Helen wants to move
to a new community, and she is applying for a job with a small retail
establishment. She is confident that she is fully qualified and will be able to
perform well if she gets the job. The employer, however, has advertised for
someone with three years of retail experience, and Helen only has
two-and-a-half years. She is considering whether to exaggerate slightly on her
resume in order to improve her chances of getting the job.
Helen asks three
friends to offer their advice on what she should do.
-- Henry says, “Go ahead and claim three-and-a-half years of experience;
they’re going to be so happy with your work that by the time they check (if
they ever do) it won’t matter.”
-- Jennifer says, “I’m sure you’ll arrive at the best decision on your own;
I’ve always known you to be an honest person.”
-- George says, “It is never all right to lie, even when you are unlikely to
get caught and it seems relatively harmless to do so.”
To begin our
discussion this week, let's discuss some of the following questions:
1. Which of the Three Primary Schools of Ethics is each of Helen’s friends
relying upon?
2. Can you imagine other people using the same approaches to arrive at
different kinds of advice?
3. Do one of these Three Primary Schools of Ethics feel like the style you
usually use already?
The study of Ethics and Philosophy is one which brings many
different kinds of "thinkers" together. One person's philosophy on
Ethics is another person's philosophy on Evil. We will be working this term on
constructing personal ethical bases and understanding how Ethical Codes (both
personal and professional) are created and followed.To start us thinking about the different areas of philosophy
and ethics, and how we fit into the different molds or world views, let's
discuss the differences and similarities between these views.
To do this, let's look at the role of right and wrong, laws
which regulate behavior, principles vs. morality, and the role of ethics in our
society.
To start out we'll answer some of these questions and create
more of them as we go. Pick one of the following and respond to your classmates
thoughts and views:
1. Do we need ethics if we have laws? Why or why not?
2. Is it ethical to change our own views of ethics based on
the situation we are in?
3. Can we "legislate" ethics?
4. How doesAristotle's "virtue ethics"mirror your
ethical view, or how is it different?
DeVry
ETHC445 Week 2 Dq 1 & Dq 2 latest october 2016
dq 1
|
When Siding with
the Majority (graded)
|
As our opening page states,
Mark Twain warned that "Whenever you find
yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect."It
is likely that your parents warned you "not to follow the crowd," or
your school counselors warned you about "peer pressure."
The United States
utilizes a democratic republic form of government, which espouses the
"majority rule" in many instances. For example, when passing laws,
Congress and state Legislators use majority voting. When electing our
officials, the majority rules. But, is our government unethical?
This week's thread
will look at two or three "examples" of majority findings or rules.
We will bring new ones in throughout the week, so be sure to visit back at
least every other day and post your thoughts.
Here is our first one
for the week:
The great majority of people seem to find nothing objectionable about the use
of commercials in children's television programming. Yet a distinguished panel
commissioned by the National Science Foundation found reason to disagree. After
reviewing 21 relevant scholarly studies, they concluded:
It is clear from the
available evidence that television advertising doesinfluence
children. Research has demonstrated that children attend to and learn from
commercials, and that advertising is at least moderately successful in creating
positive attitudes toward and the desire for products advertised. The variable
that emerged most clearly across numerous studies as a strong determinant of
children's perception of television advertising is the child's age. Research
clearly establishes that children become more skilled in evaluating television
advertising as they grow older, and that to treat all children from 2 to 12 as
a homogenous group masks important, perhaps crucial differences.
Do you think the
majority view is correct in this case? What difference would it make that a
majority thinks this way?
Do you think the use of commercials in children's television programming raises
any ethical questions? Do explain.
Do you wish to place evidence for what you say before your classmates?
dq 2
|
The Struggle of
Good vs. Evil (graded)
|
Personal struggles
with one's own tendencies, desires, lusts, and self-interest have placed people
in conflict with other people and their own communities farther back than any
of us can read. We read about the struggles of others in history -- what about
ourselves? Yes, us! What about our experiences of being ourselves?
When we look back in
history, we find people who are not so different from us -- struggling with
their human nature -- and trying to live ethical lives in whatever way they can
do so. They aspire to live ethical lifes and find themselves failing again and
again.
St. Augustine in the
5th Century held that although we feel free to make choices in life, our true nature
as human beings includes a persistent disregard for what is good. On this view,
we are sinners whose only hope for redemption lies in the gracious love of a
merciful deity. Whatever I do on my own, Augustine would argue, is bound to be
wrong; whatever I do right, must be performed by God through me.
St. Thomas Aquinas in
the 13th Century brought Aristotle’s theories back into “vogue,” soon after St.
Augustine’s death (if 800 years is soon, that is.) He allowed humanity to have
a bit of secularity along with faith, and his ethics allows for a Natural Law
which can be found in the heart of man. Please be
sure to listen to our Saints' Debate on the lecture tab before working in this
thread.
So, here we are in
the 21st Century with all the sophistication and technology of the age. Does
this account of human nature fit well with your own experience of human action?
That is, do you observe (in yourself and others) an inclination toward evil
instead of toward good? Bring in examples of scenarios which bolster your view,
or which tend to bring your view (or others) into question.
DeVry
ETHC445 Week 3 Dq 1 & Dq 2 latest october 2016
dq 1
|
|
Applying the Death
Penalty (graded)
|
First, here is a word of caution. With
this discussion comes a tasking to discuss the death penalty in two ways:
first, as an expression of the social contract, where one person has killed
another in a violation of that other person’s right to peace and safety, and
second, as a rules-based function of the justice system being applied to a difficult
situation.
