Do non-malfeasance and honesty conflict?
Do non-malfeasance and honesty conflict?
1. Case Study: A young man meets a wonderful girl in his senior year in college. He believes this is the one that he might marry in the future. He is deeply in love with her. He has a problem. After leaving the constraints of parental authority at home, he went wild as a party animal at college. He was very sexually active in his freshman and sophomore years at college. During that time, he caught genital herpes. (Hint: Think about the following: Were these acts virtuous and honest? To whom? Is the individual responsible for his actions?) His sister goes to the same college and is friends with her brother’s girlfriend as well as being close to her brother. She knows he has genital herpes. She does not want to hurt him or the relationship but she wonders if she should tell her brother’s girlfriend about her brother’s condition. (Hint: Think about the following: What would be the virtuous and honest thing to do in your own mind? Does the sister have a different relationship and/or responsibility to the girlfriend than the brother? What is the overlap of these relationships? What is the responsibility of the sister to each? What consequences might be expected? Are vices of lack and vices of excess evident?) Answer the following three questions in your assignment response. Please read all three questions before beginning. After you have finished answering the three questions, read the new development and answer question 4. 1. Discuss the following case in terms of virtue, non-malfeasance, and honesty. Can you identify examples of each (or their opposites) in the case study as written? Where and by whom? Explain your answers. Please do not get emotionally or personally involved with “finger pointing.” Stay focused on virtue, non-malfeasance, and honesty. 2. How should each person in the case (brother and sister) handle his or her situation moving forward? Explain how non-malfeasance and virtue come into play. For example, what should the sister do and why? The brother? The girlfriend? In your answer, discuss the concepts of “no harm” and “honesty.” 3. In your opinion, can virtues or moral values conflict with each other? Do non-malfeasance and honesty conflict? Whether you answer yes or no, explain your answer. New Development: The sister learns that her brother has decided not to tell his girlfriend until much later if they become serious and he has an outbreak. He also asks his sister to promise to keep his secret. (Hint: Think about what the sister should do now. How do virtue, non-malfeasance, and honesty come into play?) 1. Considering your answers in questions 1 – 3 above, consider how the “new development” might change your answers. What should the sister do now? Remember: address the questions from the position of virtue, non-malfeasance, and honesty, not from an emotional response. Submit your response to the questions in Part I and II in APA form. Make show to include IN-TEXT-CITATION. Write a cohesive 2–3-page (500–750-word) Microsoft Word document to the M1: Assignment 3 Drop box by Wednesday, October 15, 2014.
2. The Prisoner’s Dilemma; What is in My Best Interest? We learned in earlier discussions that according to Aristotle and Bentham, one’s happiness was the highest goal. Enter social contract. How does one ensure one’s self-interest when one has to compromise with another to achieve the goal? David Gauthier proposes that it is possible, offering the Prisoner’s Dilemma as an example. According to the story of the Prisoner’s Dilemma, two people have been brought in for questioning, conducted separately, about a crime they are suspected to have committed. The police have solid evidence of a lesser crime that they committed, but need confessions in order to convict them on more serious charges. Each prisoner is told that if she cooperates with the police by informing on the other prisoner, then she will be rewarded by receiving a relatively light sentence of one year in prison, whereas her cohort will go to prison for ten years. If they both remain silent, then there will be no such rewards, and they can each expect to receive moderate sentences of two years. And if they both cooperate with police by informing on each other, then the police will have enough to send each to prison for five years. The dilemma then is this: in order to serve her own interests as well as possible, each prisoner reasons that no matter what the other does she is better off cooperating with the police by confessing. Each reasons: “If she confesses, then I should confess, thereby being sentenced to five years instead of ten. And if she does not confess, then I should confess, thereby being sentenced to one year instead of two. So, no matter what she does, I should confess.” The problem is that when each reasons this way, they each confess, and each goes to prison for five years. However, had they each remained silent, thereby cooperating with each other rather than with the police, they would have spent only two years in prison. (Note: For additional information, you can read more about Gauthier by copying the URL into your internet browser. (http://www.iep.utm.edu/soc-cont/#SH2a). It will take you to the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. The link takes you to the beginning of a great article on social contract. The outline at the beginning shows that the discussion on Gauthier and the Prisoner’s Dilemma is in the middle of the article, in the “More Recent Theories” section, following Rawls. Gauthier comments on the idea that the Prisoner’s Dilemma shows that it is in an individual’s best interest to cooperate, even when it means that they will give up some individual freedom.) Assignment Requirements: Write a 3-page (650-750 word) paper addressing the following questions: 1. Consider the concepts of utilitarianism, egoism, and social contract. What moral theory—utilitarianism, egoism, or social contract—is consistent with coopering with the other prisoner and rejecting self-interest as the best option? What is the recommended course of action for each prisoner in regard to the other two theories? 2. From your experience, is cooperation always in your best interest? Share an example. Alternatively, to state it negatively, why do selfish, self-centered people seem to prosper if cooperation is always in their best interest? Post the 3-page (650-750 words) paper to the M2: Assignment 2 Dropbox by Wednesday, October 22, 2014. All written assignments and responses should follow in APA form. Make show to include IN-TEXT-CITATION. Write citation rules for attributing sources. Please use Microsoft Word spelling/grammar checker before submitting your paper. Please remember that the plagiarism policy applies.
