Ethics Final Take Home 11
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Broward College *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
MISC
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Apr 3, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
7
Uploaded by SuperPencil4723
Name: Nicole Jimenez
Ethics – Final Test Take-Home Portion
Show off your moral reasoning
and critical thinking
skills!!!
15% of your overall course grade
Instructions & Details
: -
Complete
this assignment. Apply your best
philosophical reasoning and critical thinking.
-
Submit on D2L
(“Assignments Folder”) before the start of class on the due date (on the course outline).
-
Score for final: 65 points total: o
Short Answer 20pts
o
Moral Reasoning 20pts
o
Application Sheet (HW-for-Your-Future-Self) 10pts
o
In-class final discussion/application 15pts
Short Answer – answer all of them (20 points total: 5 points each)
1.
When you make ethical decisions, should you take other people/things into account, or think only of yourself? Explain. Apply at least two concepts
(or discuss at least two thinkers or theories) from our class
in your explanation. (5 points)
As social beings living within communities, it is crucial to emphasize the significance of making ethical choices. This importance arises from the necessity of considering the consequences of our actions on both individuals and the broader context, rather than solely prioritizing our own interests. In this interconnected society, equitable treatment of all individuals is paramount. When navigating ethical dilemmas, it is vital to consider the well-being of others, acknowledging that our actions can impact them. Utilitarianism, for instance, centers on maximizing happiness and overall well-being for the greatest number of people within our society. Achieving this goal requires identifying people's interests and making decisions that benefit society, rather than solely serving personal interests. Furthermore, deontology underscores the concept of duty, wherein the recognition of universal moral principles plays a pivotal role in guiding ethical decision-making.
2.
Describe Immanuel Kant’s moral theory (which is called deontology
or duty ethics), and its core principle, the categorical imperative
. THEN write out the two main ways
the categorical imperative is stated.
THEN elaborate
on each statement by restating each in your own words. AND then show that you can apply
deontology by explaining HOW Kant would treat a cashier at the bookstore and WHY he would treat them that way (hint: make reference to the categorical imperative in your explanation). (5 points)
Kant's moral theory is grounded in the fundamental principle of the categorical imperative, which serves as a guide for our actions in all circumstances. According to Kant, our moral conduct should be driven by reason and autonomous will. He suggests that our actions should be such that they could be made into a universal law, and we should question whether our actions would be morally acceptable if everyone in a similar situation acted the same way. If an action can be consistently and feasibly universalized, it is considered morally correct. Furthermore, Kant emphasizes the inherent dignity of individuals, regarding them as rational and free beings deserving of respect. He urges us to consider the impact of our actions on others and not to treat people merely as tools to achieve our own objectives. We should act while respecting the autonomy and moral rights of others. In the context of how we treat a cashier in a bookstore, Kant's principles suggest that we should consistently treat the cashier as an end in themselves and not merely as a means to facilitate our purchases or convenience. This entails displaying respect, consideration, and fairness towards the cashier, and recognizing their autonomy and human dignity. It means refraining from treating the cashier disrespectfully, abusing one's position as a customer to take advantage of them, or treating them unfairly. By acting in this manner, we are demonstrating a universalization of our behavior, as we would want everyone else to act similarly when faced with a similar situation.
3.
Explain what you have learned about morality and religion by responding to this prompt: Your friend says, “Without religion, there would be no morality.” How would you respond to your friend? (5 points)
It is important to highlight that this statement can be the subject of debate since there are different philosophical approaches to the relationship between morality and religion. For example, morality is relative and can exist independently of religion. The ethical principles on which it is based are concepts such as empathy, reason, and the search for human well-being. Here Morality is seen as a product of social and cultural evolution, and not by religious power. However, the emergence of cultural relativism proposes that culture or in this case religion is what predisposes the moral and religious characters of people. From my perspective, I would disagree with my friend's viewpoint because it appears that he is limiting his moral development to a conventional environment or what is considered the "conventional level." Instead, his objective should be to challenge his perspective, broaden his horizons, and seek knowledge beyond what he has been taught.
©Kimber 2023
4.
