(1) Question:
Do human beings have a natural tendency to good, a natural tendency to evil, or some combination of tendencies? What are the implications of the answer for ethics?
(2) Conceptual Clarifications:
"Good" can be described as morally righteous. Good is to describe one's morality as excellent; to do goodwill.
"Natural" is to be based on the state of things in nature. To do something naturally, it is done purely and without compromise.
"Tendency" is the prevailing disposition to move, or act in a direction or toward some result.
"Evil" is described as morally wrong, and can be done neglecting the greater good.
(3) Answer:
I believe that humans have some combination of tendencies both good and evil. My reasoning is that when an situation arises, the natural tendency is to do what is best for you or for the majority of people. That is not always good, but it is not always evil. Good is always the morally virtuous result. I believe the natural tendency is to always do what is "best for me", but only after weighing the outcomes do humans find the greater good in the result. Each situation's result should be for the greater good, and provide the person with goodwill, but the natural tendency upon first glance will always be "looking out for number one", and depending of the situation that can be either good or evil. In ethics, the greater good always outweighs the evil. When you have two outcomes, both with good, then the ethical choice would be the outcome with the lesser evil. Our tendencies will ultimately give us some good, and out final choice should give us the greatest good with the lesser evil.
(4) Example:
One example of our natural tendency was shown in a enormous scale with the ending of WWII. To end the war with Japan President Harry S. Trueman ordered that two Nuclear bombs to be dropped on two major Japanese cities. The reasoning behind his order was to quickly end the war with Japan by showing deadly power, and demoralize the opposition. He had already ordered non-nuclear bombing on 67 other cities, but Japan refused to surrender. The idea was that countless amounts of American lives would be lost if the war would have continued, and by destroying entire cities, Japan would have no choice but to surrender. The bombings killed over 220,000 Innocent lives combined. The natural tendency was to make sure that our soldiers lives were taken into account before anything else, and President Trueman believed that the greater good (saving several hundred thousands of soldiers for both the U.S. and Japan) out weighed the evil (killing 220,000 Japanese in a matter of minutes). Whether his actions are ethically correct, he was acting with his natural tendency (I have to do what is best for MY country first). To put the evil into perspective, in both cities the majority of its population was dead within minutes and since then thousands if not more have died of cancer from the bombs radiation. Japan did surrender six days after the second bombing, and no more lives would be lost in WWII. In this instance President Trueman's natural tendency was to do good, but it produced quite a bit of evil that he was well aware of from the time that he made his judgement.
(5) Word Count:
522 Words
(6) Image:
(7) References:
Ruggiero. (2008). Thinking Critically About Ethical Issues. McGraw Hill. pg. 140-147.
The National Security Archive On-line. The Atomic Bomb and the End of World War II. Updated April 27, 2007.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB162/index.htm
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Blog Assignment #10
Ethical Decision Making Framework
FOCUS: IDEALS
NAME:JOHN RADECKI
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:
(2) Stakeholders: Name each person, group, organization, etc., that has a stake in this outcome
(3) Are the details given sufficient? Why or why not?
(4) What additional questions does this inquiry raise?
What did the officer do/say to the "friends" she was making?
Was she asking where to find drugs?
What was the evidence that she had to find in order to make arrests?
How many people where arrested in the end?
How close did she become with her new "friends"?
STEP 2:
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
1. Justice- The undercover officer did not use any "playing of the favorites," and she arrested those that are guilty. Justice was served through the undercover operation, and society has benefited from her actions. (108)
2. Courage- The woman officer had to keep her identity intacted while becoming close to people she knew were involved in criminal activity. Her goal was to find the truth no matter what she had to do. (108)
3. Honesty- The undercover officer can look past the friendships that she has formed to fulfill her professional demands. She does not hold back any information that she has come up with, and she has made the maximum amount of arrests in the case. (109)
4. Gratitude- The public and the police force should show the brave police officer some thanks for what she has done. She has taken some criminals off of the campus, and made the community a better place. (109)
STEP 3
Alternative #1: The police officer could form deeper relationships that would keep her from giving evidence for certain individuals. She would be protecting her new found friends.
Alternative#2: The drug pushers could find out that she is a undercover police officer, and could harm her or leave town. This would create even more problems for the police department.
Alternative #3: If the officer was afraid to approach certain individuals, but rather just created bonds with people that she wasn't scared to be around then she would only make half the arrests. The higher in power drug pushers would just move away, or be more careful of who they talk to.
