Category: Ethics

Starting Something Versus Finishing What You Started, Including Life
Be sure you support your views with one or more underlying moral principle(s) that have not already been shown to be flawed unless you can say why and how the flaws do not apply or are not really flaws.
Read the set of questions carefully. It is not about abortion, but is primarily about conception versus euthanasia (of an adult). The principle to be developed will apply to abortion, but the question itself is not specifically about abortion.
Keep this in mind while answering the set of questions below: The whole purpose of these questions is to understand whether the criteria that justify finishing something you started and have put time and energy into are the same criteria that would justify beginning it in the first place. Address that general question in answering #10 below.
Suppose you go to a 3 hour and 20 minute play on Broadway that your parents have given you tickets they received for free as part of some advertising promotion they could not attend and were not really interested in anyway, and that they thought you and your spouse might enjoy. The first three hours are somewhat okay, but not all that great, with some of it pretty boring, and the last intermission is about twenty minutes before the end of the show. The last twenty minutes may tie it up real well and make it worthwhile having gone to or it may not. I won’t tell you which way that works out, but the overall experience was not anything to rave about, though it was also not the worst night of your life. On your way out of the theater, the management selects you to give two free tickets to give to friends.
1) Should you accept the tickets and give them to your friends? If you do, you are not allowed to tell them anything about the play or your experience and feelings about it. You either give them the tickets or you do not. If you give them the tickets, they will go (because they will take it as a recommendation and because they won’t want to spurn your offer or offend your apparent generosity). Basically you are controlling whether they go or not, so you have to decide for them by deciding whether to give them the tickets or not. The idea is that this is just like conceiving a child, where what you do doesn’t give the child any real choice in the matter and you don’t get to consult with it, to see what it wants, and it can’t research to see whether it wants to be born or not. (And remember, we are talking here only about conception — which is about fertilizing the egg and creating a pregnancy in the first place, not about abortion. If you conceive the child, you will carry it through to birth. This is not an abortion question. So you have to decide whether to conceive and therefore bring a child into this world or not, and in the same way you have to decide whether to send your friends to this play or not. Giving them the tickets is analogous to conceiving the child.)
The play is not about a subject they are known to be any more or less particularly interested in then you are, so you have no reason for thinking they will enjoy the play any more than you did. They may or may not, but the odds are they won’t like it any more than you did. So, would you accept the tickets to give to your friends or not? Why or why not?
2) Should you stay for the last 20 minutes, or should you have just leave during that intermission at the end of the first three hours? Why?
3) Would you have gone to the show in the first place if you had known it was going to be like this, or would you have told your parents you couldn’t go and suggest they give the tickets to someone else or sell or return them? Why? It will not hurt their feelings if you can’t accept the tickets.
4) Would it make any difference in your decision to give your friends the tickets if you were also given $1,000 on the condition you gave them the tickets and they went to the show? Why or why not? But again you are not allowed to tell them anything about the play or how much or little you liked it. And you are not allowed to share any of the money with them or use it to buy them anything to make up for sending them to this play, even if they do not enjoy it.
5) What if your friends were disabled and though they could go, it would be a hardship for them to travel and get into the theater, and they had to secure a baby sitter for their children, go out on a weeknight, etc? Would you give them the tickets? Why or why not?
Explain and justify your answers. Then suppose that this is an analogy, where the play represents life in general, and giving your friends the tickets represents conceiving and giving birth to a child. The $1,000 represents any pleasure you get at having the child regardless of what pleasure or pains the child finds in life (or the couple has in going to the play). 6) Should you conceive a child and give birth to it under any of these conditions? Why or why not?
To help make clear the premise of the scenario, consider this scenario also, which is supposed to be the same basic problem: Tickets go on sale two months ahead of time for a concert by a band you are somewhat interested in seeing, but it is not a must-see band for you, not one of your favorite bands. You go to the box office (because the tickets are not on sale online) and the line is long but should move quickly. However, it does not move quickly, and after various promising starts you find you have been waiting in line for nearly three hours, but it will be just twenty more minutes (for sure). 7) Should you wait the twenty minutes, or should you leave and do without the tickets? 8) If you had known the total wait would have been 3 hours and 20 minutes, should you have gone to get the tickets in the first place? 9) Should you call a friend to come down to get in line at the end of the line (so the friend has to wait 3 hours and 20 minutes to get his/her tickets — because you can’t let the friend cut in and you can’t buy more than your own ticket at the window) or not? If you call the friend, you are not allowed to tell him/her about the length of the wait in line. The friend has about the same level of interest in this particular band that you do, as far as you know.
10) The purpose of these questions is to understand whether the criteria that justify finishing something you started and have put time and energy into are the same criteria that would justify beginning it in the first place. Why or why not? Are the grounds for remaining alive, for someone who suffers, the same grounds for their being conceived in the first place? What about when they are still in the womb with regard to being born or carried to term? Explain and justify your answer, and use an underlying general moral principle for support (as I used my principle for support in the “supermarket examples” in the Introduction to Ethics).

