PHIL 3281 Exam #1
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
University of North Carolina, Pembroke *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
1000
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Feb 20, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
7
Uploaded by SargentGalaxy14767
PHIL 3281 On-Line
Emily Strickland
Professor Smith
Exam #1
Essay #1: Write a short essay (1-2 pages) in which you indicate what this course is about, where it is to be placed in ECU's "general education" and "humanities area," and what your course requirements will be. PHIL 3281 (PHIL Ethics in health care) is a course that focuses on moral relativism. This
course is classified by ECU as part of the "humanities," which can encourage students to challenge their personal beliefs concerning the nature of human existence. Courses in the humanities require students to be critical thinkers, as well as could take and apply knowledge to their daily lives. The topic of moral relativism in this course allows students to take popular concepts in philosophy and use them to modern ideas, such as the nature of America's founding and domestic diversity. The humanities allow students to be successful members of a democratic society, as well as will enable them to develop and have several skills, which can be divided into two categories: General Education requirements and Domestic Diversity requirements. The General Education requirements deal with the application of the discipline-specific knowledge that goes with a philosophy course. Artistic, literary, philosophical, or religious creations must be
distinguished and applied to current human concerns and conditions. Additionally, the Domestic Diversity requirements focus further on application, as students are expected to take the material they learn in class and apply it to their desired area of study. In PHIL 3281, students are also likely to use critical philosophical contributions to other disciplines in the arts, social sciences, and other humanities. With this method of application, students that take this class can construct sound and valid moral arguments and use those arguments in both professional and personal settings. Additionally, they can further describe how the analysis of moral claims is relevant to domestic diversity in particular social and professional contexts. Overall, this course provides a detailed overview of ethical concepts and will provide students that take it with the skills to ethically succeed in their personal and professional lives. Through this class, I hope to gain a further understanding of the philosophy and ethics in the health care world, as well as the ability to interpret moral situations in a non-relativistic way. PHIL 3281 will be an excellent and helpful
course to take in the humanities.
Essay #2: Write a short essay (1-2 pages) in which you describe and explain how Professor Smith begins this course with the Nashu Story and why he does so. Be sure to include the ballot history, what that history shows, what problems that lead to, and how we resolve them via RQ 6 and RQ 13. The story of Nashu was written by Professor Smith to validate Allan Bloom's thesis: that most American college students were (or had the mindset of) moral relativists. Nashu was a young teenager who was a part of a culture that made frequent sacrifices to their deities (the under gods) to prevent volcanic eruptions and further catastrophes. She was chosen to be sacrificed (her family was honored because of it), but it is unclear whether she decided to leave on her own. Along with Nashu's story, Professor Smith included a ballot that contained questions
concerning whether the actions of her culture were right or wrong. Surprisingly, the results of the
ballot mirrored Bloom's conclusion, as 45-90% of students chose the answers that highlighted both the principles of cultural and moral relativism: "What happened to her was not wrong because that's how her culture does things." and "I think that what happened to her was wrong, but that's only because I'm from a different culture.". The results from the Nashu Ballot open a robust discussion concerning moral and cultural relativism. Ethical relativism can be defined by the statement: "An action is morally right or wrong only if some group or individual says so.", and this reasoning is naturally incorrect. Likewise, cultural relativism is the view that cultures can vary (either slightly or significantly) about what they value. There is a distinct difference between these two philosophies, as cultural relativism is a factual claim, while moral relativism is based on morality. Unlike cultural relativism, ethical relativism can be proven to be naturally incorrect. If moral relativism is correct, then the individual or collective power is categorized as the summum bonum (highest good) and should be what we as humans seek to reach. However, power (of any type) is never the highest good, meaning that group or individual decisions cannot determine what is right or wrong. Additionally, a moral relativist could not justifiably condemn actions that could be categorized as immoral or inhumane (like actions of the Nazis or terrorist groups). Furthermore, the answers reflected in the Nashu ballot provide an explanation for the meaning behind this class. As highlighted previously, 45-90% of the course chose solutions
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
relating to both cultural and moral relativism. This way of thinking implies that the voter (the student) believes that ethics only relies on cultural standards, as the answer choices showed that a
respective culture's decision is the basis of whether an action is right or wrong. However, this is not the case. If that view can be considered acceptable, this class would be replaced by a cultural studies class, and the only basis for morality would be the opinion. In conclusion, the story of Nashu and its accompanying ballot provide exciting implications for both this class and moral relativism. Moral relativism is a naturally incorrect worldview, as no critique can be given for any action that could be seen as immoral. It also takes the rational aspect out of life, as people only acknowledge moral opinion over moral knowledge, thus leaving life as an irrational and random concept.