STEP 4
1. In your own words, describe something new that you learned from this week’s assigned reading material and guidance.
The most important thing that I learned from this assignment is how to properly analyze a inquiry. I found out the meaning for each individual ideal, and it helped to make me realized that ideals are not just described with a few words. The portion of the chapter that was titled "Ideals in Conflict;" was helpful in explaining how ideals do not always work together. (107-110)
2. In your own words, describe in detail some insight you gained, about the material, from one of your classmates' blogs this week.
3. Did you post a thoroughly completed post to your blog on time this week?
Yes, I completed this blog post on time.
4. Did you ALSO print this out, so you can bring it to class and earn total points?
No, I did not attend class this week.
5. Of 25 points total, my efforts this week deserve: Insert your JUSTIFIED answer here.
Since I did not attend class I would give my blog a 10 out of 12.5. I used the readings from the book and changed the words to my own. I answered all questions, and followed the guideline.
FOCUS: IDEALS
NAME:JOHN RADECKI
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 to do inquiry twelve on page 115. It describes a police officer that works undercover at a local college. Her job is to make friendships, and be an informant to the police department about the drug trafficking on campus. She ends up arresting people that she had fake friendships with.
(2) Stakeholders: Name each person, group, organization, etc., that has a stake in this outcome
1. The Undercover Officer
2.The drug pushers
3. The local college
4. The police department
5. The College Students and Employees
(3) Are the details given sufficient? Why or why not?
The details of the inquiry where not sufficient enough to conclude whether what the officer did was right. She had a duty and she had to fulfill her job, but the inquiry doesn't give details on how she formed the relationships. The undercover operations are important to ending crime, but some of the their tactics can be border-line infraction on a person's privacy.
(4) What additional questions does this inquiry raise?
What did the officer do/say to the "friends" she was making?
Was she asking where to find drugs?
What was the evidence that she had to find in order to make arrests?
How many people where arrested in the end?
How close did she become with her new "friends"?
STEP 2:
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
1. Justice- The undercover officer did not use any "playing of the favorites," and she arrested those that are guilty. Justice was served through the undercover operation, and society has benefited from her actions. (108)
2. Courage- The woman officer had to keep her identity intacted while becoming close to people she knew were involved in criminal activity. Her goal was to find the truth no matter what she had to do. (108)
3. Honesty- The undercover officer can look past the friendships that she has formed to fulfill her professional demands. She does not hold back any information that she has come up with, and she has made the maximum amount of arrests in the case. (109)
4. Gratitude- The public and the police force should show the brave police officer some thanks for what she has done. She has taken some criminals off of the campus, and made the community a better place. (109)
STEP 3
Alternative #1: The police officer could form deeper relationships that would keep her from giving evidence for certain individuals. She would be protecting her new found friends.
Alternative#2: The drug pushers could find out that she is a undercover police officer, and could harm her or leave town. This would create even more problems for the police department.
Alternative #3: If the officer was afraid to approach certain individuals, but rather just created bonds with people that she wasn't scared to be around then she would only make half the arrests. The higher in power drug pushers would just move away, or be more careful of who they talk to.
STEP 4
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 action taken will definitely achieve the greater good for all persons involved. She resolved justice, and she did the job that was asked of her to the fullest. Getting all the criminals off the campus will make the campus and the community that much safer for everyone involved.
1. In your own words, describe something new that you learned from this week’s assigned reading material and guidance.
The most important thing that I learned from this assignment is how to properly analyze a inquiry. I found out the meaning for each individual ideal, and it helped to make me realized that ideals are not just described with a few words. The portion of the chapter that was titled "Ideals in Conflict;" was helpful in explaining how ideals do not always work together. (107-110)
2. In your own words, describe in detail some insight you gained, about the material, from one of your classmates' blogs this week.
3. Did you post a thoroughly completed post to your blog on time this week?
Yes, I completed this blog post on time.
4. Did you ALSO print this out, so you can bring it to class and earn total points?
No, I did not attend class this week.
5. Of 25 points total, my efforts this week deserve: Insert your JUSTIFIED answer here.
Since I did not attend class I would give my blog a 10 out of 12.5. I used the readings from the book and changed the words to my own. I answered all questions, and followed the guideline.
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Blog Assignment #9
PART 1
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: An unwarranted assumption is an error when someone unconsciously does not acknowledge all details (cutting corners). When looking at information someone that makes this error will try to separate what it says, and what is not said.
