introtohumanities assignment4
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Indian River State College *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
1020
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Dec 6, 2023
Type
docx
Pages
8
Uploaded by EarlStraw4263
Assignment 4
Please read:
1. Cohen, “Lawyer’s Ethics,” pp. 74-76.
2. Aristotle, “Virtue Ethics,” pp. 77-84.
3. Cohen, “Pure Legal Advocates and Moral Agents,” pp. 93-109.
4. Wasserman, “The Philosopher as Public Defender: In Defense of
a Rapist,” pp. 111-115.
Answer the following questions:
______________________________
1.
Question 1
: Give a list of at least
ten of the most
important virtues for what you think makes a good
person
. Use one word for each. Number them 1-10. (Hint:
Things like fear, anger, hate, passion, pain
do not
state
virtues.)
Answer 1:
1. empathetic
2. faithful
3. honest
4. caring
5. respectful
6.
sincere
7. brave
8. accepting
9. reliable
10. humble
______________________________
2.
Question 2
: Aristotle says in “Book I” that happiness is the
chief good, the end at which other activities aim. Give his
explanation of what happiness is for humans. Explain it
completely.
2.
Answer 2:
Aristotle claims that happiness is the chief good in "Book I"
because people frequently select happiness as a goal or
end. In other words, when happiness is prioritized over all else,
it represents the greater good. Every endeavor aims to
achieve some sort of conclusion, objective, or purpose.
Happiness is the ultimate goal that everything, including
humans, strive for. It is the good that motivates all of our
actions. According to Aristotle, it is having all the wealth,
knowledge, pleasure and more that enhance human life and
fulfill human nature is what makes people happy.
______________________________
3.
Question 3
: What does Aristotle mean when he says that a
virtue is a mean between two vices, or two extremes? Pick a
virtue to use as an example, and use it to explain what Aristotle
means by this.
Answer 3:
Vices either fall short of or go beyond what is acceptable in both
passions and acts, therefore virtue is the median because it both
finds and selects what that lies in the middle. An example of that
would be excess and deficiency. It is harmful to have too much of
anything, just as it is bad to have too little of anything. To explain
if someone is too confident it can appear they are cocky but if
someone is not confident enough they are insecure.
_____________________________
4.
Question 4
: After reading Cohen’s article (Pure Legal
Advocates), list the names of what Cohen gives as marks of the
morally good person. There are 7 of them. Also give a
brief
explanation
of each of them
.
Answer 4:
1. Liberal Person: A person who practices ethically upright
financial behavior.
2. Morally Autonomy Person: person who makes their own
moral decisions, applying moral principles and critical
thought techniques to decide what to do in moral situations.
3. Morally Courageous Person: one who is able to act morally
upright despite difficulties or expense.
4. Just Person: one who treats others equally and accords them
the rights and benefits to which they are both legally and
morally entitled.
5. Benevolent Person: someone who supports the happiness of
others and refrains from hurting them.
6. Trustworthy Person: one who honors commitments made to
others.
7. Truthful Person: someone who tells the truth and does not
deceive people.
______________________________
5.
Question 5
: With this list, do you agree that Cohen captured
the virtues that define what it means to be a good person?
Consider whether it agrees with the list you gave in question 1.
Explain why you agree with Cohen. Explain why you disagree.
Answer 5:
I concur with Cohen's list since each quality he lists serves to
define what a sincere and sensible person is in reality. His list and
mine are extremely similar as both of us stressed the value of
being an honest, brave, and caring person. In certain instances, I
disagree with his list—not necessarily because they are traits of a
good human, but rather because I think there are others that are
more useful for character analysis.
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
_____________________________
6.
Question 6
: Using Cohen, as completely as you can, explain
the “
pure legal advocate concept
” of a lawyer and to help
explain the concept also give an example of what the pure legal
advocate might do.
Answer6:
The idea that a lawyer's role is limited to acting as their client's
spokesman is known as the "pure legal advocate concept." In
other words, a skilled lawyer will be obligated to use all legal
methods at their disposal to advance the wellbeing of their client
at the cost of everyone else, will be obliged to win cases by any
way possible, and may even be required to act unethically.
____________________________
7.
Question 7
: Cohen explains what he thinks are some problems
with the
pure legal advocate concept
of the lawyer. Explain
these problems.
Answer 7:
Cohen states that the use of this concept can bring about an
unjust system. By using the pure legal advocate concept we risk
letting danger walk free due to morally incorrect representation. If
a lawyer is not to perform morally but rather as representation for
a guilty client, then how morally correct can the legal system be,
Cohen wonders?
_________________________
8.