What do you see going
on that is a violation of the Hobbes/Locke social contract idea?
And you might also connect it with any of the Three Schools, plus Aristotle,
that you have read in past weeks—and especially with the rules-based ethics
model.
Here's the situation:
In Manatee County, Florida, a judge sentenced a man to death—the first time
this had happened in the county for over 19 years. Sentenced to death was a
25-year-old man for the January 7, 2004, murder of both of his parents by
bludgeoning them to death in their bed with a baseball bat.
Now, with your social
contract ethicist hats on, tell us what you make of this quote by the judge at
the sentencing, quoted from the front page of the November 17, 2007 Bradenton
Herald: "You have not only forfeited
your right to live among us, but under the laws of the state of Florida, you
have forfeited the right to live at all."
Have at it, good
folks. But, rather than running off with reactions and opinions about the death
penalty in general, please do keep it in the context of our social contract
discussion for this week and also connected with ethics of justice.
dq 2
|
Living in Our State
of Nature (graded)
|
Social Contract
theorists say that morality consists of a set of rules governing how people
should treat one another that rational beings will agree to accept for their
mutual benefit, on the condition that others agree to follow these rules as
well.
Hobbesruns the logic like
this in the form of a logical syllogism:
1) We are all self-interested,
2) Each of us needs to have a peaceful and cooperative social order to pursue
our interests,
3) We need moral rules in order to establish and maintain a cooperative social
order,
Therefore, self-interest motivates us to establish moral rules.
Thomas Hobbeslooked
to the past to observe a primitive “State of Nature” in which there is no such
thing as morality, and that this self-interested human nature was "nasty,
brutish, and short" -- a kind of perpetual state of warfare
John Lockedisagreed,
and set forth the view that the state exists to preserve the natural rights of
its citizens. When governments fail in that task, citizens have the right—and
sometimes the duty—to withdraw their support and even to rebel. Listen
to Locke's audio on the lecture tab and read his lecturette to be able to
answer this thread.
Locke addressed Hobbes's claim that the state of nature was the state of war,
though he attribute this claim to "some men" not to Hobbes. He
refuted it by pointing to existing and real historical examples of people in a
state of nature. For this purpose he regarded any people who are not subject to
a common judge to resolve disputes, people who may legitimately take action to
themselves punish wrong doers, as in a state of nature.
Which philosophy do you espouse?
In coming to grips
with the two and considering your experience of society as it is today, think
out loud about what you experiences as the State of Nature, and tell us what
you would be willing to give up in exchange for civil order and personal
security?
You might consider
what you have already given up in exchange for security as well as what might
be required in coming days.
DeVry
ETHC445 Week 4 Dq 1 & Dq 2 latest october 2016
dq 1
|
|
Ethics of Controlling Environmental
Innovation (graded)
|
Increasing food supplies are
necessary to sustain growing populations around the world and their appetites
for great food, quality products, and continuous availability.
A great deal of expensive research
is invested in developing technologies to deliver productive agriculture.
Horticultural efforts to breed hybrid crops are seen as far back as history can
observe, and there have been efforts to domesticate improved animals, as well.
Gene splitting was a 1990s technology to improve the health and productivity of
farm crops. With the 21st century have come genetically modified foods (GMF)
through the use of nanotechnology to cause changes at the genetic and even
molecular levels. These are very expensive technologies, and many new products
have been patented and otherwise protected as proprietary products of
intellectual property.
Drive out to the country during
growing season, and you will see signs identifying that the crop has been grown
with a protected seed that cannot be used to produce retained seed for planting
in the next growing season.
In terms of this week’s TCOs, what
ethical issues are raised by this legal process of patent protection, and how
do we see the primary schools of ethics used in these proprietary measures?
What, in this deontological week and in our learning to date, informs our
understanding of this situation, and what should be done about it?
dq2
|
|
Kant - Accomplice
to Crazed Murderer? (graded)
|
Kant’s famous First
Formulation of the Categorical Imperative reads:
“Act only according
to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a
universal law.” Kant taught morality as a matter of following maxims of living
that reflect absolute laws. “Universal” is a term that allows for no
exceptions, and what is universal applies always and everywhere. Lying, for any
reason, is universally wrong.
Be sure to listen to
Kant's audio lecture before posting this week!
So, consider the
famous case of the Crazed Murderer. In your town the Crazed Murderer comes to
your door looking for your friend and wanting to kill him. You know that your
friend went home to hide. What do you tell the murderer? When he leaves and
runs up the street to your friend’s house, what do you do?
DeVry
ETHC445 Week 5 Dq 1 & Dq 2 latest october 2016
dq 1
|
Life & Death;
Politics & Ethics (graded)
|
There are three basic
propositions in standard Utilitarianism (Please be sure to listen to Mill's
audio lecture before joining this threaded discussion):
- Actions are judged right and wrong
solely on their consequences;
that is, nothing else matters except the consequence, and right actions
are simply those with the best consequences.
- To assess consequences, the only
thing that matters is the amount of happiness and unhappiness caused;
that is, there is only one criterion and everything else is irrelevant.
- In calculating happiness and
unhappiness caused, nobody’s happiness counts any more than anybody
else’s;
that is, everybody’s welfare is equally important and the majority rules.