Example: When I was coaching soccer last year at the high school level, I found myself assuming that the players would know the rules. When the games started the players would break a rule, and wouldn't know about it. I was embarrassed being the coach, but it was my fault they weren't informed. After the first game we went back to the basics, and I took a whole practice taking questions and explaining the rules.
Oversimplification: Simplification is an ordinary part of our daily lives. It is crucial that we can simplify what we need to say in order to communicate properly and efficiently. The error of oversimplification is when someone leaves out information that is necessary and changes the way the person will receive the case. This is all done in order to trim-up the information, but it ends up coming off differently than the way it was originally supposed to be stated.
Example: When I would tell my parents what my grades where the week before report cards would come out, I would tell them that I was doing "pretty good". I would always leave out that I had to pass that week's test to get a B. I made it look like I knew what I was going to get, and that it would reflect a "pretty good" grade.
Hasty Conclusions: The error of hasty conclusions occurs when someone does not take the time to fully examine something before making a judgement. The problem is that someone will usually make a judgement based on first impressions, and not give the decision the adequate amount of time and focus.
Example: My friends and I wanted to take a vacation right after graduation. I said that we should get a cabin in Tennessee, and most of them said that it looked boring and they didn't want to go. They said no without even looking into the trip, and they didn't look into all there was to do. After some convincing we went, and they still talk about that trip almost daily.
PART 2
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?
When a situation arises where there is multiple obligations, the most important thing to do is to thoroughly look at the importance of each obligation. In most cases of multiple obligations when you weigh both one will have some kind of slight edge over the other. The way to go about deciding which obligation means more to you is to ask yourself questions like "how deeply am I commited to this obligations?" and "how will not fulfilling this obligation effect my future, and my goals".
2. How can we reconcile conflicting obligations?
The way to go about reconciling conflicting obligations is to look at the good, and the bad in each of the conflicting obligations. Giving each the positive edge, and then looking at the outcome will help you to invision what effect your decision might have. An important part of reconciling is to find out which obligation can by itself fulfill something that the other simply cannot fulfill. The outcome of choosing an obligation will vary from person to person, but that is because when choosing you have to decide on the obligation that is best suited for you personally. I think it is helpful to make a list of values that are important to you, and then looking at each obligation, making sure that your choice fulfills what you believe in.
PART 3
1. In a nutshell, what is the most important thing, for you, that you learned from this assignment?
I think the most important thing that I learned from this assignment is the terms listed in part one. I knew that oversimplification, hasty conclusions, and unwarranted assumptions happen in our daily lives but I have never really looked into the technical descriptions of the terms. To realize that doing so is an error, and can lead to troublesome outcomes. I think that most of the time the errors are done unconsciously, because the negative outcome is not always right in front of you. I would like to try to avoid making these errors in the future.
2. How will you apply what you learned through this assignment to your everyday life?
I think it will be easier to realize that I need to take more time making decisions when I decide something on first impression. My goal will be to stop myself when I quickly decide something, and weigh my options to make sure that I have come up with the right conclusion. I never try to assume anything because when you do you are normally wrong, but I will try to realize and be more patient when I am dealing with someone that assumes everything.
3. What grade do you believe your efforts regarding this assignment deserve? Justify your answer.
I believe that my efforts deserve a grade in the 23-25 range. I answered all the questions fully, and I put all my answers into my own words trying to explain as clearly as I could. I read the chapter, and put forth my answers on how I perceived the information in the chapter.
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: An unwarranted assumption is an error when someone unconsciously does not acknowledge all details (cutting corners). When looking at information someone that makes this error will try to separate what it says, and what is not said.
Example: When I was coaching soccer last year at the high school level, I found myself assuming that the players would know the rules. When the games started the players would break a rule, and wouldn't know about it. I was embarrassed being the coach, but it was my fault they weren't informed. After the first game we went back to the basics, and I took a whole practice taking questions and explaining the rules.
Oversimplification: Simplification is an ordinary part of our daily lives. It is crucial that we can simplify what we need to say in order to communicate properly and efficiently. The error of oversimplification is when someone leaves out information that is necessary and changes the way the person will receive the case. This is all done in order to trim-up the information, but it ends up coming off differently than the way it was originally supposed to be stated.
Example: When I would tell my parents what my grades where the week before report cards would come out, I would tell them that I was doing "pretty good". I would always leave out that I had to pass that week's test to get a B. I made it look like I knew what I was going to get, and that it would reflect a "pretty good" grade.
