ASSIGNMENT PART ONE
Unwarranted Assumptions: This is when you are reading into a case, idea, situation and there are parts of the description that is left out, but unconsciously we make up our mind what we think they did or meant by it.
EXAMPLE: An older man walked up to me in a parking lot at Best Buy and started talking to me in a very friendly way about how his car ran out of gas and he didn’t have any of his debt cards. I assumed that he was a bum that wanted my money for wrong things. I asked the guy a few questions an he showed me his newer Honda accord that was in good shape sitting next to the gas station. I then re-thought my unwarranted assumption and helped the guy out.
Oversimplification: This is distorting a situation and leaving out some of the most important material.
EXAMPLE: When I was at my first day of job my boss had told me to sweep up before we closed. So I did just that and swept the restaurant out. Then I went home. I guess the owner meant that I should clean the bathrooms, and mop the floors after sweeping; he just figured I knew that.
Hasty Conclusions: Making a judgment before considering the situation completely.
EXAMPLE: I was talking to my brother about this skate park we used to skate at, and he immediately said he didn’t remember. Until I finished explaining where it was and when we went there, then he admitted that he jumped to conclusion and he does remember.
ASSIGNMENT PART TWO
1. What do we do in situations where there is more than a single obligation? You should choose the more important of the two, or if possible you should try to satisfy both obligations. All possibilities should be examined, but its up to you to decide which is ethical or morally correct.
2. How can we reconcile conflicting obligations? You should try to find a way to do a little bit of each of the obligation. The individual needs to make what they believe to be the most appropriate decision for each situation.
ASSIGNMENT PART THREE
1. In a nutshell, what is the most important thing, for you that you learned from this assignment? I learned that with out even realizing it you can make assumptions about important decisions that if you stepped back and thought about it you might re-think the choice. I have always been a big follower on not judging things before you actually know what there all about. So I feel that that part just further strengthened my feelings on the topic.
2. How will you apply what you learned through this assignment to your everyday life? The next time someone is telling me a story I will wait until they are done to make any sort of assumption. I will do my best to accommodate obligations of people that I deal with everyday
3. What grade do you believe your efforts regarding this assignment deserve? Out of 25 points I think I should get 24 because After reading chapter 8 I felt that I understood what was being brought up but I did not get into the chapter because I felt the chapter repeated it self as well as a topic I already have a view on. I felt that I did a good job of explaining the definitions in assignment 1 though. That all made sense and was something I learned from.
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
BLOGG 6
PART ONE
QUESTION #1: If an action that is praised in one culture may be condemned in another, would it be correct to say that all moral values are relative to the culture they are found in?
ANSWER 1A:
After reading the assign chapters out of Ruggiero’s text, I find that all moral values are relative to the culture they are found in. My first premise is the phrase cultural relativity. To me this means that each culture has developed its own set of values based off there experiences. Some one in Africa might not have experienced the same type of life of someone that lives in Russia. So based off that idea you can not expect both sets of people to view moral ideas the same. Ruggiero says in the text, “It derives from observation of cultural differences and two important realizations: (1)that culture’s values, rituals and customs reflect its geography, history and socioeconomic circumstances and (2) that hasty or facile comparison of other cultures with one’s own culture tends to thwart scholarly analysis and produce shallow or erroneous conclusions.” My second premise is a quote from Clyde Kluckhohn, “the principle of cultural relativity does not mean that because the members of some savage tribe are allowed to behave in a certain way that this fact gives intellectual warrant for such behavior in all groups…” This perfectly explains my conclusion because he is saying that something from one culture that is positive might be a negative thing in another culture.
ANSWER 1B:
P: the existence of the term cultural relativity.
P: Clyde Kluckhohn’s quote about how each culture has different values based on their personal habitat.
------------------------------
C: Therefore, it is correct to say that all moral values are relative to the culture they are found in.
QUESTION #2: Isn’t it a mark of ignorance to pass judgments on other cultures or to claim that one culture is better than another?