Essay #3: Write a short essay (1-2 pages) in which you summarize the important points respectively of Professor Henry Aiken's Chart on Moral Discourse [see RQ 15] and then also of the "Value Spectrum Sheet" [see RQ 16]. After your comprehensive summaries, write an extended statement about how these two RQs provide related aspects of a positive turn as to the "doing of philosophical ethics." There are many resources in the field of ethics that can help further one's knowledge concerning intellectual and moral discourse, and two of those essential resources are Professor Henry Aiken's Chart on Moral Discourse and the "Value Spectrum Sheet." Henry Aiken's Chart on Moral Discourse outlines the differences between genuine ethical discourse and defective ethical discourse. In the chart, there are four levels: expressions (emotions), commands (rules), moral claims, and conceptual claims, and the last two levels in the chart represent practical and rational discussion. The first level, the level of emotion, is very subjective and is based on individual thoughts and feelings. The second level is the level of rules or commands, and it is based on following existing laws and customs (how people should or shouldn't act). The third level of the chart involves implementing moral principles that may have been taught throughout childhood into a situation. Additionally, the statements on this level should not be regarded as factual but rather as moral claims. The last level in the chart is viewed as the "meta-ethical" level
and is where crucial ethical principles and concepts are defined. The "Value Spectrum Sheet" is a
resource that indicates the stark differences that can occur between different internal and external
values, which range from personal taste to rights and virtue. This spectrum also highlights the importance of avoiding value relativism. Value relativism is the premise that all values are equal,
which is not the case, and this premise also ties into moral relativism (an action is correct if an individual or group believes it to be). Values can differ significantly (either culturally or significantly), as reason is the only thing that genuinely dictates agreement. However, it is essential to also recognize that people who frequently demonstrate reason and logic may differ on several ethical topics, and respectable differences are a normal process when engaged in ethical discourse. In conclusion, both Henry Aiken's chart and the "Value Spectrum Sheet" perfectly encapsulate the "doing of ethics," which concerns the kind of person someone is. Being
ethical should not revolve around societal standards, as most cultures have a (somewhat) universal standard of what is right or wrong. Instead, an ethical person should have an internal moral code that helps them know that an action is right or wrong, and making the right choices will help give a voice to values that arise when ethical dilemmas occur.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
Essay #4: Write a short essay (1-2 pages) in which you present and then evaluate the approach to
ethics taken by William Graham Sumner, one of sociology's founding scholars. William Graham Sumner is known today as one of the most influential people in modern sociology. He is regarded as one of the most influential professors in social sciences at Yale and was one of the leading supporters of Social Darwinism. Additionally, Sumner's book Folkways is
regarded (and used) as one of the leading proponents of cultural relativism. In his text, Sumner uses two terms, folkways and mores, to explain his beliefs concerning cultural relativism. He first defines folkways as the right (or morally correct) ways to fulfill the interests of everyone involved in a situation, as they are part of a tradition and have been passed down across generations. The principle of ethnocentrism (the belief that one's group ideals are best) almost seamlessly ties in with folkways, as every culture thinks that their values and traditions are the best. Sumner then goes on to highlight mores, which he describes as "… folkways are raised to another plane." (Sumner 3). In other words, more are generalizations that arise from folkways that directly benefit society. While Sumner's ideas concerning mores and folkways are somewhat
justified, his beliefs on morality are severely flawed. His definition of immorality is "…contrary to the mores of the time and place." (Sumner 5) and continues to argue that there is no permanent
or universal standard by which the concept of right and wrong can be established. With this reasoning, Sumner fails to acknowledge the critical difference between cultural relativism and moral relativism. Cultural relativism can be simply defined as the belief that cultures differ on what they value, and moral relativism can be defined as an action that is considered correct if a particular group or individual says so. Sumner's reasoning implies that cultural relativism is the basis for all moral actions and decisions when in reality, this is not the case. Cultural relativism has nothing to do with the type of ethics or morality we choose, as it is only based on facts. Facts
alone cannot necessarily prove what humans should or shouldn't do, as a form of moral guidance is required to make rational ethical decisions. Therefore, William Graham Sumner has important ideas concerning cultural relativism, as he details how the folkways and mores impact culture and beliefs. However, his logic and explanations are flawed in the sense that cultural relativism cannot be the basis for valid and sound moral justification.