Chapter 8

ASSIGNMENT PART ONE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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). Breifly 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: Based on the fact that we can make assumptions based on what we do or do not know enough about. It is something everyone does usually without knowing they are actually doing it. By not getting all the facts there can be errors in our judgement.
Example: I freaked out once at a boyfrend I had over something I thought I knew. I read an email, carelessly obviously, from a girl that missed him and said a lot of other personal stuff. I immediately accused him of cheating. Come to find out later on it was a cousin....nothing to be worried out. But if I was to read a little more carefully I would have known that and avoided a fight.
Oversimplification: Occurs when we read too much into things. When we try to see things or think we see things that just aren't there. A lot of times we ignore the smaller things and try to base our judgement on the bigger, more obvious issues.
Example: I love my best friend but every single time I get busy and don't respond immediately to a text or return a phoone call she freaks out. She calls or comes over crying asking why I'm mad at her. I'm never mad, I just have a busy schedule.
Hasty Conclusions: When making hasty conclusions we generally make a quick uneducated judgement. There is no time or thought put in to the judgement. Example: The other day at work my co-worker blew up at me. I have been putting in extra time and taking the time to learn the duties of higher positions. She automatically claimed I was trying to take her job. The truth there is I am actually training for a higher position on another property.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSIGNMENT PART TWO
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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?
In situations where a person has more than one obligation it can be very difficult to decide what to do. I guess the main thing would be to try and decide which obligation carries the most weight. Who or what the most important obliation is the main key here. I think staying true to yourself and your beliefs will be beneficial to making the best decision in which obligation to stick with.
2. How can we reconcile conflicting obligations?
When there is more than one obligation to adhere to, conflict is bound to exist. According to the book the best way to deal with conflicting obligations is to consider the relative importance of each and give preference to the more important one. Everyone has different beliefs and opinions so no one can make a perfect decision. I think perfect is in the eye of the beholder. What you consider wrong, the person next to you may believe passionately about.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSIGNMENT PART THREE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. In a nutshell, what is the most important thing, for you, that you learned from this assignment? I learned to consider the whole picture when making a decision. There have been times before when I've had to make a decision and choose between things that are hard to choose between. The chapter itself gives you pointers as what to consider when making difficult decisions.
2. How will you apply what you learned through this assignment to your everyday life? I will try to think about every decision I have to make as much and as clearly as possible. I will also consider the ties and responsibilities I have towards others when doing so.
3. What grade do you believe your efforts regarding this assignment deserve? Justify your answer. Full credit!! I forget how to do homework its been so long since we've had any :)

KMJ-week 5 blog

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uO0gOyPVj6A


I think this video is kinda silly, but represents the feelings and conscience dilemmas we are faced with daily. It shows three different situations and asks what we would feel like the appropriate thing to do in each was. In each situation I think we can generally choose the right thing to do. This weeks readings talked about one's conscience and how it is our "inner voice." The second scenario in the video really presents a conscience decision. Yeah the right thing to do would be to follow the man and give him back his money. But how many of us would have a guilty conscience for having a few extra bucks in our pockets? On page 40 in the book it gets into the individual differences from person to person. Some of us could pick up the money and walk away and not feel the slightest bit of remorse, while others would definitely feel guilty.


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:

A) It represents this weeks readings about our conscience and its affect on decision making.
B) It sites the link for the video and book.
C) I did it early :)

Blog Assignment #4

Last names beginning with H - P: Relationship b/n Law and Ethics1. Paragraph: explain in your own words what the relationship is between laws and ethics.
Laws and ethics definatly coincide with each other. Without ethics we wouldn't have laws. Laws are created when organizations come together and decide on what is right and wrong. Of course as time changes, so do our ethical views, thus do our laws to fit them. Ethics help make our laws and laws help us to live morally.
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 really pressed the issue that there may never be a clear answer to the relationship between law and ethics. Their relationship tends to do circles around each other and it is important to understand the history of both to come to any kind of conclusion. It references Plato and Kant for many of its reasoning. It clearly says that the two combined are a "problem package & a package deal" and you can't have laws without having ethics.

http://www-hsc.usc.edu/~mbernste/tae.ethics&law.herrera.html
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 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 we need ethics, given that we already have laws.
Conclusion: We need ethics even though we already have laws.
Premises: We need ethics even though we have laws because
(1) Ethics give certain laws ground rules.
(2) Ethics allow us to decide what is right and wrong in order to make and change laws.
(3) Ethics helps us decide certain the appropriate punishment when a law is broken.