ANSWER 2A:
I feel it is a mark of ignorance to pass judgments on other cultures, or to claim that one culture is better than another. This is true to me because even if you feel that morally there is something wrong with a value that another culture has, you have not experiences the same things they have, so you cannot judge. In the text it says how “based on cultural relativism moral judgment of other cultures is never appropriate.” It is morally wrong to have negative opinions towards other cultures based on lack of experience in their territory. My second premise is, just because something is morally considered correct here, does not mean it is morally accepted in other cultures. Ruggiero brings up a good point, “If a pregnant American woman visits Germany, For example, does her fetus magically gain moral and legal rights?” I think this is a great example of how cultural relativism comes into effect. There is no possible way to create a “norm” for the entire world to follow.
ANSWER 2B:
P: lack of experience in other cultures leaves no place for judgment of them
P: just because something is morally considered correct here, does not mean it is morally accepted in other cultures.
-------------------------------
C: Therefore, it is a mark of ignorance to pass judgments on other cultures.
PART TWO
Argument #1:
I chose number 5, in some cultures; mutilation is considered an appropriate punishment for certain crimes. For example, if a man is caught stealing, his hand is cut off. Since such a punishment is unheard of in our culture, we tend to consider it morally insupportable.
Arguable issue: Is it morally insupportable to consider a punishment in another culture immoral because we see it that way in our culture?
P: Mutilation is wrong, even for punishment (cruel and unusual punishment)
P: Other means of punishment, imprisonment, are morally acceptable
P: Extreme punishment for a non extreme crime.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C: Therefore, you should not be able to mutilate people as a form of punishment.
QUESTION #1: If an action that is praised in one culture may be condemned in another, would it be correct to say that all moral values are relative to the culture they are found in?
ANSWER 1A:
After reading the assign chapters out of Ruggiero’s text, I find that all moral values are relative to the culture they are found in. My first premise is the phrase cultural relativity. To me this means that each culture has developed its own set of values based off there experiences. Some one in Africa might not have experienced the same type of life of someone that lives in Russia. So based off that idea you can not expect both sets of people to view moral ideas the same. Ruggiero says in the text, “It derives from observation of cultural differences and two important realizations: (1)that culture’s values, rituals and customs reflect its geography, history and socioeconomic circumstances and (2) that hasty or facile comparison of other cultures with one’s own culture tends to thwart scholarly analysis and produce shallow or erroneous conclusions.” My second premise is a quote from Clyde Kluckhohn, “the principle of cultural relativity does not mean that because the members of some savage tribe are allowed to behave in a certain way that this fact gives intellectual warrant for such behavior in all groups…” This perfectly explains my conclusion because he is saying that something from one culture that is positive might be a negative thing in another culture.
ANSWER 1B:
P: the existence of the term cultural relativity.
P: Clyde Kluckhohn’s quote about how each culture has different values based on their personal habitat.
------------------------------
C: Therefore, it is correct to say that all moral values are relative to the culture they are found in.
QUESTION #2: Isn’t it a mark of ignorance to pass judgments on other cultures or to claim that one culture is better than another?
ANSWER 2A:
I feel it is a mark of ignorance to pass judgments on other cultures, or to claim that one culture is better than another. This is true to me because even if you feel that morally there is something wrong with a value that another culture has, you have not experiences the same things they have, so you cannot judge. In the text it says how “based on cultural relativism moral judgment of other cultures is never appropriate.” It is morally wrong to have negative opinions towards other cultures based on lack of experience in their territory. My second premise is, just because something is morally considered correct here, does not mean it is morally accepted in other cultures. Ruggiero brings up a good point, “If a pregnant American woman visits Germany, For example, does her fetus magically gain moral and legal rights?” I think this is a great example of how cultural relativism comes into effect. There is no possible way to create a “norm” for the entire world to follow.
ANSWER 2B:
P: lack of experience in other cultures leaves no place for judgment of them
P: just because something is morally considered correct here, does not mean it is morally accepted in other cultures.
-------------------------------
C: Therefore, it is a mark of ignorance to pass judgments on other cultures.
PART TWO
Argument #1:
I chose number 5, in some cultures; mutilation is considered an appropriate punishment for certain crimes. For example, if a man is caught stealing, his hand is cut off. Since such a punishment is unheard of in our culture, we tend to consider it morally insupportable.
Arguable issue: Is it morally insupportable to consider a punishment in another culture immoral because we see it that way in our culture?