In specific cases
where justice and utility are in conflict, it may seem expedient to serve the
greater happiness through quick action that overrules consideration for
justice. There is a side to happiness that can call for rushed decisions and actions
that put decision-makers under the pressure of expediency.
Here is a dilemma for
our class:
You are the elected
district attorney. You receive a phone call from a nursing home administrator
who was a good friend of yours in college. She has a waiting list of 3,000
people who will die if they don't get into her nursing home facility within the
next 3 weeks, and she currently has 400 patients who have asked (or their
families have asked on their behalf) for the famous Dr. Jack Kevorkian's
(fictitious) sister, Dr. Jill Kevorkian, for assistance in helping them die.
The 3,000 people on the waiting list want to live. She (the nursing home
administrator) wants to know if you would agree to "look the other
way" if she let in Dr. Jill to assist in the suicide of the 400 patients
who have requested it, thus allowing at least 400 of the 3,000 on the waiting
list in.
- How would we use Utilitarianism to
"solve" this dilemma?
- What ethics did your friend, the
nursing home administrator, use in deciding to call you?
- What ethics are you using if you
just "look the other way" and let it happen?
dq 2
|
Dealing With
Emergencies and Outcomes (graded)
|
Chapter 9 of our text includes the
terrorism situation at the 1972 Munich Olympics, and it needs to be read before
engaging this discussion.
The principle of
utility involves maximizing happiness as a desirable outcome of decisions.
Although it does not get directly said, there is an inverse intention to
minimize the undesirable outcome of disaster. Utilitarian decisions are
directed toward outcomes—that is, the consequences of decisions.
The Olympic hostage
situation was a high-tension moment, full of dangerous surprises and strategies
to deal with the situation that did not work out for the best. Among the
strategies was the idea to kill the leader of the terrorists so as to disrupt
the terrorist plot and to allow a good outcome in which the hostages would be
saved. In the situation it was also entirely possible that a terrible outcome
might occur in which all would die. The situation was an emergency.
The German legal
system might eventually take the terrorists and their leader to trial, but
first there was the need to end the hostage situation. The account in our text
ends with, “But it was the lesser of two evils.”
As utilitarian
ethicists this week, how shall we reason through to the decision of the law
enforcement authorities at the 1972 Munich Olympics?
DeVry
ETHC445 Week 6 Dq 1 & Dq 2 latest october 2016
dq 1
|
|
Applying Rand's
Objectivism (graded)
|
Ayn Rand’s Objectivist philosophyhas been touted by her detractors as the philosophy of
self-interested selfishness.
Her four epistemological principles are:
1. Metaphysics: Objective reality of the world and the objects in it.
2. Epistemology: Reason as the one and only key to understanding.
3. Ethics: Self-interest in what behavior is but also what it should be.
4. Politics: Capitalism through the performance of deeds by individuals who are
self-interested.
In the early 1960's,
a student asked a spokesman for Objectivism what would happen to the poor in an
Objectivist's free society.
The spokesman answered, "If you want to help them, you will not be
stopped."
If one reads Rand's
works, Atlas Shrugged, or The Fountainhead, one will conclude that this would be the answer Ayn would
have given to that student as well.
What do you conclude
from the answer given by the Objectivist spokesperson?
Is Objectivism, like Moral Relativism, the opposite of ethics?
And what clue in what she taught leads to your conclusion?
dq 2
|
Working Conflict
Resolution Methods (graded)
|
Different ways to
analyze ethical behaviors and dilemmas exist, and many of them will help direct
you to the correct or "best" solution to a problem.
As we discussed in
week 1 in the "tough choices" .pdf, sometimes right vs. right or
wrong vs. wrong decisions have to be made.
In the lecture this
week, you are given three ethical dilemma
resolution models to try out on a dilemma provided there. Please review that
interactive before posting to the threads this week, and let's bring your
questions and comments about the "proposed" solutions here to the
threads. We will talk about that through mid-week, and then I will post a new
dilemma here where we will, as a group, begin analyzing it using the different
methods.
You will need to be
able to use these three models (Blanchard and Peale, Laura Nash and Front page
of the Newspaper) on the final exam ... so let's be sure to practice all three
of them together this week.
So, to start this
off, let's address the dilemma in the Week 6 Lecture interactive (in the middle
of the page). You MUST read the lecture and run the interactive in order to
participate in the threads this week!
- Review the sample solution to the
Laura Nash method.
Do you agree with that analysis? If so, what parts do you think really
helped you work through the dilemma? If not, which parts do you not agree
with?
- Review the sample solution to the
Front Page of the Newspaper method.
Do you think this is one of those types of dilemmas for which this model
works? If not, why not? If so, why? How did using this method help you
work through the dilemma?
- Review the sample solution to the
Blanchard and Peale method.
Do you agree with the analysis? If not, why not? If so, in what way did
this help you analyze this dilemma?
Pick ONE of the above
3 questions and let's get started.Or,
respond to another student with details about why you agree or disagree with
their analysis. Feel free to kindly debate with each other. Do not take things
personally if someone disagrees. Be sure to show that you have viewed the
lecture and interactive and that you attempted an analysis for "high
quality" posts this week. After Wednesday, I will bring in another
scenario and we can analyze that one together as a class.
DeVry
ETHC445 Week 7 Dq 1 & Dq 2 latest october 2016
dq 1
|
Business Ethics
& the Hovercraft Debacle (graded)
|
This week, we looked
at two more ethical codes—one for the Project Management Institute, and one for
Engineers.