What have you learned about the relationship between morality and character? (5 points)
The relationship between morality and character is complex but also interconnected. Character refers to the personal qualities, traits, and behaviors that define a person, their way of being, and how they interact with others. On the other hand, morality refers to the ethical principles and values that guide human behavior and determine what we consider right and wrong. A person's character can influence their morality from their integrity, empathy, compassion, and moral strength. It is worth highlighting that character does not automatically determine a person's morality, because there are multiple factors that influence ethical decision-making. However, with a well-developed and ethical character, one can provide a solid foundation for making consistent moral decisions and acting ethically at various times.
Very Important!
Moral Reasoning & Critical Thinking Application Section:
(20 points)
Use the prompts below and your BEST critical thinking and moral reasoning to respond to the following scenario. Here’s the scenario
:
Sam works as a mold inspector and pays for food for the family using money from that job. Sam’s two young children depend on Sam’s money to have regular access to food. Sam takes a private test and tests positive for Covid 19, but is not experiencing any symptoms. Sam
shows up to search for mold at a family’s home. The family is in the house and includes two adults, two small children, and an elderly grandparent. The owner of the house asks Sam, “Have you received a negative test result for Covid 19 this week? If not, please don’t enter my home.” What should Sam do (or not
do)? (
Use the prompts below to answer
.)
Provide thorough responses to EACH prompt below. This will require a total of 1-2 pages all together
. (Apply your understanding of moral development, justifications, ethical relativism, utilitarianism, deontology, and critical thinking in your response.)
Prompts
:
1. Clearly state the main moral
question
, problem, or issue. Explain
what makes this the main moral question in this case. (Note: Use at least one universal moral principle in your response, and underline it.) The central moral dilemma in this situation revolves around the potential risk of exposing the family to COVID-19 contamination if Sam enters the house without a negative test result. This issue fundamentally relates to Sam's ethical duty to avoid causing harm and to protect the well-being and health of others, which is essentially a matter of upholding the fundamental moral principle of preserving life
. In the context of moral development, which involves individuals' sense of what is morally right and wrong, it is expected that Sam demonstrates a sense of responsibility toward both him and others. He should also exercise care in his behavior, especially in a situation that represents a health risk to others. Sam may attempt to justify his decision to enter the house by arguing that he is asymptomatic and therefore not a COVID
transmission risk. However, this justification is weak because asymptomatic individuals can still transmit the virus. Moreover, the homeowner has clearly expressed concern and requested a negative test result, underscoring the importance of honoring this request. Ethical relativism, which suggests that ethical actions depend on individual or cultural perspectives, may lead Sam to argue that his actions are morally acceptable from his viewpoint. However, when the health and well-being of others are at stake, it becomes crucial to consider universal ethical principles. Critical thinking is essential in evaluating the arguments and perspectives in this situation. Sam must weigh the potential consequences of his actions, including the risks to the family inside the house, and reflect on ethical principles before making a decision.
To make an ethical and responsible decision in this scenario, Sam should consider the following:
1. Compliance with safety regulations: Sam must respect and adhere to the homeowner's requirements regarding his COVID-19 test. If he has not received a negative result, he should be honest, inform the homeowner, and refrain from entering. This approach prevents the potential spread of the virus and prioritizes the safety of the family and the elderly individual.
2. Responsibility towards families: Sam should prioritize the safety and health of his own family while also considering the safety of the family inside the house. While Sam depends on his job for income, he must balance this with the well-being of those around him, particularly those who may be more vulnerable, such as small children and the elderly.
3. Exploring alternative options: Sam should consider alternative ways to support his family financially without putting others at risk of contagion. He can discuss the possibility of alternative tasks with his employer that do not involve potential virus transmission or explore alternative work activities that provide income while ensuring his health status is confirmed.
2. Analyze and interpret
relevant information. (Note
: you can fill in some of the unknown facts in this case on your own to enhance your exploration.) Do this by writing a list of questions
that Sam should consider. For each question, explain WHY Sam should consider that question (use class concepts in your explanation).
Interpretation of Relevant Information and Unknown Facts:
1. Sam is employed as a mold inspector, and his family relies on his income for their livelihood.
2. Sam has tested positive for COVID-19 but is asymptomatic.
©Kimber 2023
3. He has been offered a job to inspect a property, but there is a vulnerable population inside, including two children and an elderly adult.