Hasty Conclusions: The error of hasty conclusions occurs when someone does not take the time to fully examine something before making a judgement. The problem is that someone will usually make a judgement based on first impressions, and not give the decision the adequate amount of time and focus.
Example: My friends and I wanted to take a vacation right after graduation. I said that we should get a cabin in Tennessee, and most of them said that it looked boring and they didn't want to go. They said no without even looking into the trip, and they didn't look into all there was to do. After some convincing we went, and they still talk about that trip almost daily.
PART 2
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?
When a situation arises where there is multiple obligations, the most important thing to do is to thoroughly look at the importance of each obligation. In most cases of multiple obligations when you weigh both one will have some kind of slight edge over the other. The way to go about deciding which obligation means more to you is to ask yourself questions like "how deeply am I commited to this obligations?" and "how will not fulfilling this obligation effect my future, and my goals".
2. How can we reconcile conflicting obligations?
The way to go about reconciling conflicting obligations is to look at the good, and the bad in each of the conflicting obligations. Giving each the positive edge, and then looking at the outcome will help you to invision what effect your decision might have. An important part of reconciling is to find out which obligation can by itself fulfill something that the other simply cannot fulfill. The outcome of choosing an obligation will vary from person to person, but that is because when choosing you have to decide on the obligation that is best suited for you personally. I think it is helpful to make a list of values that are important to you, and then looking at each obligation, making sure that your choice fulfills what you believe in.
PART 3
1. In a nutshell, what is the most important thing, for you, that you learned from this assignment?
I think the most important thing that I learned from this assignment is the terms listed in part one. I knew that oversimplification, hasty conclusions, and unwarranted assumptions happen in our daily lives but I have never really looked into the technical descriptions of the terms. To realize that doing so is an error, and can lead to troublesome outcomes. I think that most of the time the errors are done unconsciously, because the negative outcome is not always right in front of you. I would like to try to avoid making these errors in the future.
2. How will you apply what you learned through this assignment to your everyday life?
I think it will be easier to realize that I need to take more time making decisions when I decide something on first impression. My goal will be to stop myself when I quickly decide something, and weigh my options to make sure that I have come up with the right conclusion. I never try to assume anything because when you do you are normally wrong, but I will try to realize and be more patient when I am dealing with someone that assumes everything.
3. What grade do you believe your efforts regarding this assignment deserve? Justify your answer.
I believe that my efforts deserve a grade in the 23-25 range. I answered all the questions fully, and I put all my answers into my own words trying to explain as clearly as I could. I read the chapter, and put forth my answers on how I perceived the information in the chapter.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Blog Assignment #6
PART 1
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:
Yes, I would say that all moral values are relative to the culture that they are found in. I have come to this conclusion based on two premises. The first would be that a moral value in one culture can be completely meaning-less in another. For example in our culture we believe that it is only humane,and our duty to take care of our elderly and sick. While native Americans believed that when you become sick or elderly you can not contribute to the tribe anymore, and you would accept to leave the tribe and live on your own. My second premise is based on how high a moral value is regarded in any given culture. Moral values can be similar between two cultures, but the value of that moral can be interpreted much different. Resulting in a difference in meaning even though both cultures share the same value.
ANSWER 1B:
P: We ought to realize that cultures can value a moral that isn't even existent in another.
P: Different cultures interpret moral codes differently, which in fact can change the value of how highly the moral is held.
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:
Yes, it is a mark of ignorance to pass judgments on other cultures. No culture is more important than another. It is very hard for anyone to understand a distant culture, but the problem is that without being a part of that culture it can be very hard to understand that culture. Cultures are changing and it is most important to know where comes from. Some have been around for thousands of years, while the United States has only been around for a few hundred. So what would make us more knowledgeable than those that have been around for centuries longer?
ANSWER 2B:
P: We should always try to understand where a culture comes from.
P: We ought to notice that there are many other cultures with vast contributions to the modern world, and none is more important than another.
C: Therefore, it is a mark of ignorance to pass judgments on other cultures.
PART 2
The inquire I chose was #6. It is based on a dictator's wife that was known for spending millions of dollars in a single day, while the country was in poverty. I do not think we could pass judgement because as recently as the last few months this has been happening right here in the United States. The New York Yankees are spending more money on baseball players than ever. Out biding all other teams and paying multiple players over 20 million dollars a year while other teams barely have that much for their entire team salary. A lot of the big named companies are spending money on week long vacations for management and owners, while they are laying off thousands of long-time employees. I think that the fact of the matter is that people get greedy no matter what is around them, and having so many people suffer while you can live it up only feeds that desire to spend what you have.