The Role of the Majority View
1. Paragraph: Explain in your own words what a Majority View is. Cite your sources.
Majority view in my opinion is simply a statistical number. It is a view decided by a certain amount of people deciding on an issue. It does not include everyone. Some may decide they don't know where they stand and decide not to vote. Some would be influenced by others to vote a certain way. It isn't a reliable number to count on. The book (Ruggiero) says that the majority view is what we believe to be the wisest, most informed view and that it cannot be counted on.
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: The majority view is not a reliable basis for ethical decision-making.
Premises: The majority view is not a reliable basis for ethical decision- making because
(1) It does not include the view of everyone.
(2) The views and opinions of certain people can be influence to vote a certain way.
(3) Just because more people believe one way doesn't make it the right way.

The Role of Feelings
1. Paragraph: Explain in your own words what feelings are. Cite your sources.
A feeling is something we believe in, something we stand behind. Everyone has different beliefs dependant on how they were raised and things that they have adapted to in their life. Feelings help to make us who we are and develop our core values. According to the book (Ruggiero) feelings are not reliable and differ from person to person. We all have separate needs and wants.
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 decision making.
Premises: Feelings are not a reliable basis for decision making because
(1) Feelings differ from person to person.
(2) Feelings are based off our own personal needs and wants.
(3) Feelings aren't always solid, they can change at anytime.

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 in my own words. I referenced the book when not using them.
What was easiest / hardest about this assignment?
The easiest part was probably the argument elements. The hardest was trying to make a point and without sounding like the book.
How will you apply what you learned through this assignment to your everyday life?
I know now that having a feeling doesn't justify making all ethical decisions. Sometimes it takes more than just a feeling. Also that just because a group may feel a certain way about a certain thing doesn't mean it is always the right decision.
How well do you think you did on this assignment? Explain
This assignment was one of the longer ones, but was one of the funner ones as well. The argument elements really allow you to challenge yourself and your beliefs. My answers could have been longer to be honest.

KMJ ethics

1. Explain what “to give an argument” means in this book.
The book's definition of "to give an arguement" is to offer a set of reasons or evidence in support of a conclusion. What that means to me is first you need to decide what point it is you are trying to prove. You aren't trying to prove or disprove anyone or anything. Since we all think individually and have different opinions, convincing someone they are right or wrong is nearly impossible. Once you know where it is you stand on an issue, it is important to back up that point with reasons you feel this way. Sometimes it takes evidence to come to a conclusion, and sometimes it can be supported with mearrly opinion.
2. What are the reasons Weston gives in support of his claim, “arguments are essential”?
An argument is important because it is a way of trying to find out which views are stronger and which are weaker. The argument itself helps take careful consideration of all views in order to figure out which is truely the best. Some points can be argued but don't have much behind them to support it. A strongly supported conclusion is easily explained by means of an arguement.
3. Explain why many students tend to “write an essay, but not an argument”.
I think most students tend to write essays instead of arguemnets because writing an essay is much easier. It is what we were taught going through grade school. How many times did we have to write a report on a President or do a report on a class assigned book? It is easy to report known facts already given. Sometimes we may find it hard to reach inside and actually argue an issue. Many times one may rather write an essay out of fear of rejection of their own thoughts.
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".
Issue: Is it ok to shoplift? (small items like makeup etc)
Premises: It is ok to shoplift
Conclusion: It is ok to shoplift because
a) I don't have the money right now and I have bought tons of things at this store in the past.
b) I probably won't get caught because the item is so small
c) There aren't any security tags on it making it easy to hide

Issue: Is it ok to shoplift? (small items like makeup etc)
Premises: It is not ok to shoplift
Conclusion: It is not ok to shoplift because
a) It is illegal and punishable by law
b) Other people work to have money to buy things, I should to
c) It will set bad examples for others around me that may see or know I did it
5. Review the seven rules in chapter one. Briefly discuss how your argument demonstrates that each rule was applied, in the construction of your arguments above.
#1 says to distinguish pemises and conclusion. I did that by asking if it was ok to shoplift and then stated to different scenarios. #2 says that that the ideas be put in a natural order. I put them how I would argue them. #3 says to start from reliable premises. My arguements(more so for the not ok argument) are relaible. #4 says to be clear. Most of my arguments are clear. I did have some that could be opinion...noted :) #5 says not to use loaded language. I didn't mock any side here so I think I'm good. #6 says to use consisent terms. I didn't get in to full arguement with my conclusions, however I feel that they could be easily argued. #7 says to stick to one meaning for each term. I may have bounced around a little :/
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.
The rules in the appendix state to be specific, work from actual cases, and not to use definitions to do all the work. Looking back after I posted my arguments, they were more ideas as to how an argument can start to be analyized. Some of them are specific, some of them I can use actual cases to argue, and none of them were arguments. If researched a little better I think this could be a good arguement.
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 did a lot of reading and think I did pretty good on the first couple of questions. The argument question could have been done a little better. I was looking at it as more of an approach method to my conclusion. I hope for the best.

ethics blog

1. Were the questions on the Moral Sense Test difficult to answer (psychologically, emotionally, conceptually, technically, etc.)? Why or why not? Do you think your responses to the Moral Sense Test questions were consistent? Does this matter?