4. The homeowner has requested that Sam provide a negative COVID-19 test result before entering the house for the mold inspection.
Questions:
1. Would putting the family's health and safety at risk violate the principle of "do no harm"? Sam needs to consider whether entering the house without a negative COVID-19 test result would jeopardize the health of the family members, which could contradict the ethical principle of avoiding harm to others.
2. Is it ethical to prioritize my family's financial support over the health of the family living in the house? Sam should reflect on the relative importance of his financial income compared to the risk of spreading the virus and the well-being of the family inside the house.
3. Am I being fair by exposing the family to unnecessary risk? Sam should consider whether his actions would be fair to the family inside the house, as they have the right to protect their safety by requesting a negative COVID-19 result before granting him entry.
4. How would my actions affect people's trust in my profession and in mold inspectors in general? Sam needs to think about how his decision might impact the public perception of his profession and the trust people place in mold inspectors. Maintaining high ethical standards is crucial for ensuring the reliability and credibility of his field of work.
5. Are there alternatives to maintaining my family's livelihood while complying with the family's requests and safety measures at the house? Sam should explore possible options and solutions that allow him to meet both his family's needs and the ethical demands of the situation. This may include seeking temporary work in areas that do not pose a contagion risk or discussing potential alternative assignments with your employer.
6. What do my professional ethics and health and safety guidelines say? Sam should review professional and governmental regulations and recommendations related to the COVID-19 pandemic. This might involve following specific protocols for conducting his work and interacting with others. 7. Can an alternative solution be found to perform his job without putting others at risk? Sam could consider options such as quarantining, seeking temporary financial assistance, or exploring alternatives to ensure his family's food supply while safeguarding the health of others.
8. What is the impact of my decision on the community and the fight against the spread of the virus? Sam needs to contemplate how his actions would affect the broader community and his moral responsibility to contribute to the common well-being during the pandemic.
3. Evaluate
this scenario using (at the very least) utilitarianism
AND deontology
AND Rawls’ Veil of Ignorance/Impartiality
to identify strengths and weaknesses of different possible conclusions/choices. (Example: “A utilitarian would likely conclude… because…”):
a.
A utilitarian would likely conclude… because… :
From a Utilitarian perspective, it can be concluded that Sam should refrain from entering the family's home. This decision aligns
with Utilitarianism's core principle of maximizing overall happiness while minimizing suffering for the greatest number of people. Allowing Sam to enter the house would heighten the risk of virus transmission to all family members, including the most vulnerable individuals like children and the elderly. Despite Sam being asymptomatic, there remains a significant likelihood of him transmitting the virus to others, thus jeopardizing their well-being and endangering his own health. From a Utilitarian standpoint, the most beneficial course of action would be to avoid the risk of virus transmission to maximize overall happiness.
Strengths
: Emphasizes the well-being of the majority and takes into account long-term consequences.
Weaknesses
: May overlook issues related to individual rights and ethical considerations since it is rule-based.
b.
A deontologist would likely conclude… because… :
From a Deontological perspective, which centers on adherence to duties and principles, Sam is morally obligated to respect the homeowner's instructions. He must act responsibly to safeguard both the individuals inside the house and his own family. The reason he hasn't received the laboratory test result doesn't excuse him from this duty. While Sam might justify his decision to enter the house based on his own perspective, arguing that his actions are not morally wrong, he must recognize that ethical principles that prioritize the health and well-being of others take precedence in this situation. From a Deontological perspective, the conclusion would be that Sam should abstain from entering the family's home, driven by his moral duties and obligations. In this ethical framework, there exist universal moral principles that must be upheld regardless
of the potential outcomes. These principles encompass respecting the autonomy, well-being, and health of others. Allowing Sam access to the house could potentially violate these principles as there exists a risk of him transmitting the virus to other family members, thereby jeopardizing their health. Hence, Sam has the moral duty not to enter the house and to safeguard the well-being of the entire family residing there.
Strengths
:
Prioritizes adherence to universal moral duties and principles.