Argument #1:
Arguable issue: Whether or not it is right for someone to spend large amounts of money, when others are in poverty.
P: Gluttony is always wrong.
P: If you are better off than everyone else you should try to help the solution, not become apart of the problem.
C: Therefore you should limit yourself to necessities when others cannot afford to live a normal life.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Blog Assignment #5
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://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=20010929&slug=faull290
3. Explain how and why it relates to our readings. Be specific; note which passages from our text most relate & why.
The on-line source I found is an article in the Seattle Times titled "Disappointed parents shape kids' conscience." The article caught my eye because I wanted to know what types of things shape our conscience at a early age. The article suggests that disappointment displayed by parents can shape a child's conscience at a early age. By displaying disappointment when it is necessary and in the right way can influence a child's moral perspective about what is right and wrong. The article explains that if disappointment is shown correctly, then it explains to a child responsibility. Disappointment and how you express it varies by how old the child is, but in all cases it is a valuable tool to shaping one's conscience. In our text the subject titled The Shapers of Conscience directly shows the importance of outside influence on shaping a person's conscience. It basically explains that there is a notion that all conscience is in one person's mind, and that they are somehow naturally able to tell what is right and wrong. That notion is wrong, and there are many outside influences at all ages that shapes a person's conscience. One of the most important outside influences are parents, and how they want to develop their child's moral conscience for the rest of their lives.
Thinking Critically About Ethical Issues. Vincent Ryan Ruggiero, Second Ed. page # 41.
4. In a separate paragraph, tell me how many points you believe your efforts deserve--in argument form! For example:
Arguable issue: whether or not this post deserves points...if yes, how many?
Conclusion: This post deserves 25 points.
Premises: this post deserves 25 points because:
(1)I cited my on-line source by giving the link, as well as cited the text I used.
(2)I did the assignment to the best of my ability, and read the chapter thoroughly.
(3)I followed the directions listed above and completed the assignment on time.
2. Cite the resource--either link to it and/or clearly list it.
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=20010929&slug=faull290
3. Explain how and why it relates to our readings. Be specific; note which passages from our text most relate & why.
The on-line source I found is an article in the Seattle Times titled "Disappointed parents shape kids' conscience." The article caught my eye because I wanted to know what types of things shape our conscience at a early age. The article suggests that disappointment displayed by parents can shape a child's conscience at a early age. By displaying disappointment when it is necessary and in the right way can influence a child's moral perspective about what is right and wrong. The article explains that if disappointment is shown correctly, then it explains to a child responsibility. Disappointment and how you express it varies by how old the child is, but in all cases it is a valuable tool to shaping one's conscience. In our text the subject titled The Shapers of Conscience directly shows the importance of outside influence on shaping a person's conscience. It basically explains that there is a notion that all conscience is in one person's mind, and that they are somehow naturally able to tell what is right and wrong. That notion is wrong, and there are many outside influences at all ages that shapes a person's conscience. One of the most important outside influences are parents, and how they want to develop their child's moral conscience for the rest of their lives.
Thinking Critically About Ethical Issues. Vincent Ryan Ruggiero, Second Ed. page # 41.
4. In a separate paragraph, tell me how many points you believe your efforts deserve--in argument form! For example:
Arguable issue: whether or not this post deserves points...if yes, how many?
Conclusion: This post deserves 25 points.
Premises: this post deserves 25 points because:
(1)I cited my on-line source by giving the link, as well as cited the text I used.
(2)I did the assignment to the best of my ability, and read the chapter thoroughly.
(3)I followed the directions listed above and completed the assignment on time.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Blog assignment #4
PART 1
1. Paragraph: explain in your own words what the relationship is between religion and ethics.
The relationship between religion and ethics is a complex relationship that really challenges people to argue moral situations from their particular interpretation. Since no two religions believe in the same teachings and do not take the same stance on moral issues, ethical solutions are necessary to giving some kind of reason to why people feel the way they do. Most would like to say that they believe they are right because they have faith and God says that they should feel that way. In reality it is important to make your argument reasonable to persuade someone that may not have the same beliefs that you do. Simply just saying that is what God wants you to believe will not work. People can interpret the same religious teachings in a different way, but the way that you convince someone that your perspective is correct is to use religious 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.