I found the questions to the Moral Sense Test to be difficult to answer. Some of the situations were obviously wrong and should be punished, but to what degree is what frustrated me. Some of them like stealing were no-brainers, but others like using the tablecloth as a napkin were hard. It is wrong to do so, but do people really get punished for that sort of stuff? I was hoping to have some sort of result at the end as well and they didn't give you one. I felt like all of my answers were pretty consistant. I think that it is important to be consistant with the way they are answered because it shows you staying true to your own set of moral values.

2. Should people always follow the law? Why or why not? When might one be justified in NOT following the law? Give examples.

I feel like people should always try their best to follow the law. Laws are there for a reason and keep social order. Of course there is always the exception to the rule. Not everyone can be perfect all the time. For example if a woman is in labor and needs to be rushed to the hospital it would be understandable to speed to get there as quick as possible.

3. In your own words, explain what "social convention" means. Give examples.

Social convention to me would be defined as a set of agreed upon rules and standards used by a group. They aren't illegal to break, they are used more like a guideline as what to or not to do. A good example would be like your employer's code of conduct. It tells employees what is expected of them and creates structure.

4. Should people always follow the conventions of their society? Why or why not? Give examples.

I think people should always try to follow the conventions of their society. It shows respect and keeps the peace. But I also think that if the social conventions are ridiculous then they will be hard to follow. I don't really like conformity and I do promote one staying true to themselves and doing what they feel is right. For example, one's society says that women should stay home and be domestic engineers rather than have careers of their own. If that isn't what someone wants to do then I don't feel like they should follow the conventions.

5. Should people always follow their own principles? Why or why not? Give examples.

That kinda depends. If someone has really good morals and principles then they should definately follow them. But, if someone normally makes bad decisions than maybe they should seek out advice or follow someone else's principles. For the most part yes....stay true to yourself and your beliefs.
6. Explain in your own words the difference between socially acceptable, legally acceptable, and morally acceptable.

Socially acceptable would be defined as something that is acceptable to the public. Smoking would be an example. Legally acceptable would be define as what is right and wrong with laws. Morally acceptable would be defined as whats right and wrong in the way one lives their life and how they react to certain situations.
7. Out of 25 points, how many points do you feel your work on this assignment deserves? Justify your answer.

I hope I get at least 20 points. I kinda waited last min. to do this assignment. I had a really busy week with work and school got pushed to the side. I answered all the questions to the best of my ability though :)

PHI 1603 Blog Assignment #1

1. How would you have explained the meaning of the term "ethics", before taking this class?

Before taking this class I would explain the term "ethics" by doing what is right or wrong acording to one's own personal beliefs. Everyone has their own opinion as to where they stand on an issue and how they react to a situation. Not everyone has the same values built within them and thats what makes this subject so interesting. What one person may do when placed in a particular position may be completely polar opposite of what another may do.

2. What are some of your deepest held values?

I believe in honesty to a tremendous degree. Many of my past experiences in life have taught me to hold that very high. It says a lot about someone who can be unselfish andtell the truth despite the consequences. I believe honesty is the base of all relationships whether they be romantic or platonic. I think there is an ethically right and wrong way to tell the truth. What do you have if you don't have honesty?

3. What are some main principles you try to live your life by?

I try not to get too stressed out about something that may be going on today, because how important is it really going to be in a year from now. I try to take life a day at a time and enjoy the wonderful people I have been blessed to have in my life. I used to think life was too short and I was running out of time to do things I wanted to do. The older I get the more I realize how much time you do waste stressing out and taking for granted the little things.

4. What moral qualities do you look for in others?

Like I mentioned before honesty definately. I also admire anyone who stays true to themselves. It drives me crazy when someone changes who they are for each person they encounter. I think we are who we are and we should be able to look in the mirror and be proud to be that person. My take on it is I would rather someone hate me for who I am than love me for who I am not.

5. How were your values and principles developed?

Some of my values and principles have been taught to me by my mom and dad. Just the way they raised me and taught me what to and not to do. I would say the majority of my values and principles have been formed just by life's experiences. Life is trial and error. You learn something new and take something away from each situation, whether it be good or bad.

6. How have your values and principles changed throughout your life so far?

They have actually changed a lot within the past 6 months. I've always had values and principles but I was always flexable with them. My life has done a 180 in the past months and I am learning to fine tune my values and stick to them.

7. Out of 25 points, how many points do you feel your work on this assignment deserves? Justify your answer.

I don't think there was any right/wrong answers with this assignment. I answered all of them as honestly as possible. I feel I should receive full credit :)