(Find links to these professional codes in the Week 7 Assignmenttab
along with the Week 7 readings.)
You can see that both
of them are much simpler than the Legal code we looked at last week, and even
simpler than the Medical code of ethics. Appropriate professional behavior,
practice, and discipline varies among professions and reflects the needs and
values of the professional society in question.
Let's then assume professional roles as we work on this fictional scenario:
It's 2020, and General Foryota Company opens a plant in
which to build a new mass-produced hover-craft. This hover-craft will work
using E-85 Ethanol, will travel up to 200 mph, and will reduce pollution
worldwide at a rate of 10 percent per year. It is likely that when all
automobiles in the industrial world have been changed over to hovercrafts,
emission of greenhouse gasses may be so reduced that global warming may end and
air quality will become completely refreshed.
However, the downside
is that during the transition time, GFC's Hover-Vee (only available in red or
black), will most likely put all transportation as we know it in major
dissaray. Roadways will no longer be necessary, but new methods of controlling
traffic will be required. Further, while the old version of cars are still
being used, Hover-vee's will cause accidents, parking issues, and most likely
class envy and warfare. The sticker price on the first two models will be about
four times that of the average SUV (to about $200,000.) Even so, GFC's
marketing futurists have let them know that they will be able to pre-sell their
first three years of expected production, with a potential waiting list which
will take between 15 and 20 years to fill.
The Chief Engineer of
GFC commissions a study on potential liabilities for the Hover-vees. The
preliminary result is that Hover-vees will likely kill or maim humans at an
increased rate of double to triple over automobile travel because of collisions
and crashes at high speeds -- projected annual death rates of 100,000 to
200,000. However, global warming will end, and the environment will flourish.
The U. S. Government
gets wind of the plans. Congress begins to discuss the rules on who can own and
operate Hover-vees. GFC's stock skyrockets. The Chief Engineer takes the
results of the study to the Chief Legal Counsel, and together they agree to
bury the study, going forward with the production plans. The Chief Project
Manager, who has read the study and agreed to bury it, goes ahead and plans out
the project for the company, with target dates and production deadlines.
Our class is a team
of young lawyers, project managers, engineers, and congressional aides who are
all part of the process of helping get this project off the ground. In fact,
according to the first letter of your last name, you are the following team:
A-G: Attorney on the
GFC team
H-N: Project Manager on the GFC team
0-S: Engineer on the GFC team
T-Z: Congressional Aide
Somebody sent a
secret copy of the report to you at your home address. It has no information in
it at all, except for the report showing the proof of the increase in accidents
and deaths. The report shows, on its face, that the CLO, CE, CPM, and your
Congressional Representative have seen copies of this report. On the front
there are these words typed in red:They knew—they
buried this. Please save the world!
Each of you feel a
very loyal tie to your boss and your company/country. You all have mortgages,
and families to feed. It is likely if you blow the whistle on this report, you
will lose your job and your livelihood. You're not even sure who wrote the
study in your envelope or who actually sent it to you.
Now to the task at
hand:
Utilizing your profession's code of ethics, what would be
your first step? Who would you talk to first? Would you go to the press? Would
you go to your boss? Should you do anything at all?
dq 2
|
|
Assemble and Test
Your Personal Ethics Statement (graded)
|
Please be sure to
read the Week Seven Lecture in its entirety before posting to this
discussion.
This week we will work on creating your own statement of personal ethics.
To get started, read summarizing review of our great and famous ethics and what
they have taught us -- found in our lecture this week.
Then, let's work on
creating one for you.
Your goal for the end
of this thread is to have created a personal ethical philosophy and be able to
tell your classmates from which philosophies you created it and why the
contents are important and meaningful for you. List its precepts.(You
will need to do this on the Final Exam.)
After you have assembled and posted your personal ethics
statement, responded to what others may have said to you and thought about what
you have posted to others, then take your statement and use it to work through
the famous case of the Ring of Gyges.
One of the great examples of ethics and morals in all of
literature comes from Plato who wrote about the Ring of Gyges inThe Republic, Book II, starting at paragraph 359a.
For those who wish to read the whole story, it is in the Doc
Sharing tab and here is a link to the story --Ring of Gyges.
The story goes that Gyges was a shepherd in the service of
the King. In a most unusual circumstance he came upon a dead man, removed the
man's ring, and discovered that it made him invisible. He conspired to take the
periodic report of the shepherds to the King -- once there he seduced the Queen
and eventually took control of the Kingdom by conspiring with the Queen. Plato
continues the story:
"Suppose now that there were two such magic rings, and
the just put on one of them and the unjust the other; no man can be imagined to
be of such an iron nature that he would stand fast in justice. No man would
keep his hands off what was not his own when he could safely take what he liked
out of the market, or go into houses and lie with any one at his pleasure, or
kill or release from prison whom he would, and in all respects be like a God
among men. Then the actions of the just would be as the actions of the unjust;
they would both come at last to the same point. And this we may truly affirm to
be a great proof that a man is just, not willingly or because he thinks that
justice is any good to him individually, but of necessity, for wherever any one
thinks that he can safely be unjust, there he is unjust. For all men believe in
their hearts that injustice is far more profitable to the individual than
justice, and he who argues as I have been supposing, will say that they are
right."
This story raises up the question of what sanctions prevent
people from just taking any liberties they are inclined to take.
