
(2)I put alot of thought into this assignment.
(3)I did all the work required for the assignment.
2. This is a great website that relates conscience to ethics. It says that, "without conscience serving as a standard of measurement, ethics disappear." The site also talks about questions you should ask yourself before making an ethical decision, for example, "Is the decision consistent with organizational values and culture or my own personal system of ethics?"The answers to the list of questions on this site will clearly identify the ethics of a decision relative to your own personal standards. So to sum it all up, a person's conscience is the main force that drives us in all the ethical decisions we make.
3.Arguable issue: whether or not this post deserves points...if yes, how many?
Conclusion: this post deserves 23 points.
Premises: this post deserves 23 points because:
(1)This is a great site that offers some great information tht relates conscience to ethics.
(2)I put alot of thought into this assignment.
(3)I did all the work required for the assignment.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Blog Assignment #4
Part One
1.Laws are made to protect society us and keep us in line.Laws tell you what is acceptable and not acceptable.basically, what is right and what is wrong. Ethics is what is morally right and wrong.So the relationship is that many laws are made on the premis-is it ethical?Does the general society believe this?Thats why laws vary where ever you go, because the culture of a country (or even a state) can have different values and believes on ethical issues. For example, the issue of gay marriage.It is legal in some states and not in others.Thats the relationship between law and ethics, ethics determines laws.
2.I learned that law and ethics form a problematic package,but a package deal nonetheless.You cant have laws without ethics,and you cant have ethics without law.Also that law must apply to everyone equally. It must also be possible for each citizen to embrace the reasoning behind the law, including any penalties for violating the law.In some cases the legal obligation conflicts with the ethical obligation.You may feel an ethical obligation to something, but have no legal obligation. Like helping out someone who is suffering.URL-http://www-hsc.usc.edu/~mbernste/tae.ethics&law.herrera.html
3.Arguable Issue: The arguable issue is whether or not we need ethics, given that we already have laws.
Conclusion: we do need ethics even though we have laws.
Premises:
(1)Ethics is the base of many laws.
(2)There would be no laws without ethics, nobody would have a view of what is right and wrong.
(3)Ethics gives us a sense of what is a just punishment for a law being broken.
Conclusion:we dont need ethics because we already have laws.
Premises:
(1)Laws already provide us with a sense of what is right and what is wrong.
(2)Laws already have a set punishment for crimes against them.
(3)Ethics could cause unjust laws for some, because of a majority belief on a given topic.
Part Two
2.Arguable Issue: The arguable issue is whether or not the Majority View is a reliable basis for ethical decision-making.
Conclusion:Majority view is not a reliable basis for ethical decisicion-making.
Premises:
(1)Majority view cuts out the rights of the minority.
(2)It dosent solve the problem in an ethical way, it combines personal views.
(3)Just because the majority of people think something is right, it does not make it right.
1.Laws are made to protect society us and keep us in line.Laws tell you what is acceptable and not acceptable.basically, what is right and what is wrong. Ethics is what is morally right and wrong.So the relationship is that many laws are made on the premis-is it ethical?Does the general society believe this?Thats why laws vary where ever you go, because the culture of a country (or even a state) can have different values and believes on ethical issues. For example, the issue of gay marriage.It is legal in some states and not in others.Thats the relationship between law and ethics, ethics determines laws.
2.I learned that law and ethics form a problematic package,but a package deal nonetheless.You cant have laws without ethics,and you cant have ethics without law.Also that law must apply to everyone equally. It must also be possible for each citizen to embrace the reasoning behind the law, including any penalties for violating the law.In some cases the legal obligation conflicts with the ethical obligation.You may feel an ethical obligation to something, but have no legal obligation. Like helping out someone who is suffering.URL-http://www-hsc.usc.edu/~mbernste/tae.ethics&law.herrera.html
3.Arguable Issue: The arguable issue is whether or not we need ethics, given that we already have laws.
Conclusion: we do need ethics even though we have laws.
Premises:
(1)Ethics is the base of many laws.
(2)There would be no laws without ethics, nobody would have a view of what is right and wrong.
(3)Ethics gives us a sense of what is a just punishment for a law being broken.
Conclusion:we dont need ethics because we already have laws.
Premises:
(1)Laws already provide us with a sense of what is right and what is wrong.
(2)Laws already have a set punishment for crimes against them.
(3)Ethics could cause unjust laws for some, because of a majority belief on a given topic.
Part Two
Majority View
2.Arguable Issue: The arguable issue is whether or not the Majority View is a reliable basis for ethical decision-making.
Conclusion:Majority view is not a reliable basis for ethical decisicion-making.
Premises:
(1)Majority view cuts out the rights of the minority.
(2)It dosent solve the problem in an ethical way, it combines personal views.
(3)Just because the majority of people think something is right, it does not make it right.
The Role Of Feelings
1.The role of feelings is how you personally feel about something and whether or not it is right to base your decision on how you feel.Feelings are influenced by what is around you or what is happening to you at a given time.Feelings are basically your own personal belief on something because of past experiences.
2.Arguable Issue: The arguable issue is whether or not our feelings are a reliable basis for ethical decision-making.
Conclusion:Feelings are not a reliable basis for ethical decision-making.
Premises:
(1)Feelings can change over time.
(2)You can make a rash decision based on your feelings at the moment and later regret it.
(3)Feelings can get in the way of rational thinking, they cloud your judgement.
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, I only put what I believed and how I felt.
What was easiest / hardest about this assignment?
The easiest part was the arguments because I just put what I believed. The hardest part was just the length of the assignment.
How will you apply what you learned through this assignment to your everyday life?
I will make rash decisions, not based on my emotions at the time or on how the majority feel, but rather on what I beleive in and is ethical.
How well do you think you did on this assignment? Explain.