P: Mutilation is wrong, even for punishment (cruel and unusual punishment)
P: Other means of punishment, imprisonment, are morally acceptable
P: Extreme punishment for a non extreme crime.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C: Therefore, you should not be able to mutilate people as a form of punishment.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
WEEK 5 BLOGGGGGGG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I choose “Guilty Conscience” by EMINEM because it is an extreme rendition of what goes on in our heads. I realize that this song is a bit derogatory but the concept of the song is more what I’m relating to. After reading the chapter and coming across the section titled, “A Balanced View of Conscience” I began to see similarities. In the song the different characters are about to do something that involves a moral dilemma. The situation pause’s and Dr. Dre plays the role of the “good” conscience and EMINEM plays the “bad” conscience. As stated in the chapter “we should follow our conscience, but not blindly.” I feel that this relates to the song because the character stops and listens to his conscience and goes through the wrong way and the right way. Eventually the character makes a decision resulting in what he had coming based off the conscience decision. The chapter talks about how you need to listen to your conscience when you are presented with a moral situation. “You should try if time allows, look deep into the situation and try to analyze the issue critically and to consider the possibility that a different choice might be better.” This passage from the chapter directly relates to the song I chose because the character in the song stops completely and looks critically at his choices and their outcomes.
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:
(1) I chose a song that directly relates to a chapter in our book.
(2) I carefully and precisely explained why I felt that the song related to the chapter about “The Role of Conscience”
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:
(1) I chose a song that directly relates to a chapter in our book.
(2) I carefully and precisely explained why I felt that the song related to the chapter about “The Role of Conscience”
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
WEEK 3 BLOG POST
1. Explain what “to give an argument” means in this book.
According to the book by Weston’s, “to give an argument”, it means, “to offer a set of reasons or evidence in support of a conclusion.” He goes on to explain how arguing is making a point with actual evidential claims to back the point up. The author also goes on to say how we need arguments and they are a necessity.
2. What are the reasons Weston gives in support of his claim, “arguments are essential”?
Essentially Weston says that arguing is essential because, without it we would not be able to find out which views are best. He says, “Arguments are in this sense a means of inquiry.” This is a pretty cool way to put it, for some reason I understood his point of view better when I read this. Arguing is a good way to defend what ever view we have come to a conclusion upon. Weston shows that there are a lot of different use’s for arguing.
3. Explain why many students tend to “write an essay, but not an argument”.
Students tend to write an essay, but not an argument because they do not look at the topic of their paper hard enough. He explains how it is natural for a student to make this mistake of writing an essay, not an argument. They do not try to find out what they think for themselves instead of basic clear cut answers. Weston talks about how you should use arguments in two different ways, in inquiry and in defending a view.
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".
FOR
Arguable issue: whether or not people should smoke in a bar.
Conclusion: People should not be able to smoke in a bar.
Premises: People should not be able to smoke in a bar because:
(1) People who do not smoke get affected by 2nd hand smoke.
(2) Smoking indoors concentrates the smoke inhalation, making it even worse then normal.
AGAINST
Arguable issue: whether or not people should smoke in a bar.
Conclusion: People should be able to smoke in a bar.
Premises: People should be able to smoke in a bar because:
(1) Why respect other people’s health.
(2) The more smoke you inhale the better you feel, so why not do it inside so it can’t escape.
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.
I feel that I am clearly expressing what I’m trying to prove in my argument, while naturally going in order to help making the argument clear. Starting with an issue regarding smoking health problems is a very reliable one because people are familiar with this topic. The conclusion and premise are very clear cut and to the point. I use very basic language in my argument outline. The arguable issue, conclusion, and premise are basically the same sentence with a few key words mixed around. I did stick to one meaning or each term for the outline.
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 first is talking about being specific with your argument, which I took into consideration when coming up with my own argument. I feel that smoking effects others health all the time, but more specifically while were in doors w/ non smokers. The second definition talks about when terms are being contested and what exactly you are arguing about. But I did not really use this definition because I did not really understand it. The last definition is perhaps my favorite of the three because it explained a lot to me. I re looked at my argument and decided that I was not clear enough in a few of my word choices. I actually looked at what I had said and thought of the different definitions of each of the words and realized they could be taken differently, so I changed the words.