The whole subject of ethics, seen in large scale, is that of
accepting and living under moral standards.
1. Using YOUR personal ethical statement that you have
created, what would you do if you had that second ring?
2. What else within this course helps in responding to this
fictitious situation or in explaining it?
3. Respond to your classmates' posts. Are they holding true
to their own personal ethical philosophies in their resolutions of this
dilemma?
Pick one or more of the above, and post below!
Imagine that!;o)
DeVry
ETHC445 Week 1 Ethics Paper latest october 2016
Assignments
Consider the ethical dilemma given below. Write an ethics
paper about it, including all the following information and analysis:
Solve the dilemma using any two of the following Three
Primary Schools of Ethics we discuss this week from our assigned reading. (Ends
based, Rules based, or Care based).
Explain the similarities and differences in your two
solutions to the same dilemma.
State (and justify) whether you feel the two schools of
ethics are worthy of use in "real life" dilemmas.
Do you feel that Aristotle would have approved of either of
your solutions? Why or why not?
Please note that your ethics papers this term will be a great
practice for you in doing the Final Exam. Your final exam is an essay exam
which will follow a very similar format to the homework assignments...so please
be sure to spend some time doing your readings and applying them to your
written assignments.
Your papers should be about two typed pages, double spaced.
Use the DeVry standard format for the paper (the title page and citation pages
do not count among the two pages). Please organize your thoughts, use headings,
and create readable documents with grammar and spelling checked.
The Dilemma will be your choice from either of the two
following:
Choice 1: Over the past few decades, a sizable industry has
arisen to serve the demand for ready-made and even customized compositions and
term papers. Many students presumably believe there is nothing morally wrong
with the practice of buying one of these papers and turning it in to fulfill a
course requirement. Review what you read about plagiarism in this chapter. Then
write a several-paragraph explanation of its message for a friend who doesn't
get it. (Be sure to follow the approach explained in that section so you avoid
committing plagiarism yourself).
Choice 2: A married couple, both addicted to drugs, are
unable to care for their infant daughter. She is taken from them by court order
and placed in a foster home. The years pass. She comes to regard her foster
parents as her real parents. They love her as they would their own daughter.
When the child is 9 years old, the natural parents, rehabilitated from drugs,
begin court action to regain custody. The case is decided in their favor. The
child is returned to them, against her will. Does ethics support the law in
this case? Discuss.
We recommend you wait until at least Thursday to begin
working on this assignment so you can include the information we are learning
in the threads and in our readings in your thought processes. Write your answer
and save it in a Word document, entitled,
"YourLastnameEthicsWeek1.docx."
e.g. Julius Caesar would turn in a document named
"CaesarEthicsWeek1.docx"
Submit your lab to the Dropbox, located at the top of this
page. For instructions on how to use the Dropbox, read these step-by-step
instructions.
See the Syllabus section "Due Dates for Assignments
& Exams" for due date information.
DeVry
ETHC445 Week 2 Ethics Paper latest october 2016
Assignments
Choose one ethical dilemma from each group
Group A: A newspaper columnist signs a contract with a
newspaper chain. Several months later she is offered a position with another
newspaper chain at a higher salary. Because she would prefer making more money,
she notifies the first chain that she is breaking her contract. The courts will
decide the legality of her action. But what of the morality? Did the columnist
behave ethically?
An airline pilot goes for his regular medical checkup. The
doctor discovers that he has developed a heart murmur. The pilot only has a
month to go before he is eligible for retirement. The doctor know this and
wonders whether, under these unusual circumstances, she is justified in
withholding the information about the pilot's condition.
Group B: An office worker had a record of frequent absence.
He used all his vacation and sick leave days and frequently requested
additional leave without pay. His supervisor and co-workers expressed great
frustration because his absenteeism caused bottlenecks in paperwork, created
low morale in the office, and required others to do his work in addition to
their own. On the other hand, he felt he was entitled to take his earned time
and additional time off without pay. Was he right?
Rhonda enjoys socializing with fellow employees at work, but
their discussion usually consists of gossiping about other people, including
several of her friends. At first Rhonda feels uncomfortable talking in this way
about people she is close to, but then she decided it does no real harm and she
feels no remorse for joining in.
Please wait until at least Thursday to begin working on this
assignment so you can include the information we are learning in the threads
and in our readings in your thought processes.
Parameters for writing this paper:
Answer the questions raised in the problems above. You will
have two separate sections to your paper, one on each separate question in your
chosen group. You do not have to write an "English class" style paper
this week. Answer each problem separately.
While writing your answers, incorporate the ideas of
"good vs. evil," "wrong vs. right," and "ought/should
be vs. what is."
Explain in your answer to each problem how Augustine and
Aquinas would have solved the problem based on what we learned about each here
in the materials and course, and if they differ, why?
Your two sets of answers should be about two pages, double
spaced.
Write your answer and save it in a Word document, entitled
"YourLastnameEthicsWeek2.docx." For example, Christopher Columbus
would turn in a document named "ColumbusEthicsWeek2.docx."
Submit your lab to the Dropbox, located at the top of this
page. For instructions on how to use the Dropbox, read these step-by-step
instructions.
See the Syllabus section "Due Dates for Assignments
& Exams" for due date information.
