(1) Choose one inquiry, from inquiries 1 - 28 (pages 114 - 117). Indicate which inquiry you chose, and then briefly explain it in your own words: I chose to use inquiry number 25. It concerns a restaurant cook who drops food and calls for it to be served after only picking it up and putting it right on the tray.
(2) Stakeholders: The cook could be fired if someone saw him, the customer getting the floor-food could get ill, the restaurant that employs a cook who is unclean can obtain a bad reputation if anything is wrong with the tainted food.
(3) Are the details given sufficient? Why or why not? The evidence of the cook's unprofessionalism and bad judgement regarding whether or not to serve steaks that fell on the floor is pretty apparent even without much stated detail. Serving food in a restaurant that touched a floor is unhealthy and unappetizing; he made a mistake.
(4) What additional questions does this inquiry raise? Everything the cook did was wrong. No question.
STEP TWO: THE RELEVANT CRITERIA
1. Obligations (aka "duties"): Optional this week
2. Moral Ideals (aka "virtues"): See breakdown of ideals below
3. Consequences (aka "outcomes" or "results"): Optional this week
NOTE: Not ALL of the following ideals will apply! Only consider the main ones that you believe apply, in the inquiry you chose. Don't just pick the easy ones to consider, because you didn't take the time to thoroughly read the chapter and learn what each one of these actually means. I will quiz you when we do group work on Thursday.
* The action taken by the cook had no moral behind it to back it up, however he could have had conflicting ideals which made him choose what he thought was right, but was actually not the most ethical decision.
* Conflicting ideals--I notice in the inquiry that a conflict of honesty and temperance. The cook probably thought about throwing out the steaks, but decided to take control of the situation and not get in trouble for it on the basis that no one saw him. He makes his decision based on his own status at his job and without taking into account the stakeholders, his decision is not morally justified.
STEP THREE: POSSIBLE COURSES OF ACTION
Alternative #1: The cook could have just made new steaks and taken the heat for messing up like a mature person. He would then at least have the virtue of honesty on his side.
Alternative #2: He could have been low on steaks and if that was the issue he could have asked the customer to re-choose an entree and he could make sure not to mess it up.
Alternative #3: He could have offered a discount for messing up the steaks and made them new entrees.
STEP FOUR: THE MOST ETHICAL ACTION
Examine the action taken or proposed and decide whether it achieves the greater good (the most widespread "respect for persons")...if it does not, choose one that will, from your alternatives. Where the choice of actions is such that no good can be achieved, choose the action that will result in the lesser evil.
The action taken by the cook is undoubtedly wrong and the only way it could be right is if he re-made the food or offered the customers something else. The customers are paying for the meal and for the cook to work there and he is not taking his most important supporters' health seriously at all. If he had just been courageous and owned up to his mistake the outcome would be only uncomfortable for him. Now that he has involved other's health and the entire restaurant's reputation, there is no greater good that he could have been reaching for. He was selfish and unprofessional. Of the twelve virtues (pp.107-109) he could have based his decision on, he chose to not, and risk more than just a few steaks and a repremanding about carefulness around the expensive entree preparation stations.
SELF EVALUATION
1. In your own words, describe something new that you learned from this week’s assigned reading material and guidance. --I learned how doing something wrong can be a product of conflicting virtues and someone can try to be doing good but it won't always be the greatest good that is reached or it won't always be right in one sense, but right in another relevant sense.
2. In your own words, describe in detail some insight you gained, about the material, from one of your classmates' blogs this week. In NS-ethics blog, I read an answer that said that as the parties involved in a situation grows, so does the possiblity that the best answer is not the most moral. It was insightful.
3. Did you post a thoroughly completed post to your blog on time this week? I believe based on my choice of inquiry that i was as thorough as possible and genuinely understand the readings.
4. Did you ALSO print this out, so you can bring it to class and earn total points? Of course.
5. Of 25 points total, my efforts this week deserve: I will bring it to class and i have been very thorough in my work this week and I feel it is represented well. I deserve all possible 25 total points.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
blog assignment #9
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSIGNMENT PART ONE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this section, we're going to return for a moment to Chapter 7, to the section that discusses errors that are common in the analysis of moral issues (p. 89). Briefly explain each of the following errors in your own words, as if you were explaining the concept to a friend who had never taken this class (consider who, what, when, where, why, how, when); and then give an example of each one, preferably from your own past experience.
Unwarranted Assumptions: a conclusion about an issue or question based on little evidence or our unconscious choice to believe or disbelieve based on what was meant by something being left out of the situation. We insert our own thoughts into left out spaces that we notice in a situation, making our conclusions not evidentially based and therefore quite biased.
ex.) I bought tickets to a concert and spent the extra money for VIP. There wasn't information on how VIP was different, but since it was more expensive I assumed that it would be the best way to go. At the concert, in VIP, the water ran out and everyone was crammed under a small tent. I left and had a great time on the regular priced ground where I could actually move and even dance. VIP was a waste of money and I definitely fell victim to an unwarranted assumption.