The article I found discussed the idea of keeping patients alive at a hospital by means of a feeding tube. One thing I learned from the article is how ethical issues when seen in a religious view point, the solutions people come up with can be much different. Some would say that the feeding tube is "treating others as you would like to be treated". Others could say that if you are going to complete your life the way God intended, then you shouldn't use a feeding tube to keep someone from dying. The way that issues like this should be resolved would be to use reasons such as pain and suffering to discus these ethical question, rather than referring to passages in the bible that people could debate on their true meaning.
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/episodes/january-23-2009/end-of-life-dilemmas/2029/
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 does not 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: Ethics and religious beliefs are complementary.
Premises:
1) People use religious beliefs to decide on ethical questions.
2) What would Jesus do?
3) People often look to a higher power to decide what is wrong and right.
PART 2
The majority view is basically a statistical way of looking for solutions from the public. The majority would have to be at least 51% of the general public to be a perfect source of finding out how people really feel about a issue. The fact of the matter is that it is impossible to get an opinion from 51% of the country, so typically their will be a small group that is questioned to find how people feel about issues. Their are many flaws when dealing with the majority view. Their isn't any real reasoning for how someone feels the way they do, everyone is just a number on one side or the other. In a perfect world the majority view would get every one's opinion, and decide all matters with everyone getting a equal say in the matter.
Source : Thinking Critically About Ethical Issues, Seventh Edition. pg. 22-24.
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.
Conclusion: Majority View is not a reliable basis for ethical decision-making.
Premises:
1) Not everyone has the same amount of knowledge to answer one way or the other.
2)Majority View is based on numbers and not reasoning.
3) It is impossible to ask 100% of people to answer all issues.
The Role of Feelings
1. Paragraph: Explain in your own words what feelings are. Cite your sources.
Feelings are a person's mindset of what is right and a reaction to those situations. People do things because they feel that what they are doing is morally right. Feelings differ from person to person, and that is why feelings cannot be how we morally judge situations. People develop feelings over time that effect the way they see ethical situations, and feelings make it hard to tell people that what they are doing is wrong.
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: Feelings are not a reliable basis for ethical decision-making.
Premises:
1)Feelings vary from person to person.
2) There are too many things that affect feelings, they aren't always consistent.
3) What people prefer to do is not always the ethical solution.
PART 3
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 did put everything into my own words. I really tried to base my answers on what I had read, and not look back into the reading as I answered the questions.
What was easiest / hardest about this assignment?
The hardest part of the assignment was trying to evaluate weather religion and ethics are complementary. It took some thinking and I had to read that part of the chapter a few times to come up with my answer. The easiest part of the assignment was making a argument for majority view. Majority view is always around us in advertisement and if advertisement can tell us anything, it is that not everything is as good as it looks.
How will you apply what you learned through this assignment to your everyday life?
The main thing that I will apply will be a more accurate description for feeling. I always thought of feelings as just describing what kind of mood a person is in. Also, really taking a deeper look into the stance that my church takes on ethical issues and what kind of reasoning is used.
How well do you think you did on this assignment? Explain.
I think I did well on this assignment. I would say a 9 out of 10. I think I understood all of the questions being asked, and I tried to answer them as thoughtfully as I could.
1. Paragraph: explain in your own words what the relationship is between religion and ethics.
The relationship between religion and ethics is a complex relationship that really challenges people to argue moral situations from their particular interpretation. Since no two religions believe in the same teachings and do not take the same stance on moral issues, ethical solutions are necessary to giving some kind of reason to why people feel the way they do. Most would like to say that they believe they are right because they have faith and God says that they should feel that way. In reality it is important to make your argument reasonable to persuade someone that may not have the same beliefs that you do. Simply just saying that is what God wants you to believe will not work. People can interpret the same religious teachings in a different way, but the way that you convince someone that your perspective is correct is to use religious 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.
The article I found discussed the idea of keeping patients alive at a hospital by means of a feeding tube. One thing I learned from the article is how ethical issues when seen in a religious view point, the solutions people come up with can be much different. Some would say that the feeding tube is "treating others as you would like to be treated". Others could say that if you are going to complete your life the way God intended, then you shouldn't use a feeding tube to keep someone from dying. The way that issues like this should be resolved would be to use reasons such as pain and suffering to discus these ethical question, rather than referring to passages in the bible that people could debate on their true meaning.
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/episodes/january-23-2009/end-of-life-dilemmas/2029/
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 does not 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: Ethics and religious beliefs are complementary.
Premises:
1) People use religious beliefs to decide on ethical questions.