DeVry
ETHC445 Week 3 Ethics Paper latest october 2016
Assignments
Consider these three problems. In writing a paper about all
three of them individually, identify the consequences of the actions taken, and
then determine whether the actions taken represented a greater good, who would
benefit from the good, and whether the consequences ethically justify the
decisions and actions.
The Mayor of a large city was given a free membership in an
exclusive golf club by people who have received several city contracts. He also
accepted gifts from organizations that have not done business with the City but
might in the future. The gifts ranged from $200 tickets to professional sports
events to designer watches and jewelry.
A college instructor is pursuing her doctorate in night
school. To gain extra time for her own studies, she gives her students the same
lectures, the same assignments, and the same examinations semester after
semester without the slightest effort to improve them.
Todd and Edna have been married for three years. They have
had serious personal problems. Edna is a heavy drinker, and Todd cannot keep a
job. Also, they have bickered and fought constantly since their marriage.
Deciding that the way to overcome their problems is to have a child, they stop
practicing birth control, and Edna becomes pregnant.
Using what you have learned from our discussions and readings
up to this week, write an answer to all three parts. How would Locke have
addressed or solved the problem? Explain how his ethics and the answer he may
have given are different or the same as yours.
Be sure to complete your readings before beginning this
assignment. The paper length should be about two pages double spaced. Write
your answer and save it in a Word document, entitled, "YourLastnameEthicsWeek3.docx."
We recommend you wait until at least Thursday to begin
working on this assignment so you can include the information we are learning
in the threads and in our readings in your thought processes. Write your answer
and save it in a Word document, entitled,
"YourLastnameEthicsWeek1.docx."
For example, Sir Isaac Newton would turn in a document named
"NewtonEthicsWeek3.docx."
Submit your lab to the Dropbox, located at the top of this
page. For instructions on how to use the Dropbox, read these step-by-step
instructions.
See the Syllabus section "Due Dates for Assignments
& Exams" for due date information.
DeVry
ETHC445 Week 4 Ethics Paper latest october 2016
Assignments
Using web based research, find an environmental-based ethical
dilemma from the past five years online. (You can use a news story, an internet
article, a law case, or anything from a governmental database for this
assignment.) Then, using this story as a foundation for your dilemma:
Create a 2-4 paragraph "dilemma" similar to the
other dilemmas you have been solving throughout this term.
Solve the dilemma using Kant's ethics (Categorical
Imperative).
Solve the dilemma using any other method we have discussed to
date (with which you agree.)
State which resolution (Kant's or the other one you chose)
you prefer and why.
(It is possible that one or more of these dilemmas you write
may become future exam questions for this course, so keep that in mind while
you write the dilemma.)
This assignment should be about two typed pages, double-spaced.
You MUST provide the source of the dilemma, and thus this paper will require at
least one "reference." Use APA format in citing the source, and let
me know if you have questions on how to do that.
Write your answer and save it in a Word document, entitled,
"YourLastnameEthicsWeek4.docx."
e.g. Arnold Schwarzenegger would turn in a document named
"SchwarzeneggerEthicsWeek4.docx."
Submit your lab to the Dropbox, located at the top of this
page. For instructions on how to use the Dropbox, read these step-by-step
instructions.
See the Syllabus section "Due Dates for Assignments
& Exams" for due date information.
DeVry
ETHC445 Week 5 Ethics Paper latest october 2016
Assignments
The "You Decide" tab to the left presents a
difficult and painful dilemma to you in an imagined professional role. Go
through the You Decide presentation, make the decision it calls for, and write
your weekly paper to make your decision and explain, in the given format, your
reasoning and justification for it.
Your dilemma is that you have to make a painful medical
decision and to explain, in writing, who benefits from what you decided, who
gets denied a needed benefit, and why. The document is to be in the form of an
official memorandum that will be kept for the record and could be potentially
read by not only your Peer Review Committee, but also possibly those involved
in charitable fundraising to support hospital development and others with
financial interests in the choice made.
You will see in the You Decide tab that there is time
pressure in the simulated situation to make your decision, so remember that you
would not have the luxury to dawdle in the decision-making process, and as the
decision-maker, you would not have the luxury of consulting others. It all falls
on YOU!
Include in the document the utilitarian ethical philosophy of
John Stuart Mill (from the lecture and audio for this week) and ONE OTHER
ETHICAL PHILOSOPHER of your choice that we have studied to date, and use both
of those philosophies to bolster your decision. This paper will be at least two
double spaced pages but limited to three pages. Remember both professional
written form and potential audience, as well as tone when writing this
sensitive paper.
You may want to wait until at least Thursday to begin working
on this assignment so you can include the information we are learning in the
threads and in our readings in your thought processes.
Write your answer and save it in a Word document,
entitled,"YourLastnameEthicsWeek5.docx."
For example, Dr. Christian Barnard, who performed the first
heart transplant surgery, would turn in a document named
"BarnardEthicsWeek5.docx."
This problem may take more than a few paragraphs to answer. I
would think that about two pages should cover this. You may include a reference
to up to two outside sources, if properly documented. Outside sources are NOT
required.
Submit your lab to the Dropbox, located at the top of this
page. For instructions on how to use the Dropbox, read these step-by-step
instructions.
See the Syllabus section "Due Dates for Assignments
& Exams" for due date information.
DeVry
ETHC445 final exam latest October 2016
This exam covers all 14 TCO's.
For each of the following multiple choice questions, please
select the Philosophy (and/or Philosopher) which best goes with each
description below.