Question 8
: Do you think it is true that when a
lawyer acts
as a pure legal advocate
, the lawyer will not always be able to
act as
a good person
in his job at the same time? Explain why or
why not.
Answer 8:
I do believe that it may become difficult to perform as a pure legal
advocate and a good person in a work setting at once. In cases
like those of lawyer Wesserman and his “date-rape” client, he
knew his client was guilty for the crime and knew it was not
morally correct for him to be walking free. Although he was
conscious of what was good and bad, by acting as a pure legal
advocate as his lawyer he still defended him.
__________________________
9.
Question 9
: Do you think that the
pure legal advocate
concept
of a lawyer is a good concept to use for defining a
lawyer? Explain why or why not.
Answer 9:
I believe the pure legal advocate concept could be a good concept
for defining a lawyer. Although I believe it may interfere with what
is morally correct and just, it does demonstrate how effectively a
lawyer can perform in different conditions. But with that unjust
results may be presented.
___________________________
10.
Question 10
: According to Cohen, what is the “
moral agent
concept
” of a lawyer? Explain it.
Answer 10:
The moral agent concept states that a lawyer shouldn't push his
morality on a client, shouldn't concur with the client's choice, and
shouldn't be held accountable for any ethical failings. The lawyer
should only be bound by the criminal law's restrictions, and
because he is a human, he cannot lose sight of his humanity by
acting in a "technician's role." In other words, a good lawyer in
this definition is someone who effectively advocates for the
client's cause both morally and legally while also conducting him
or her in a morally upright manner.
__________________________
11.
Question 11
: Based on his list of virtues, Cohen gives a list of
principles that the lawyer should follow to be a lawyer on the
moral agent concept.
Pick at least two of these principles
to evaluate
. Name them, explain what they are, and then
explain why you agree or disagree with these principles.
Answer 11:
1. Truthfulness: the attribute of being honest and not harboring
any lies or telling any
-
I agree with this principle for a lawyer as in all cases a
lawyer’s priority is to protect their client and if they are
not truthful they are not allowing for a just case to be
made.
2. Nonmaleficence: There is a responsibility to treat others with
respect and not cause harm.
-
I agree as well as disagree that a lawyer should follow this
principle. I believe that a lawyer should always work in
proving the innocence of their client but in some cases,
the intent is to demonstrate the opposing side as guilty
which is when one may not have the other’s best interest
in mind.
_________________________
12. Question 12: Do you think that the legal profession should
adopt Cohen’s
moral agent concept
of the lawyer. Is it a good
concept to adopt? Explain why or why not.
Answer 12:
I believe Cohen’s moral agent concept is a good concept to be
adopted by a legal professional. I believe that in any work
environment one may not always be in agreeance with a client
but this concept allows for a mature boundary to be placed. It
allows for a professional to do as they are supposed to in their
position but take into consideration what is morally upright as
well.
_________________________
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
13.
Question 13
: After reading the Wasserman paper, do these
three things.
First
explain the case in which Wasserman was a
defender of an accused rapist and what happened.
Second
,
explain what the
moral dilemma or moral problem
was for
Wasserman in this case.
Third
, explain whether you agree or
disagree with how Wasserman handled the case and this moral
problem, and explain why you agree or disagree.
Answer 13:
1. Steven Wasserman represented people accused of crimes but
unable to pay for legal representation. Regardless of the offense,
he was required to accept any client who had been assigned to
him. Wasserman was given the task of defending Sam, a 20-year-
old man suspected of raping Doris in his vehicle. Sam allegedly
pushed himself on Doris by almost strangling her after driving her
to a private location rather than a restaurant, according to Doris.
Sam claimed that Doris had consented to have sex with him in
exchange for money but had grown angry at the little payment
and lack of affection he had made in return. Sam was eventually
arrested at work the following day. Doris had no other symptoms
of trauma or any markings on her throat that would indicate that
she had been strangled. Wasserman was sure that he was
representing a guilty man after looking through his office's private
data on Sam's prior arrests. Sam's prior cases were the same as
this one with Doris. The documents made it abundantly evident
that Sam was a charming and cunning psychopath and that Doris
was a frequent victim of the "date-rape," as it is known among
criminologists.
2. The moral dilemma of this case is Wasserman being
conscious of his client’s past and defending him as if he is
innocent. It is a dilemma as it is not morally correct for him
to have found proof of the danger the client brings and
chose to withhold it.
3. I disagree but to a certain extent also agree with how
Wasserman handled this case. In my view, the jury should
have been provided with more information on Sam's prior
accusations. I don't believe it is appropriate to allow a rapist
to roam free so that he can later cause harm to more
females. I also somewhat agree as I know he was simply
doing his job as a professional regardless of his own beliefs.