Ethics

Ethics and Moral Development Reflect upon ethical dilemmas you may have encountered in an organization you are or have been with or that is currently in the news. Also, familiarize yourself with Kohlberg’s stages of moral development. For your initial post, address the following, supporting your perspectives with scholarly research: Summarize the ethical dilemma you encountered in your organization. Which of Kohlberg’s stages of moral development is represented in your example? Be sure to justify your reasoning for your choice. Do you think that one of the other theories of moral development better describes your example? Why? Postulate the (hypothetical or real) best- and worst-case outcomes of this dilemma as you see them.

1.                 What is the argument to promote diversity in favor of Affirmative Action (i.e. explain why diversity is important to Universities and how AA helps promote diversity)? Explain how those who are against AA use the practical objection to argue that AA does not actually help minorities.                                                                  2.      In her defense of abortion, Judith Jarvis Thomson uses a thought experiment called “the life support violinist.” How does the thought experiment work as an analogical argument that stands in for discussions about abortion? Present one possible objection to it. 3.      Stephen Macedo argues for the Civic View on Immigration. What is the civic view and how is it different from what Macedo calls “Cosmopolitanism”? ****Answer each question in less than 100 words each please *** Thank you!!

Post a draft of your final paper’s abstract, introduction, and conclusion for peer review. Be sure to include the problem you are addressing. Identify any questions or challenges you are facing with the assignment, or mention something new that you have learned. Pose specific questions you would like your peers to address.

1.     Final Paper Each week, we are touching on different ethical theories and ideological stances and their implications for problem definition, research and action. To better understand why educational policy making can engender heated debate, it is important to understand the myriad ways in which policy issues can be framed, the ethical theories that underlie the various frames, which stakeholders adopt which frames, and how those frames inform their positions/stances. The final paper is the ultimate assignment in this course and is designed to help you critically examine a policy issue of your choosing in order to better understand why, among other things, all of the key stakeholders believe their framing and position/stance is “right” and/or “good” while the framing and positions/stances of others’ are “wrong” and/or “bad.” Developing the final Ideology paper is a process and we will divide it into phases on which you will be evaluated: * Phase 1 we had to pick a topic for our final paper. I chose the opt out policy where parents can decide if they want their child to take standardized testing or not. Right now opt out has been mandated in only 3 states: California, Utah, Wisconsin. Sates where it is not an official law/policy, parents that decide to opt out have to state that it is for “religious reasons”.  * Phase 2: Ethics Analysis  (CURRENTLY WE ARE FOCUSING ON PHASE 2) In a 4–5 page (not counting your title page and reference list), double-spaced, 12-point font paper, you will apply the various ethical theories we have reviewed thus far in the course to your final paper policy topic.  In the first part of the paper, you should provide a brief overview of the policy issue that you will be discussing.  Then, you should discuss how adherents to the philosophical approaches of each of Kant (kantianism), the Utilitarians (utilitarianism), Rawls (social contract theory), and Noddings (ethics of caring) might apply their respective approaches to the issues relating to your specific policy, and how they would ultimately resolve the relevant ethical considerations. You should also indicate which of the resolutions you find most satisfying, and why. Your stance should be that of a research and analyst. This is primarily a research paper and not a persuasive or advocacy paper. Remember to use APA formatting and style throughout, including title page, in-text citations, reference list, etc. Be sure to proofread your paper so that it is free of spelling, punctuation, and grammatical errors.  Students will apply the various ethical theories studied during the first half of the course to their final paper policy topic, demonstrating an understanding of the respective outcomes to which the application of the different theories leads. * Phase 3: Stakeholder Analysis   This assignment focuses on the stakeholders implicated in the policy issue you are addressing for your final Ideology paper.  In it, you need to provide a brief overview of the policy issue you are considering, the key stakeholders involved in this issue, and the positions that they have taken. Using the theories from the course, you should examine why those stakeholders might hold these positions and the implications of their positions for resolution of the policy issue. The paper should be 4 – 5 pages (not including the title page or works cited), double spaced, 12 pt. Times New Roman font with one-inch margins.

First, select a topic of moral controversy, debate, disagreement, and dispute, Examples of such topics are euthanasia, the death penalty, abortion, cloning, etc. You can pick any such topic. It need not be listed here. Next, detail the positions of each side of the ethical debate. Note at least two moral reasons each side presents to show their view on the topic is correct. What would an Ethical Egoist say about this topic? What side would the Ethical Egoist take? What would the Ethical Egoist say to justify their moral position? Is there a conflict between loyalty to self and to community relevant to your topic? If so, how so? Note what you feel is the best course of action. What would a Social Contract Ethicist say about this topic? What side would the Social Contract Ethicist take? What would the Social Contract Ethicist say to justify their moral position? Does your topic involve a collision between personal obligations and national ones? If so, how so? Note what you feel is the best course of action. Finally, reference and discuss any professional code of ethics relevant to your topic such as the AMA code for doctors, the ANA code for nurses, or any other pertinent professional code. State whether and how your chosen topic involves any conflicts between professional and familial duties. incorporate outside sources, including citations. Writing Requirements (APA format) Length: 3 (not including title page or references page) 1-inch margins Double spaced 12-point Times New Roman font References page (minimum of 2 scholarly sources in addition to the course textbook)