Starting Something Versus Finishing What You Started, Including Life
Be sure you support your views with one or more underlying moral principle(s) that have not already been shown to be flawed unless you can say why and how the flaws do not apply or are not really flaws.
Read the set of questions carefully. It is not about abortion, but is primarily about conception versus euthanasia (of an adult). The principle to be developed will apply to abortion, but the question itself is not specifically about abortion.
Keep this in mind while answering the set of questions below: The whole purpose of these questions is to understand whether the criteria that justify finishing something you started and have put time and energy into are the same criteria that would justify beginning it in the first place. Address that general question in answering #10 below.
Suppose you go to a 3 hour and 20 minute play on Broadway that your parents have given you tickets they received for free as part of some advertising promotion they could not attend and were not really interested in anyway, and that they thought you and your spouse might enjoy. The first three hours are somewhat okay, but not all that great, with some of it pretty boring, and the last intermission is about twenty minutes before the end of the show. The last twenty minutes may tie it up real well and make it worthwhile having gone to or it may not. I won’t tell you which way that works out, but the overall experience was not anything to rave about, though it was also not the worst night of your life. On your way out of the theater, the management selects you to give two free tickets to give to friends.
1) Should you accept the tickets and give them to your friends? If you do, you are not allowed to tell them anything about the play or your experience and feelings about it. You either give them the tickets or you do not. If you give them the tickets, they will go (because they will take it as a recommendation and because they won’t want to spurn your offer or offend your apparent generosity). Basically you are controlling whether they go or not, so you have to decide for them by deciding whether to give them the tickets or not. The idea is that this is just like conceiving a child, where what you do doesn’t give the child any real choice in the matter and you don’t get to consult with it, to see what it wants, and it can’t research to see whether it wants to be born or not. (And remember, we are talking here only about conception — which is about fertilizing the egg and creating a pregnancy in the first place, not about abortion. If you conceive the child, you will carry it through to birth. This is not an abortion question. So you have to decide whether to conceive and therefore bring a child into this world or not, and in the same way you have to decide whether to send your friends to this play or not. Giving them the tickets is analogous to conceiving the child.)
The play is not about a subject they are known to be any more or less particularly interested in then you are, so you have no reason for thinking they will enjoy the play any more than you did. They may or may not, but the odds are they won’t like it any more than you did. So, would you accept the tickets to give to your friends or not? Why or why not?
2) Should you stay for the last 20 minutes, or should you have just leave during that intermission at the end of the first three hours? Why?
3) Would you have gone to the show in the first place if you had known it was going to be like this, or would you have told your parents you couldn’t go and suggest they give the tickets to someone else or sell or return them? Why? It will not hurt their feelings if you can’t accept the tickets.
4) Would it make any difference in your decision to give your friends the tickets if you were also given $1,000 on the condition you gave them the tickets and they went to the show? Why or why not? But again you are not allowed to tell them anything about the play or how much or little you liked it. And you are not allowed to share any of the money with them or use it to buy them anything to make up for sending them to this play, even if they do not enjoy it.
5) What if your friends were disabled and though they could go, it would be a hardship for them to travel and get into the theater, and they had to secure a baby sitter for their children, go out on a weeknight, etc? Would you give them the tickets? Why or why not?
Explain and justify your answers. Then suppose that this is an analogy, where the play represents life in general, and giving your friends the tickets represents conceiving and giving birth to a child. The $1,000 represents any pleasure you get at having the child regardless of what pleasure or pains the child finds in life (or the couple has in going to the play). 6) Should you conceive a child and give birth to it under any of these conditions? Why or why not?
To help make clear the premise of the scenario, consider this scenario also, which is supposed to be the same basic problem: Tickets go on sale two months ahead of time for a concert by a band you are somewhat interested in seeing, but it is not a must-see band for you, not one of your favorite bands. You go to the box office (because the tickets are not on sale online) and the line is long but should move quickly. However, it does not move quickly, and after various promising starts you find you have been waiting in line for nearly three hours, but it will be just twenty more minutes (for sure). 7) Should you wait the twenty minutes, or should you leave and do without the tickets? 8) If you had known the total wait would have been 3 hours and 20 minutes, should you have gone to get the tickets in the first place? 9) Should you call a friend to come down to get in line at the end of the line (so the friend has to wait 3 hours and 20 minutes to get his/her tickets — because you can’t let the friend cut in and you can’t buy more than your own ticket at the window) or not? If you call the friend, you are not allowed to tell him/her about the length of the wait in line. The friend has about the same level of interest in this particular band that you do, as far as you know.
10) The purpose of these questions is to understand whether the criteria that justify finishing something you started and have put time and energy into are the same criteria that would justify beginning it in the first place. Why or why not? Are the grounds for remaining alive, for someone who suffers, the same grounds for their being conceived in the first place? What about when they are still in the womb with regard to being born or carried to term? Explain and justify your answer, and use an underlying general moral principle for support (as I used my principle for support in the “supermarket examples” in the Introduction to Ethics).