7. Reasoning for grade:
I feel like I deserve 22 points for this week’s assignment. I feel this way because I did not understand a few of the definitions completely so I did not feel I was able to use them while coming up with my argument which might have made it weaker.
Friday, January 16, 2009
Blog Assignment #2
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 felt that the questions that were on the Moral test were not really too hard to answer. I felt that there was a few that actually made you think about the situation as if you were really in it, but I feel that is what the test is supposed to do. While answering the morality test I did notice that after a few of the series of questions that all of my answers are the same. I kept hitting the same number for each question and then when the question would change I would see pattern’s in my answers. I think it does matter when answering these questions because it shows if you are consistent in your morals.
2. Should people always follow the law? Why or why not? When might one be justified in NOT following the law? Give examples.
No I do not think that people should always follow the law. There are some laws that are ridiculous and do not need to be followed 100% of the time. There are a lot of laws that were made so long ago that they really don’t even apply to our lives this day in age. If the speed limit is 35 mph and everyone on the road is going 50 mph you would get ran over if you went 35 mph. So in that case you had better go at least 40 mph, which would be breaking the law.
3. In your own words, explain what "social convention" means. Give examples.
I feel that a social convention might be a large gathering of people that all have something in common. There might be a common thread of cars, and people have come together to talk about and explore the world of cars in a social atmosphere. There might be a social convention that is based around a book. There is sure to be a lot of people that have read the same book, so I’m sure that people get together to read them allowed to each other and discuss what each chapter means to them.
4. Should people always follow the conventions of their society? Why or why not? Give examples.
Well the last question was answered in a totally different context than what was implied. This question helps me understand the third question better. I feel you do not need to follow the “conventions” of your society. If everyone followed each others ideas then we would all look alike and nothing new would happen. I think life would be quite boring if there was nobody to stand out and do different things.
5. Should people always follow their own principles? Why or why not? Give examples.
Yes I feel that if you have gone as far as to set principles for your self, then you are truly only hurting yourself if you choose to break them. Personal principles are meant to make your life run better. If you do not like it when people do something, and you allow it to happen in front of you, then you might as well never decided that you wouldn’t let that happen. You have to follow your own principles or you’re basically wasting your time.
6. Explain in your own words the difference between socially acceptable, legally acceptable, and morally acceptable.
Socially acceptable is something that is accepted by the masses. It might not be legal or moral but there will be a lot of people that agree with it. Legally acceptable goes along with the Laws. If there is a law written you can not break it, end of story. Morally acceptable is based on what you have set your morals to, and weather or not your can stick to them or not.
7. Out of 25 points, how many points do you feel your work on this assignment deserves? Justify your answer.
I feel that I deserve at least 23 ½ pts. I answered each question with a few examples, and I filled up a page and a half, which is more then last time!!! ;-)
I felt that the questions that were on the Moral test were not really too hard to answer. I felt that there was a few that actually made you think about the situation as if you were really in it, but I feel that is what the test is supposed to do. While answering the morality test I did notice that after a few of the series of questions that all of my answers are the same. I kept hitting the same number for each question and then when the question would change I would see pattern’s in my answers. I think it does matter when answering these questions because it shows if you are consistent in your morals.
2. Should people always follow the law? Why or why not? When might one be justified in NOT following the law? Give examples.
No I do not think that people should always follow the law. There are some laws that are ridiculous and do not need to be followed 100% of the time. There are a lot of laws that were made so long ago that they really don’t even apply to our lives this day in age. If the speed limit is 35 mph and everyone on the road is going 50 mph you would get ran over if you went 35 mph. So in that case you had better go at least 40 mph, which would be breaking the law.
3. In your own words, explain what "social convention" means. Give examples.
I feel that a social convention might be a large gathering of people that all have something in common. There might be a common thread of cars, and people have come together to talk about and explore the world of cars in a social atmosphere. There might be a social convention that is based around a book. There is sure to be a lot of people that have read the same book, so I’m sure that people get together to read them allowed to each other and discuss what each chapter means to them.
4. Should people always follow the conventions of their society? Why or why not? Give examples.
Well the last question was answered in a totally different context than what was implied. This question helps me understand the third question better. I feel you do not need to follow the “conventions” of your society. If everyone followed each others ideas then we would all look alike and nothing new would happen. I think life would be quite boring if there was nobody to stand out and do different things.