2) What would Jesus do?
3) People often look to a higher power to decide what is wrong and right.
PART 2
The Role of the Majority View
The majority view is basically a statistical way of looking for solutions from the public. The majority would have to be at least 51% of the general public to be a perfect source of finding out how people really feel about a issue. The fact of the matter is that it is impossible to get an opinion from 51% of the country, so typically their will be a small group that is questioned to find how people feel about issues. Their are many flaws when dealing with the majority view. Their isn't any real reasoning for how someone feels the way they do, everyone is just a number on one side or the other. In a perfect world the majority view would get every one's opinion, and decide all matters with everyone getting a equal say in the matter.
Source : Thinking Critically About Ethical Issues, Seventh Edition. pg. 22-24.
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.
Conclusion: Majority View is not a reliable basis for ethical decision-making.
Premises:
1) Not everyone has the same amount of knowledge to answer one way or the other.
2)Majority View is based on numbers and not reasoning.
3) It is impossible to ask 100% of people to answer all issues.
The Role of Feelings
1. Paragraph: Explain in your own words what feelings are. Cite your sources.
Feelings are a person's mindset of what is right and a reaction to those situations. People do things because they feel that what they are doing is morally right. Feelings differ from person to person, and that is why feelings cannot be how we morally judge situations. People develop feelings over time that effect the way they see ethical situations, and feelings make it hard to tell people that what they are doing is wrong.
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: Feelings are not a reliable basis for ethical decision-making.
Premises:
1)Feelings vary from person to person.
2) There are too many things that affect feelings, they aren't always consistent.
3) What people prefer to do is not always the ethical solution.
PART 3
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 did put everything into my own words. I really tried to base my answers on what I had read, and not look back into the reading as I answered the questions.
What was easiest / hardest about this assignment?
The hardest part of the assignment was trying to evaluate weather religion and ethics are complementary. It took some thinking and I had to read that part of the chapter a few times to come up with my answer. The easiest part of the assignment was making a argument for majority view. Majority view is always around us in advertisement and if advertisement can tell us anything, it is that not everything is as good as it looks.
How will you apply what you learned through this assignment to your everyday life?
The main thing that I will apply will be a more accurate description for feeling. I always thought of feelings as just describing what kind of mood a person is in. Also, really taking a deeper look into the stance that my church takes on ethical issues and what kind of reasoning is used.
How well do you think you did on this assignment? Explain.
I think I did well on this assignment. I would say a 9 out of 10. I think I understood all of the questions being asked, and I tried to answer them as thoughtfully as I could.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Blog Assignment 3
1. Explain what “to give an argument” means in this book.
To give an argument based on the book, you need to have a series of examples that defend or back up your reasoning. The evidence you give should be in support of your own conclusion. Basically, an argument is to support your own personal view and present your reasoning to others in a way that they can decide their viewpoint on their own. (second paragraph, pg. xi)
2. What are the reasons Weston gives in support of his claim, “arguments are essential”?
Weston basically says that arguments are essential because they allow us to decide which views are better than others. By having arguments you can filter out the weaker view point, and see that not all conclusions have the same amount of support in reason. Basically arguments are essential because they allow us to grade viewpoints, and not just judge based on a single statement. Another reason that arguments are essential is that if you convince someone that your view is the right view then they will change themselves according to their new outlook.
3. Explain why many students tend to “write an essay, but not an argument”.
The book says that the main problem is that students write a statement about their views, but fail to give any real reasoning to why their view is the right one. By not giving any reasoning the students aren't writing a argument but rather just a essay. The book explains that most of what students are thought in schools in uncontroversial materials, and topics that only need well known facts to write reports on. So, the problem arises when you only write down facts, and then are asked to argue a kind of "grey area" topic. The students have trouble finding reasoning other than they just think a certain view is the correct view.
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".
FOR
Arguable issue: Does participation in extracurricular activities lead to students doing better in school, and stay out of trouble?
Conclusion: Yes, students that are in extracurricular activities are less likely to get into trouble, and do better in school.
Premises:
1) Students that participate in activities are more likely to spend more time on out of class work.
2) Students that participate in school activities have less time to waste, and are less likely to get into trouble.
3) Students have something to lose when they don't do well in school.
AGAINST
Arguable issue: Whether or not we are too dependant on computers in school.
Conclusion: Computers are the new technology and should pass up the old fashion ways of finding information.
Premises:
1) The computer is the better way of getting vast amounts of information, and
2) They save time during research, and
3) They save money when are available for e-books rather than buying a huge text book
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.