Question 1. 1. (TCOs 2, 4, 5, 6) The idea that the assisted suicide of
terminally ill patients should be allowed simply at the patient's direction
reflects what type of ethics? (Points : 5)
Hobbes' State of
Nature
Rand's
Objectivism
Aristotle's
concept of Virtue
Thomas Aquinas'
concept of conscience
Socrates' concept
of excellence
Question 2. 2. (TCOs 1, 2, 7) What is the moral ideal of
justice? (Points : 5)
Acts of mercy
beyond what is required
Making decisions
in order to build friendships
Meeting legal
requirements
Evaluation of
situations according to their merits
Meeting the terms
of the Social Contract
Question 3. 3. (TCOs 1, 2) One of the common errors in Ethics
is unwarranted assumptions. Unwarranted assumptions consist of what? (Points :
5)
Preconceptions
before ethical dilemmas are confronted
Failing to read carefully and with attention
to detail
Taking too much
for granted
Speculating apart
from information
Treating case
studies carelessly
Question 4. 4. (TCO 2)
Prescriptive language is commonly used in ethics for what reason?
(Points : 5)
To indicate what
is prohibited or impossible
To indicate that
one choice is better than others
To show what
actions are legal
To convey
requirements and obligations
To indicate that
there are really no choices available
Question 5. 5. (TCOs 7, 8) Each person ought to do whatever
will best promote his or her own interests. (Points : 5)
Utilitarianism
Kant's
Categorical Imperative
Social Contract
Theory
Ethical Egoism
Gilligan
Question 6. 6. (TCOs 2, 4, 9) Free people are motivated
toward forming social structures according to a social contract in order to
overcome what problem identified by Thomas Hobbes? (Points : 5)
The need to
overcome disagreements
A perpetual state
of warfare
The establishment
of a monarchy
Taxation to
support the costs of government
Organized ways to
select leaders
Question 7. 7. (TCOs 3, 6)
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was created through a congressional
enabling act as a governmental agency to act on the concerns voiced by
environmental ethicists. Their actions include which of the following? (Points : 5)
Subpoena
regulation offenders
Monitor
situations of environmental concern
Fine offenders
Sponsor new
legislation on environmental issues
All of the above.
Question 8. 8. (TCOs 3, 6, 7)
The notion that the only thing good without qualification is a good will
is attributed to whom? (Points : 5)
St. Thomas Aquinas
Socrates
John Locke
Immanuel Kant
Oliver Cromwell
Question 9. 9. (TCOs 8, 9)
John Stuart Mill's theory of Utilitarianism is the most common form of
ethics in use today. It is used so commonly because it belongs to which of the
Primary Schools of Ethics? (Points : 5)
Care-based
Ends-based
Economy-based
Law-based
Efficiency-based
Question 10. 10. (TCOs 3, 6, 7) What is the purpose of
proving whether a syllogism of formal logic is “valid”? (Points : 5)
To identify the
connecting phrase “therefore” or a synonym of it before proceeding further
To determine
whether the situation described is accurate
To determine
whether the premises are true before continuing
To determine
whether the conclusion proceeds from the premises
To determine that
there are only two premise statements in the syllogism
Question 11. 11. (TCOs 1, 2)
Different from normal problem solving, dilemmas are different in what
aspect? (Points : 5)
Problems are much
more complicated
When one choice
is chosen, the opportunity for the others is lost
Problems are much
more urgent
Problems are so
much more real and less theoretical
Problems usually
involve not honoring our own virtues
Question 12. 12. (TCOs 1, 2, 7) According to Thomas Aquinas,
what ethical capacity do people of every culture naturally possess? (Points :
5)
Logical thinking
Personal virtues
Self-interest
Ability to learn
lessons
Conscience
Question 13. 13. (TCOs 2, 8)
The single criterion for making decisions in objectivist ethics is what?
(Points : 5)
Professional
development
Personal
self-interest
The physical
environment
Financial gain
The close group of family and friends who
will be impacted
Question 14. 14. (TCOs 1, 2, 5) The world view of ruthless
and unending competition for property and wealth was spelled out in which of
these concepts? (Points : 5)
Locke’s notion of
the natural state of man
Rawls’ notion of
the veil of ignorance
Aristotle’s
notion of the doctrine of the mean
Hammurabi’s code
of law
Hobbes’ state of
nature
Question 15. 15. (TCOs 3, 6, 7) Kant's concern that people choose to observe
universal laws as their duty is expressed through what actions? (Points : 5)
Their habits
Their maxims
Their desires
Their loves
Their loyalties
Question 16. 16. (TCOs 2, 7, 8) Personal development and discovery through
the repetition of good acts and study of virtue characterizes what ethicist?
(Points : 5)
Plato
Aristotle
Luther
Augustine
Socrates
Question 17. 17. (TCOs 2, 8)
Professional codes of conduct serve what function for business and
industry? (Points : 5)
Allow businesses
to avoid training professional staffers
Enable transfer
of valued employees across state lines
Enable
contracting of temporary employees
Specify
continuing education needs and requirements
Providing
assurance of the professional qualifications of members
Question 18. 18. (TCOs 2, 7)
Aristotle's Ethical Doctrine of the Mean measured personal virtues on a
scale that included the virtue itself, the excess of it, and the deficiency of
it.
If the virtue is GENEROSITY, and the excess is WASTEFULNESS,
what is the deficiency?