My groups topic is about Career Opportunity vs Family Obligations/responsibilities. Make 5 slides with enough content to talk for at least 5 mins about why its right to choose family obligations over career opportunities.
Example and stuff that can be used for argument:
Represents family
Like family business
Helping is way of giving back
Don’t want to disappoint
Ruin relationships
How nursing home facilities aren’t the best
Quality of the care
Want loved one at home
Spent more time with them
Provide them comfort
Can always do your career later
Expensive care facilities
Not good ones
Love ones wanna be home with family
A job opportunity away
Family wants you stay home
Could always have another job have another opportunity
Family is at home
Could always travel

Cowart and Burt view points, instructions are going to be in the document. The log in link for the textbook
available to assigned writer

Guide word count is 300 words and there are no penalties for over or under. may reference guidelines (based in Ireland) or academic sources
1. You are working in primary care as a doctor and your patient comes from a culture in
which it is considered wrong to tell patients that they are dying. The family explain the
cultural context and requests you not to tell the patient they are dying. Discuss FOR
informing the patient?
2. You are working in primary care as a doctor and your patient comes from a culture in
which it is considered wrong to tell patients that they are dying. The family explain the
cultural context and requests you not to tell the patient they are dying. Discuss
AGAINST informing the patient?
3. A medical student falsifies a logbook to say they had attended a home visit to a child
with special needs. The parents contact the school to ask about the visit and the
student’s logbook is reviewed. Discuss FOR the student failing the module
4. A medical student falsifies a logbook to say they had attended a home visit to a child
with special needs. The parents contact the school to ask about the visit and the
student’s logbook is reviewed. Discuss AGAINST the student failing the module?
5. You are aware that there is no evidence for an effective treatment for a particular
condition but the patient and their family are requesting you try an unproven treatment.
Discuss FOR using this treatment?
6. You are aware that there is no evidence for an effective treatment for a particular
condition but the patient and their family are requesting you try an unproven treatment.
Discuss AGAINST using this treatment?
7. You have administered an out of date but still effective vaccine to a patient. Discuss
FOR informing the patient?
8. You have administered an out of date but still effective vaccine to a patient. Discuss
AGAINST informing the patient?

Overview
When we consider global ethical issues that need to be addressed, it is important to remember that every issue has been shaped by history. Examining the ethical frameworks that have influenced decision making in the past can help us better understand an issue as it exists today. By reflecting on our own biases, cultural influences, and morals and values, we can begin to explore a global ethical issue and consider the consequences of potential decisions we might make about the issue.
Directions
For this assignment, you will begin analyzing your chosen topic for the project and reflecting on ethical decision making. This assignment builds toward portions of Part Two and Part Three of the project, in which you will expand on these responses and integrate additional project components. Before working on this assignment, consult the Project Guidelines and Rubric to review the scope of the project.
Specifically, you must address the following:
Part One: Analyze Your Chosen Topic (This corresponds with Part Two of the project.)
In this section, you will look at how ethics inform and influence decisions.
Explain how your chosen topic is framed by an ethical framework.
Explain which ethical frameworks have influenced the historical decision making regarding your topic.
What evidence do you have for your answer?
Discuss the impact of ethical decisions on your chosen topic.
Part Two: Reflect on Ethical Decision Making (This corresponds with Part Three of the project.)
In this section, you will reflect on the process of your ethical decision making. You will not be providing a solution for a problem, but looking at the steps you would take, or should take, in discussing, examining, and evaluating the ethical aspects of possible outcomes.
Describe ways that your cultural influences shape your morals and values.
Support your descriiption/explanation with sources.
Explain how your cultural or individual biases impact the ethical decisions you make about your chosen topic.
Support your descriiption/explanation with sources.
Discuss ways that your cultural influences impact your ethical decisions when considering your chosen topic.
Support your descriiption/explanation with sources.
What to Submit
Submit the completed Module Four Short Paper Template as a one- to two-page Microsoft Word document with double spacing, 12-point Times New Roman font, and one-inch margins. Use at least three sources, including videos and textbooks from this course and any additional sources from the Shapiro Library. Follow APA citation guidelines when citing sources both throughout and at the end of your paper.