it’s just a discussion Within this century the United States invaded Iraq, ostensibly to overthrow the dictator Saddam Hussein and to stop him from developing and selling WMD’s (Weapons of Mass Destruction – generally including nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons). Looking at the 3 major parts of a moral issue: 1. non-moral facts, 2. concepts and, of course, 3. the moral or ethical aspects. Write 3-4 paragraphs taking a position that the invasion was or was not justified, including each of the 3 major parts within your analysis.

From Chapter 5, read Essay, Marine Parks. Answers the following: 1. What three reasons does Bill Daly consider for keeping marine parks open? Why does he ultimately reject each of these reasons? 2. What does Bill Daly think should happen concerning marine parks? What are his reasons? 3. Do you agree with Bill Daly about marine parks? Why or why not?   Here are some links that might help you to further understand the content of this assignment. ·        The Case Against Marine Mammals in Captivity ·        Change for Animals Foundation ·        Whale and Dolphin Conservation ·        Chicago Tribune Article

800 words You may use the paper to argue in support of one side of an ethical issue. If so, then you should not only find substantial arguments in support of that position, but also substantial arguments against that position. In other words, try to show that your position successfully withstands strong criticism. Alternatively, you might want to explore an ethical issue without taking a firm stance on either side. In that case, also, find substantial arguments on both sides, and analyze their strengths and weaknesses. It may help to ask yourself as you read: What sort of ethical argument is this? Is it consequentialist or nonconsequentialist? Has the author anticipated serious objections to his/her argument? Are the ethical principles assumed or advocated by the author likely to conflict in some situations? Are any significant ethical principles ignored? If the argument depends in part on empirical studies, are they strong ones, or do they ignore important evidence? Is what the author proposes realistic in economic or business terms? (These questions are meant to be suggestive, not mandatory or exhaustive.) Be very careful to avoid plagiarism. You must cite your sources everywhere in your paper where you use their ideas, and not only when you quote them directly but also where you paraphrase their points in your own words. In general, you should only use direct quotes when you find the authors’ wording to be especially effective. But your paraphrasing or summaries of authors’ points should be thorough: it’s not fair to an author to change only a couple of words in a paragraph of his/hers and then imply (by not using direct quotes) that the paragraph is entirely your own prose.

Weeks 3-8: Theme Critical Reflections Throughout this course you will be asked to engage critically with the theme, which requires not only reading/viewing the background materials but reflecting on how they relate to your own values, experiences, and growth as a business leader. Instead of looking at this as just an assignment, look at these reflections as part of your development as a leader. You will write about what the theme of the module means to you. Over the span of the course, you will have considered thoughtfully what constitutes your own statement of business leadership and human values. This is NOT an assignment to summarize the readings. You may refer to a passage or a particular resource that you find intriguing, but refrain from simply restating what is in the readings. Instead, please consider these questions when reading/watching preparatory material for the theme (pick one or two questions from the questions below for your two-three paragraph post). Don’t answer all, but use these to guide your thinking. 1. What does the material you read/watched have to do with you, personally, and with your life (past, present or future)? It is not acceptable to write that it has NOTHING to do with you, since just about everything humans can write has to do in some way with every other human. 2. How did you develop the view about the theme that you currently hold? Was there a time when you believed something different than you do now? How did your view change? 3. How much does the material agree or clash with your view of the world, and what you consider right and wrong? Use quotes as examples of how it agrees with and supports what you think about the world, about right and wrong, and about what you think it is to be human. Use quotes and examples to discuss how the text disagrees with what you think about the world and about right and wrong. 4. Write a persuasive paragraph synthesizing an argument in favor of a position about the material this week that challenges your perspective or position on the matter. Make sure to synthesize it accurately. What different assumptions about the world might you hold and build upon to develop this position? 5. How much were your views and opinions challenged or changed by this material, if at all? Did it communicate with you? Why or why not? Give examples of how your views might have changed or been strengthened (or perhaps, of why the material failed to convince you, the way it is). Please do not write “I agree with everything the author wrote,” since everybody disagrees about something, even if it is a tiny point. Use brief quotes to illustrate your points of challenge, or where you were persuaded, or where it left you cold. 6. How well does it address things that you, personally, care about and consider important to the world? How does it address things that are important to your family, your community, your ethnic group, to people of your economic or social class or background, or your faith/religious tradition? If not, who does or did the text serve? Did it pass the “Who cares?” test? Word limit 250-400 words.

Respond to this question in less than 75 words “You argue that Affirmative Action does promote diversity, but it comes at a practical cost to the minority – what is the cost to the minority and why do you think this?”