(Points : 5)
Carefulness
There is no
deficiency
Being broke
(having no money)
Stinginess
Moderation
Question 19. 19. (TCOs 8, 9)
In personal or organizational conflict, what benefits accrue to all
parties when a leader or consultant employees one of the ethical conflict
resolution models of Week 6? (Points : 5)
Objectives of
what winning the conflict means get refined and better understood
Conflict
management gets slowed down and settled.
Conflict can be
handled in a sequential, step-by-step manner
Parties can be
reconciled without solving the issues
Personal
relationships can be separated from issues
Question 20. 20. (TCOs 1, 2)
The Latin term a priori describes the origin of knowledge developed
rationally, and the term a posteriori describes knowledge developed through
observation and experience. What is an example of ethics is best described as
discovered in an a priori manner? (Points : 5)
Utilitarian
ethics
Objectivist
ethics
Deontological
ethics
Political ethics
Scientific ethics
1. (TCOs 1, 2, 3, 7) In support of TCO #7 and in the Week 7
discussions, you developed and placed into the threaded discussions your
personalized ethics statement of what has become important to you in the
practice of ethics as you have practiced ethics during the course. Your first
task in this question is to briefly present that personalized statement in just
a few sentences before continuing with the question. Much of the rest of the
exam will involve your working with that personalized statement through brief
applications and cases.
Use your ethical philosophy to solve the following ethical situation.
Explain how your philosophy helped you make your decision.
Should citizens have an ethical obligation to serve their
country when it is at war? Under what circumstances, if any, is it ethical for
a person to refuse to serve?
A significant number of people believe war is always wrong,
and that no circumstances justify one nation's taking up arms against
another. Is this view ethically sound?
How about realistically? Please state
which side you agree with, and why. Explain and defend your position using your
ethical position statement.
In answering, be sure to look at both sides of war: that is,
a country defending itself against aggression and of a strong country coming to
the aid of a weaker country that has been attacked unjustly. Then, explain how your ethical philosophy
affected how you answered this problem.
(Points : 30)
Spellchecker
Question 2. 2. (TCOs 1, 2, 7) Analyze the following ethical
situation using YOUR ethical philosophy. Read the situation and then in your
answer, explain why this is an ethical situation, what the "issues"
are, and how an "ethical" person would resolve them. Explain how YOUR ethical philosophy has
helped you reach a conclusion about how to resolve or analyze this situation.
As a result of the economic down-turn starting in 2008,
efficiency has become more and more the byword of the successful business
person. The axioms of the efficiency
expert are: "Eliminate what need not be done; simplify what must be done;
combine tasks wherever possible."
Putting this into practice means, among other things,
eliminating people's jobs. Sometimes it
also means making one person do two or three people's jobs. As company's gain the upper hand in
employment (when the number of employees wanting good jobs is higher than the
number of good (i.e. high paying) jobs available), they will more and more
expect employees to be willing to work longer hours and to do accomplish more
and varied tasks.
1. Under what
circumstances is it ethical business practices to ask employees to multi-task
or do more than one person's job?
2. Under what
circumstances is it ethical for an employee to refuse to do more work than can
be taken on in a conventional 40-45 hours per week?
3. Let's assume that
it is BECAUSE employees are willing to multi-task and do two or three people's
jobs, that others LOSE their jobs. Who
is more at fault ethically? The employer who requests the extra work from the
remaining employees? Or the employees who are willing to do the extra work,
thereby putting the others who aren't willing out of work?
(Points : 30)
Spellchecker
Question 3. 3. (TCOs 1, 7, 9) How do you feel Immanuel Kant
would have solved the above ethical situation differently or the same as you
did using your philosophy? Please explain the reasons for the similarities or
differences. (Points : 40)
Spellchecker
Question 4. 4. (TCOs 1, 2, 4, 9) Regina is chairperson of her
city's United Fund campaign. In her
annual preparations meeting with her staff of canvassers, she gives this
advice: "Hit the business places
first. Don't approach anyone who is walking alone in a hall or working alone in
a closed office. Look for two or more
people standing together or working side by side. Try to make them compete with each other in
generous giving. Capitalize on their
desire to show off and outdo the next person." She then states that the canvasser who
raises the most money of all will be awarded with a 5% cut of the total amount
that canvasser raises. Her approach pays off and the United Fund raises the
most money ever.
Tell what ethical philosophy Regina is using, if any.
Now, use your ethical philosophy to analyze the
situation. Explain how, using your
philosophy, you would have solved this situation either the same way as the
character in the situation did, or differently. Why?
(Points : 30)
Spellchecker
Question 5. 5. (TCOs 5, 6) You are a new employee in an
advertising company. Your client is a well known soup manufacturer who wants to
feature in advertisements a picture showing the solid ingredients in its
soup. Unfortunately, your advertising
group found that the solid ingredients sank to the bottom of the bowl and were
barely visible. All that could be seen
was the broth. Your boss hits upon a solution--put marbles in the bottom of the
bowl before pouring in the soup! You try it and the vegetables sit nicely on
the top, giving the appearance of thick soup. Your boss wants you to run with
the project with this solution.
What will you do?
Explain why you will do this and what ethical analysis you used to come
to this conclusion.
(Points : 30)
Spellchecker
Question 6. 6. (TCOs 6, 8) Analyze your answer above using
the Front Page of the Newspaper ethical dilemma resolution model. Show your
steps. (Points : 40)
Spellchecker