D1: Dictionaries can be a great tool providing you with different meanings for the same word, or providing multiple ways you could interpret the a single word. By using a dictionary I was able to use the words "extra-curricular" to mean anything outside of a curricular setting. Extracurricular can mean participation in sports, the marching band, or in theater. Students in each of these areas can have an advantage over students that do none of the above.
D2: When your view point can be contested because the term you used, you can use a dictionary to generalize your meaning to show that any way you look at it your view point is correct. By stating that students have less time after school to waste doing other things, I was referring to all extracurricular activities in general. By doing this their wasn't any reason to think that time spent out of school is better than time spent during school-led activities.
D3: Definitions can't be the only source for your reasoning. I didn't just give reasons why the computer is just as good as a library full of information. I also explain other reasons why the computer can be shown as a better financial investment, as well as a time saver. If I were to just say that computers are a vast source of information, someone could say that getting 10,000 books is also a vast source of information that people have been relying on for hundreds of years. Showing multiple viewpoints on your topic keeps you from having to rely on the definition of your topic.
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 think I deserve a 22-25 on this weeks blog assignment. I answered the questions as thoughtfully and the way I interpreted the readings. All my answers were at least a paragraph. Also, I titled my blog post!
To give an argument based on the book, you need to have a series of examples that defend or back up your reasoning. The evidence you give should be in support of your own conclusion. Basically, an argument is to support your own personal view and present your reasoning to others in a way that they can decide their viewpoint on their own. (second paragraph, pg. xi)
2. What are the reasons Weston gives in support of his claim, “arguments are essential”?
Weston basically says that arguments are essential because they allow us to decide which views are better than others. By having arguments you can filter out the weaker view point, and see that not all conclusions have the same amount of support in reason. Basically arguments are essential because they allow us to grade viewpoints, and not just judge based on a single statement. Another reason that arguments are essential is that if you convince someone that your view is the right view then they will change themselves according to their new outlook.
3. Explain why many students tend to “write an essay, but not an argument”.
The book says that the main problem is that students write a statement about their views, but fail to give any real reasoning to why their view is the right one. By not giving any reasoning the students aren't writing a argument but rather just a essay. The book explains that most of what students are thought in schools in uncontroversial materials, and topics that only need well known facts to write reports on. So, the problem arises when you only write down facts, and then are asked to argue a kind of "grey area" topic. The students have trouble finding reasoning other than they just think a certain view is the correct view.
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".
FOR
Arguable issue: Does participation in extracurricular activities lead to students doing better in school, and stay out of trouble?
Conclusion: Yes, students that are in extracurricular activities are less likely to get into trouble, and do better in school.
Premises:
1) Students that participate in activities are more likely to spend more time on out of class work.
2) Students that participate in school activities have less time to waste, and are less likely to get into trouble.
3) Students have something to lose when they don't do well in school.
AGAINST
Arguable issue: Whether or not we are too dependant on computers in school.
Conclusion: Computers are the new technology and should pass up the old fashion ways of finding information.
Premises:
1) The computer is the better way of getting vast amounts of information, and
2) They save time during research, and
3) They save money when are available for e-books rather than buying a huge text book
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.
D1: Dictionaries can be a great tool providing you with different meanings for the same word, or providing multiple ways you could interpret the a single word. By using a dictionary I was able to use the words "extra-curricular" to mean anything outside of a curricular setting. Extracurricular can mean participation in sports, the marching band, or in theater. Students in each of these areas can have an advantage over students that do none of the above.
D2: When your view point can be contested because the term you used, you can use a dictionary to generalize your meaning to show that any way you look at it your view point is correct. By stating that students have less time after school to waste doing other things, I was referring to all extracurricular activities in general. By doing this their wasn't any reason to think that time spent out of school is better than time spent during school-led activities.
D3: Definitions can't be the only source for your reasoning. I didn't just give reasons why the computer is just as good as a library full of information. I also explain other reasons why the computer can be shown as a better financial investment, as well as a time saver. If I were to just say that computers are a vast source of information, someone could say that getting 10,000 books is also a vast source of information that people have been relying on for hundreds of years. Showing multiple viewpoints on your topic keeps you from having to rely on the definition of your topic.
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 think I deserve a 22-25 on this weeks blog assignment. I answered the questions as thoughtfully and the way I interpreted the readings. All my answers were at least a paragraph. Also, I titled my blog post!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