5. Should people always follow their own principles? Why or why not? Give examples.
Yes I feel that if you have gone as far as to set principles for your self, then you are truly only hurting yourself if you choose to break them. Personal principles are meant to make your life run better. If you do not like it when people do something, and you allow it to happen in front of you, then you might as well never decided that you wouldn’t let that happen. You have to follow your own principles or you’re basically wasting your time.
6. Explain in your own words the difference between socially acceptable, legally acceptable, and morally acceptable.
Socially acceptable is something that is accepted by the masses. It might not be legal or moral but there will be a lot of people that agree with it. Legally acceptable goes along with the Laws. If there is a law written you can not break it, end of story. Morally acceptable is based on what you have set your morals to, and weather or not your can stick to them or not.
7. Out of 25 points, how many points do you feel your work on this assignment deserves? Justify your answer.
I feel that I deserve at least 23 ½ pts. I answered each question with a few examples, and I filled up a page and a half, which is more then last time!!! ;-)
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Blog assignment #1
1. How would you have explained the meaning of the term "ethics", before taking this class?
Before I took this class I was somewhat unsure of what was coming to me this semester. After the first class meeting I began to understand what we would be learning this semester. As of right now the word “ethics” is your personal beliefs on how to go about public or private situations.
2. What are some of your deepest held values?
I feel very strongly about being honest all the time. I feel that as long as you are honest with people then there should be nothing that goes miss understood. Things get confusing when people start bending the truth a bit.
3. What are some main principles you try to live your life by?
I live by the motto, “Treat others as you want to be treated.” I like this saying because it is very true. If people would realize that they were treating people in a way even they wouldn’t want to deal with, then maybe they can really see how they affect other people with out knowing it.
4. What moral qualities do you look for in others?
I try to find people that also base a big part of their morals on being truthful and people who do not feed you a lot of crap. These are two very important qualities for a person to me because with out these two things there is possibility for a lot of confusion.
5. How were your values and principles developed?
Both of my parents would tell me things to do or not to do when growing up, so I feel that they have a lot to do with the way I am today. I’m very thankful they spent the time to tell me the proper way to go about things. With out there guidance I probably would not be the person I am today.
6. How have your values and principles changed throughout your life so far?
When I was in grammar school I did not care to much about whom I was friends with. Now I have come to realize the types of people I prefer to be around and I tend to look for the type of person that is similar to my self and my morals.
7. Out of 25 points, how many points do you feel your work on this assignment deserves? Justify your answer.
I feel that I deserve 25/25 points because I answered all 6 questions truthfully and I did not take up many pages in doing so.
Before I took this class I was somewhat unsure of what was coming to me this semester. After the first class meeting I began to understand what we would be learning this semester. As of right now the word “ethics” is your personal beliefs on how to go about public or private situations.
2. What are some of your deepest held values?
I feel very strongly about being honest all the time. I feel that as long as you are honest with people then there should be nothing that goes miss understood. Things get confusing when people start bending the truth a bit.
3. What are some main principles you try to live your life by?
I live by the motto, “Treat others as you want to be treated.” I like this saying because it is very true. If people would realize that they were treating people in a way even they wouldn’t want to deal with, then maybe they can really see how they affect other people with out knowing it.
4. What moral qualities do you look for in others?
I try to find people that also base a big part of their morals on being truthful and people who do not feed you a lot of crap. These are two very important qualities for a person to me because with out these two things there is possibility for a lot of confusion.
5. How were your values and principles developed?
Both of my parents would tell me things to do or not to do when growing up, so I feel that they have a lot to do with the way I am today. I’m very thankful they spent the time to tell me the proper way to go about things. With out there guidance I probably would not be the person I am today.
6. How have your values and principles changed throughout your life so far?
When I was in grammar school I did not care to much about whom I was friends with. Now I have come to realize the types of people I prefer to be around and I tend to look for the type of person that is similar to my self and my morals.
7. Out of 25 points, how many points do you feel your work on this assignment deserves? Justify your answer.
I feel that I deserve 25/25 points because I answered all 6 questions truthfully and I did not take up many pages in doing so.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