Safeguards individual rights and acknowledges the significance of respecting others.
©Kimber 2023
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
Weaknesses
:
May not account for consequences and thus may not evaluate long-term impacts.
c.
A person under Rawls’ Veil of Ignorance/Impartiality would likely conclude… because… :
Under the framework of Rawls' Veil of Ignorance/Impartiality, a reasonable conclusion would likely be that Sam should not enter the family's home. This perspective involves making decisions without any knowledge of the identity or personal circumstances of the individuals involved, aiming to promote justice and fairness. Allowing Sam access to the home increases the risk of virus transmission and endangers the health of all family members. From the viewpoint of the Veil of Ignorance, it would be considered fairer and more equitable to prioritize the health and well-being of all family members.
Strengths
:
Emphasizes principles of justice and equity.
Encourages decision-making without bias and impartiality.
Weaknesses
:
May not account for individual situations or specific contextual factors.
Practical application in real-life situations can be challenging.
4. Generate a conclusion
that is best supported by your analysis and evaluation. (Note
: Your conclusion should be in response to the main moral question you identified.)
Placing the family's health, well-being, and safety in jeopardy goes against the ethical principle of non-maleficence, which is a foundational ethical concept involving the avoidance of harm to others and the protection of their well-being. Sam's decision to enter the
house, disregarding his positive COVID-19 test result, poses a significant risk to the health and well-being of the entire family.
Prioritizing the well-being and health of others should take precedence, and acting negligently and irresponsibly can have severe consequences, potentially leading to disability or even the loss of life among family members. Therefore, Sam should abstain from entering the house, placing his personal and family interests in the background, even if it entails financial and personal implications affecting his own family.
Last Part:
Create Your Own Ethics Application Sheet (HW-for-Your-Future-Self)
(
10
points)
1.
Create a HW assignment/information sheet for your future self (you in 6 months or a year from now) that will help you apply good ethical questioning, analysis, and evaluation before reaching a conclusion when you are confronted with real-world ethical issues or problems.
Tips
:
a.
You can be creative with this and make a flowchart, a rubric, a list of questions, an outline, a table, a checklist, or whatever you think
would help you apply the most important concepts you have learned in our class.
b.
When you have created your first draft of this sheet, stop and reflect on what you’ve learned about critical thinking this term as you reflected on Plato’s cave, your group project, your writing assignment, etc
. Apply critical thinking concepts and terms to enhance your sheet.
©Kimber 2023
©Kimber 2023
©Kimber 2023
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
Extra Credit:
-
What was your favorite experience in our class? The fact of being able to question things that in the daily routine and zeal of life I don't have time to analyze.
-
What concept or thinker are you most likely to explore beyond our class?
I consider that due to my approach to Utilitarianism I want to continue researching the philosophers who cover this theory, especially the
most current ones, after this I want to continue expanding my knowledge and continue with more philosophical theories in the medical environment.
-
Write your own example of an ethical issue. Identify the main universal moral principles at play in that example.
During the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, hospitals across the nation faced an ethical quandary over the allocation of limited ventilators. With a surge in critically ill patients, there were not enough ventilators to meet the demand. Healthcare professionals had to make difficult decisions about which patients would receive access to these life-saving devices. Balancing the principles of beneficence, by
striving to maximize the number of lives saved, and justice, by ensuring a fair and non-discriminatory allocation process, became paramount. Autonomy of individual patients had to be weighed against the greater good, and transparency in decision-making was essential to maintaining trust. This ethical dilemma underscores the profound ethical challenges faced by healthcare providers during times of crisis like the COVID-19 pandemic.
-
What question do you wish had been on this test?
What would we have liked to have learned in class?
o
What’s your response to that question?
-
I would have loved to know more in depth about the stories of the philosophers and what led them to propose these theories that are so prominent today. I know that time was not a factor in our favor, but I am sure that I will do my own research.
Professor Kimber, I want to express my heartfelt thanks for this enlightening experience. It's been a fantastic journey of self-discovery and learning that will stay with me for a lifetime. While I'll miss your lectures and teachings, I'm confident that your knowledge will forever be attached in my memory.
©Kimber 2023