3. LASA 1 – Letters from Birmingham Martin Luther King, Jr. was many things, a civil rights activist, nonviolent protestor, organizer, teacher, son, husband, father, and a black man. Many forget that he was first, a Christian Southern Baptist minister and preacher. His religious faith informed his ethical actions. After reading selections from Martin Luther King, Jr.’s, Letters from the Birmingham Jail, explore the role of Christian ethics in King’s actions during the turbulent times in the South in the 1960s. Consider the following: 1. King was in Birmingham to address the issue of injustice by organizing a protest. Define the injustice and the protest and explain how Judeo-Christian ethics were applied to allow for civil disobedience. How was the injustice in Birmingham tied to all communities in the South? 2. King lists four steps to nonviolent campaigns. Name them. How did these flow from King’s Christian ethical principles? How did King reconcile the “eye for an eye” Jewish ethical principle with the Christian “love one another” ethical principle of nonviolence? 3. How do King’s ethical principles help him defend against the charges that his protests and law breaking were “untimely” considering the political situation in Birmingham at the time? 4. Consider areas of conflict in the world today. Pick one and discuss how King’s actions and his ethical principles might resolve the issue. Reference King Jr., M. L. (1963). Letter from a Birmingham Jail. Retrieved from EBSCOhost database Academic Search Elite. Letters from Birmingham Jail Post a 600–750-word paper discussing all of the questions to the M3: Assignment 2 Dropbox by Wednesday, October 29, 2014. All written assignments and responses should follow proper in APA form. Make show to include IN-TEXT-CITATION. Citation rules for attributing sources. Please use Microsoft Word spelling/grammar checker.
4. Ethical (Moral) Relativism In America, many are comfortable describing ethics as follows: “Well, what’s right for me is right for me and what’s right for you is right for you. Let’s just agree to disagree.” This is an affirmation of what philosophers call individual or subjective moral relativism. In this understanding of relativism, morality is a matter of individual feelings and personal preference. In individual moral relativism, the determination of what is right and wrong in a situation varies according to the individual. Moral relativists do not believe in natural law or universal truths. Cultural moral relativism puts culture at the forefront of relative ethical decision-making. It says the individual must include the precepts of his or her culture as a prominent part of the relativistic moral action. Lawrence Kohlberg, a prominent psychologist known for recognizing moral stages of development, takes it a step farther saying cultural relativists are persons stuck in the “Conventional Stage” of ethical development. In your paper, please define individual moral relativism and cultural moral relativism in detail, noting how they differ from each other, their strengths and weaknesses, and give your position on Kohlberg’s stance on ethical relativism. What aspects of ethical relativism do you identify and agree with? What aspects do you disagree with? Give a personal example that illustrates your stance on ethical relativism, describing how you made a moral decision in an ethical dilemma. Include at least two references to support your thoughts. Post a 500-word paper to the M4: Assignment 2 Dropbox by due Wednesday, November 5, 2014. All written assignments and responses should follow proper in APA form. Make show to include IN-TEXT-CITATION. Citation rules for attributing sources. Please use Microsoft Word spelling/grammar checker. Be mindful of plagiarism policies.
5. LASA 2 – Ethical Systems and Me What a busy five weeks we have had! We have learned to use moral reasoning and examined many ethical theories in this course. These include virtue ethics, utilitarianism, social contract, deontology with goals (Hinduism and Buddhism), deontology with divine authority (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam), relativism (individual and cultural), and deontology with a categorical imperative (Kant). Think back about your impressions of each of these ethical systems and write a 1,000 to 1,250-word essay that addresses the following questions below. Be sure to write good introductory and concluding paragraphs in your essay. 1. Summarize the principle components of each of the seven ethical systems studied in this course (listed above), including the principle ethicist involved in developing the system. Use two or three sentences for each ethical system. 2. Which ethical system is most prevalent in the United States today? In the World? Explain your answer and support your response. 3. Which ethical system most closely matches your personal ethical system? Why do you think so? Explain your position. 4. Please give a short, personal example that supports your decision to identify your ethical system (3 or 4 sentences) and explain why it does so. 5. Examine your response to previous assignments in Modules 1 thru 4 in this course. Are there any inconsistencies or conflict between positions you took in earlier assignments and the ethical system identified in this paper? For example, monotheists (Christians, Muslims, and Jews) believe in universal maxims. Relativists do not think universal maxims are possible. One cannot, for example be a Christian and believe no universal maxims exist, which is a relativist position. Monotheism (Christianity) and relativism are polar opposites. If inconsistencies exist between your earlier answers and this paper, how do you resolve them in your ethical decision-making process in the real world? 6. Add at least three references to support your analysis in this paper. Post a 4-5-page (1000-1250 -word) paper to the M5: Assignment 1 Dropbox by Monday, November 10, 2014. Include a title and reference page (not included in the 4-5 page count). All written assignments and responses should follow in APA form. Make show to include IN-TEXT-CITATION. Citation rules for attributing sources using APA format. Please u