I believe I did good on this assignment, because I put fourth the time and effort and gave the best possible answers that I could.
Tuesday, January 13, 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?
- They were difficult to answer because every scenerio offered two tough choices between saving something that is important to you at the expenese of someone else, or giving up what is important to you to protect someone else. Yes my responses were consistant and this is important because it shows how you judge somebody depending on how they handle the situation and what you would do differently. It shows you what kind of person you really are at heart.
2. Should people always follow the law? Why or why not? When might one be justified in NOT following the law? Give examples.
- People should always follow the law, the only time it would be justified to break the law is when it is necessary to survive. A perfect example of this is if your wife is pregnant and she is going into labor, you should be able to go above the speed limit to get her to the hospital. Another example is self defense.
3. In your own words, explain what "social convention" means. Give examples.
- Social convention is what is common in a particular region, like customs and rituals. An example of this would be sign of respect. In America we great each other with hand shakes or speech, but in other cultures they greet each other with kisses to the cheek or bowing.
4. Should people always follow the conventions of their society? Why or why not? Give examples.
- I dont believe people should always follow the conventions in their society. My reason why is because a person's individual belief might differ than that of another society. An example of this would be bull fighting, which can be generally accepted in a society but some individuals in that society might see differently and think that it is cruel.
5. Should people always follow their own principles? Why or why not? Give examples.
- People should always follow there own principles. They should not let society make ones self go against there own morals or beliefs. For example like bull fighting, one shouldnt be a bull fighter if they believe bull fighting is unethical.
6. Explain in your own words the difference between socially acceptable, legally acceptable, and morally acceptable.
- Socially acceptable is something that a particular all agrees on, different society have different cultures. Legally acceptable follows the guidelines of the laws. Morally acceptable is what you feel is morally right for a given situation.
7. Out of 25 points, how many points do you feel your work on this assignment deserves? Justify your answer.
- 25 because I answered all the question, on time with more than one sentence. I also took my time and answered each question to the best of my ability. I also actually answered the survey and read all of it.
- They were difficult to answer because every scenerio offered two tough choices between saving something that is important to you at the expenese of someone else, or giving up what is important to you to protect someone else. Yes my responses were consistant and this is important because it shows how you judge somebody depending on how they handle the situation and what you would do differently. It shows you what kind of person you really are at heart.
2. Should people always follow the law? Why or why not? When might one be justified in NOT following the law? Give examples.
- People should always follow the law, the only time it would be justified to break the law is when it is necessary to survive. A perfect example of this is if your wife is pregnant and she is going into labor, you should be able to go above the speed limit to get her to the hospital. Another example is self defense.
3. In your own words, explain what "social convention" means. Give examples.
- Social convention is what is common in a particular region, like customs and rituals. An example of this would be sign of respect. In America we great each other with hand shakes or speech, but in other cultures they greet each other with kisses to the cheek or bowing.
4. Should people always follow the conventions of their society? Why or why not? Give examples.
- I dont believe people should always follow the conventions in their society. My reason why is because a person's individual belief might differ than that of another society. An example of this would be bull fighting, which can be generally accepted in a society but some individuals in that society might see differently and think that it is cruel.
5. Should people always follow their own principles? Why or why not? Give examples.
- People should always follow there own principles. They should not let society make ones self go against there own morals or beliefs. For example like bull fighting, one shouldnt be a bull fighter if they believe bull fighting is unethical.
6. Explain in your own words the difference between socially acceptable, legally acceptable, and morally acceptable.
- Socially acceptable is something that a particular all agrees on, different society have different cultures. Legally acceptable follows the guidelines of the laws. Morally acceptable is what you feel is morally right for a given situation.
7. Out of 25 points, how many points do you feel your work on this assignment deserves? Justify your answer.
- 25 because I answered all the question, on time with more than one sentence. I also took my time and answered each question to the best of my ability. I also actually answered the survey and read all of it.
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Blog Assignment #1
1. How would you have explained the meaning of the term "ethics", before taking this class?
-I always thought of ethics as the choice between what is morally right verses wrong based on your own experience or outlook on the situation.
2. What are some of your deepest held values?
-My deepest values are my family and friends.I love both of them more than anything.
3. What are some main principles you try to live your life by?
-To always do "the right thing" and work as hard as I can but still have fun.
4. What moral qualities do you look for in others?
-Reliability and trust. If I cant rely on you I cant trust you and vice versa.
5. How were your values and principles developed?
-Most of my values and principles come from my upbringing and past experiences.
6. How have your values and principles changed throughout your life so far?
- When was little I never had to work for anything I had and took them for granted like when my mom used to do laundry for me and my dad did yardwork and provided for us.Hard work was never important to me and now I realize that everything we have thats truly worth anything is earned.
7. Out of 25 points, how many points do you feel your work on this assignment deserves? Justify your answer.
-25 because I answered all the questions honestly and to the best of my ability.
-I always thought of ethics as the choice between what is morally right verses wrong based on your own experience or outlook on the situation.
2. What are some of your deepest held values?
-My deepest values are my family and friends.I love both of them more than anything.
3. What are some main principles you try to live your life by?
-To always do "the right thing" and work as hard as I can but still have fun.
4. What moral qualities do you look for in others?
-Reliability and trust. If I cant rely on you I cant trust you and vice versa.
5. How were your values and principles developed?
-Most of my values and principles come from my upbringing and past experiences.
6. How have your values and principles changed throughout your life so far?
- When was little I never had to work for anything I had and took them for granted like when my mom used to do laundry for me and my dad did yardwork and provided for us.Hard work was never important to me and now I realize that everything we have thats truly worth anything is earned.
7. Out of 25 points, how many points do you feel your work on this assignment deserves? Justify your answer.
-25 because I answered all the questions honestly and to the best of my ability.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)