In an essay of approximately 3 pages (double-spaced, 12pt font, 1 inch margins) address the following prompt:
Consider again the case of Juli Briskman profiled in your assigned readings. She was terminated by her employer, Akima, for her off-duty conduct as President Trump’s motorcade passed. Was it ethically appropriate for her employer to terminate her? Why or why not? In your response be sure to integrate the relevant course concepts and/or principles that we’ve studied to justify your response. Are there any general lessons or guidelines you can draw from this case about when and under what circumstances an employer can terminate an employee for off-duty conduct?
Your essay should be clearly written and organized, concise, grammatically correct, analytically sound, and demonstrate a thorough understanding of the reading assignments. Do not offer extended introductions and do not stray from directly addressing this particular assignment.
You do not need to do any outside research for this particular assignment. However, It is expected that students use the APA Style Guide for in-text citations and bibliographic references for their essays, including any outside research and for assigned texts. This means that the quality of your presentation and style will be determined by the accurate use of the APA Style Guide for citations and references. A separate reference page should be provided for the texts you cite in the body of your essay. You do not need to provide a title page, running head or abstract for these essays. Simply put your first and last name in the top right of the first page of your essay. Also, there is a textbook attached(joseph desjardins pdf file) please apply some of the ethical principles mentioned from chapter 1-3 of the textbook for the essay and there is also a summary of it (jpg file). When writing the essay, please take into account of my moral values and based it on that(jpg file). This is the assigned reading article link: https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/wrongful_termination_claim_trump_motorcade

The assignment is to read the case study and then answer the questions provided (1-15). I have provided the full instruction, case study, and questions. I have also provided the class PowerPoints related to this unit. There is no real minimum amount of words or max, one page for all the questions is fine. (All the examples I have seen have been around 1 page for each case study). Please reach out with any questions.

Purpose
This module’s readings focused on justification, which is an important part of any argument. Justification and the theories being used usually do not get their own section in a philosophy paper, as these papers do not usually include a methods section. However, many humanities papers do and all research papers do, so it is a worthwhile practice to practice stating explicitly the assumptions that will be underlying your eventual argument.
Remember, this assignment is intended to build toward the final project. The written sections are designed to be able to serve (with minor modifications) as sections in the written section of the final project.
Instructions
Pick one theory of justification from the readings (e.g., moral absolutism, cultural relativism, etc.). In a few sentences, define that theory in your own words.
Answer the following prompt:
In 1-2 paragraphs, describe your reasoning, or a chain of reasoning, that supports your position on your chosen topic. Use one of the theories of justification – ideally the one you picked earlier – to show how this reasoning is justified.
*** the topic I chose was about Covid and how it was mandatory to get a vaccination.***
Engagement Section:
Respond to the following prompt:
Plato’s Euthyphro presents a dilemma: is the Good Life good because it is loved by the gods, or do the gods love the Good Life because it is good? What are your thoughts on this? Which ‘horn’ of the dilemma is correct – or is there another option?

Read the articles below first

Bioethics

Abortion

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dobbs_v._Jackson_Women%27s_Health_Organization
Then Listen to the 2 lecture videos provided to give evidence of watching them
And the follow the instructions on the picture provided
Which are
Please define in several sentences each and in your own words, what you believe to be a TWO central moral issues within each of these ethical issues (FOUR issues total): bioethics and abortion.
2. State which of these issues is MOST interesting to you AND what your own position on it is, and explain which ethics theory (from our first two discussions) would most support your position and why. (roughly two-four sentences total).
3.) Give evidence of reading the articles listed above on bioethics and abortion, by briefly identifying/naming the readings you did and discussing at least two ideas/issues/information specifically from the reading (be specific by citing exactly what you read) which you found interesting, and also briefly explain whether you agree or disagree. NOTE: You can substitute a video (found in Announcements) for one of the readings if you wish.