Oversimplification: a common error found in today's discussions when a party leaves out a vital criterion for a study or situation to make it seem simple, when the error actually reduces the situation to a distorted slice of the actual issue.
ex.) My girlfriend asked me to help her move into a new house and I did move stuff in, but I didn't know that meant unpacking the boxes and cleaning her room with her until after I was sweaty and tired from lifting couches and mattresses all day.
Hasty Conclusions: a conclusion that has been arrived at through analyzing facts relevant to the study but ignoring alternatives so to make the conclusion closed-minded and erroneous.
ex.) I have heard racist comments from people saying things like "In India men oppress women, they are woman haters." Some are, but there are indian men in the world who do not oppress women, so not all indian men are oppressive to women.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSIGNMENT PART TWO
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Briefly answer the following "chapter opening" questions, in your own words, based on what you learned by studying chapter eight:
1. What do we do in situations where there is more than a single obligation? The best solution to deciding between two conflicting obligations is to weigh the relative importance and give the more important one presidence. Also, if half of each obligation can be done, one should do both, but if only one is possible, it shoud be the more important one that is carried out.
2. How can we reconcile conflicting obligations? One should attempt to satisfy both if ethically and morally important, but if only one can be done, then one should choose based on moral and ethical importance.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSIGNMENT PART THREE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. In a nutshell, what is the most important thing, for you, that you learned from this assignment? I took from this assignment that people can slip and fall into false conclusions if the parameters for thought aren't clearly set out in front of them. It made me think about not judging a situation without having all the facts. Also, I learned that if conflicting obligations are giving me troubles it is alright to say no to one that isn't morally and ethically important and yes to one that I believe is the most fulfilling and has the most potential importance.
2. How will you apply what you learned through this assignment to your everyday life? I will be more thorough with my thinking especially when I feel the threat of a fallacy. Also, I will know how to choose which obligations I should stick to and ones I should stear clear of.
3. What grade do you believe your efforts regarding this assignment deserve? Justify your answer. After completing the assignment in it's entirety, I believe that the time and effort put forth is deserving of the full twenty-five points. I learned a lot about distorted conclusions and learned how to manage obligations based on honest, general importance. I'd say i fulfilled the requirements!
ASSIGNMENT PART ONE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this section, we're going to return for a moment to Chapter 7, to the section that discusses errors that are common in the analysis of moral issues (p. 89). Briefly explain each of the following errors in your own words, as if you were explaining the concept to a friend who had never taken this class (consider who, what, when, where, why, how, when); and then give an example of each one, preferably from your own past experience.
Unwarranted Assumptions: a conclusion about an issue or question based on little evidence or our unconscious choice to believe or disbelieve based on what was meant by something being left out of the situation. We insert our own thoughts into left out spaces that we notice in a situation, making our conclusions not evidentially based and therefore quite biased.
ex.) I bought tickets to a concert and spent the extra money for VIP. There wasn't information on how VIP was different, but since it was more expensive I assumed that it would be the best way to go. At the concert, in VIP, the water ran out and everyone was crammed under a small tent. I left and had a great time on the regular priced ground where I could actually move and even dance. VIP was a waste of money and I definitely fell victim to an unwarranted assumption.
Oversimplification: a common error found in today's discussions when a party leaves out a vital criterion for a study or situation to make it seem simple, when the error actually reduces the situation to a distorted slice of the actual issue.
ex.) My girlfriend asked me to help her move into a new house and I did move stuff in, but I didn't know that meant unpacking the boxes and cleaning her room with her until after I was sweaty and tired from lifting couches and mattresses all day.
Hasty Conclusions: a conclusion that has been arrived at through analyzing facts relevant to the study but ignoring alternatives so to make the conclusion closed-minded and erroneous.
ex.) I have heard racist comments from people saying things like "In India men oppress women, they are woman haters." Some are, but there are indian men in the world who do not oppress women, so not all indian men are oppressive to women.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSIGNMENT PART TWO
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Briefly answer the following "chapter opening" questions, in your own words, based on what you learned by studying chapter eight:
1. What do we do in situations where there is more than a single obligation? The best solution to deciding between two conflicting obligations is to weigh the relative importance and give the more important one presidence. Also, if half of each obligation can be done, one should do both, but if only one is possible, it shoud be the more important one that is carried out.
2. How can we reconcile conflicting obligations? One should attempt to satisfy both if ethically and morally important, but if only one can be done, then one should choose based on moral and ethical importance.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSIGNMENT PART THREE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. In a nutshell, what is the most important thing, for you, that you learned from this assignment? I took from this assignment that people can slip and fall into false conclusions if the parameters for thought aren't clearly set out in front of them. It made me think about not judging a situation without having all the facts. Also, I learned that if conflicting obligations are giving me troubles it is alright to say no to one that isn't morally and ethically important and yes to one that I believe is the most fulfilling and has the most potential importance.
2. How will you apply what you learned through this assignment to your everyday life? I will be more thorough with my thinking especially when I feel the threat of a fallacy. Also, I will know how to choose which obligations I should stick to and ones I should stear clear of.
3. What grade do you believe your efforts regarding this assignment deserve? Justify your answer. After completing the assignment in it's entirety, I believe that the time and effort put forth is deserving of the full twenty-five points. I learned a lot about distorted conclusions and learned how to manage obligations based on honest, general importance. I'd say i fulfilled the requirements!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)