Kant Application of Ethics

/in /by

 

Kant Application of EthicsGuidelines:

This paper is worth 5 points. Turn this paper in during week 8 via “turn-it-in” within Canvas. Plagiarism of any kind will result in a grade of zero. This paper should be 2-4 pages. Use MLA guidelines. All references should be properly documented. Using MLA guidelines, properly document any references or ideas that are not your own. WARRNING: DO NOT USE WIKIPEDIA IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM. WIKIPEDIA IS NOT A LEGITIMATE SOURCE. ANY USE OF WIKIPEDIA WILL RESULT IN A GRADE OF ZERO. USE ONLY TRUE PROFESSIONAL SOURCES. The purpose of this paper is for you to intellectually explore a topic, issue, problem, or figure relevant to our course material. The readings from our course should be the primary “source” that you utilize. Practice standards of good writing. Have a clear thesis. Devise evidence for your thesis. Make a sound, logically constructed argument. Proofread vigorously. Correct English grammar is expected.

Topics:

(1) Consider virtue Ethics and its defense, as discussed in Chapter 3. The virtue ethicist argues adamantly against the types of “moral-law” theory advocated by figures such a Kant. Kant’s ethics is an extremely powerful theory, usually considered one of the most original and brilliant ethical theories ever devised. How might Kant defend himself against the types of issues raised against moral-law theory issued in chapter 3? (Hints: Think about the notions of ‘autonomy’ and ethical independence discussed by both theories. How is Kant, as discussed in the text, not blindly asking us to simply “follow” a manual for right conduct or a simple decision procedure? Is Kant’s theory shallow in the ways that Virtue ethics typically suggests?)

(2) Consider the film Boomerang!, (1947) by Elia Kazan. How does this film argue in favor of Kantianism and radically against Utilitarianism? Consider the readings in our text. Use your own mind to formulate a response. (Hints: Think about Kant’s view of persons and the respect that we owe them as members of the moral community. Think of the accused man and the district attorney’s decision to defend him. What possible consequences might the district attorney face by defending the innocence of the accused? Why would Kant recommend such a defense? Why would Utilitarian recommend against such a defense.)

(3) Consider the film Detour (1945) by Edgar Ulmer. Is Al Roberts a victim of “moral luck” (–as described in chapter 9 of our text–)? Are the arguments for moral luck strong or weak? Is there any sense in which Moral Luck might be legitimate? How is it a threat to ethical theorizing in general? (Hint: Think about the notion of moral responsibility and the conditions that are typically required for full responsibility. Think of Al’s situation. How much is he to “blame” for his predicament?)

Censorship and Gossip in Society

/in /by

 Censorship and Gossip in Society

Censorship

Ordinarily opponents of censorship direct their attention against the government patrolling political speech through its formidable legal apparatus. But, nowadays, there may be more to fear from individuals and informal groups patrolling unpopular opinions and punishing them without reliance on the police power of the state. What about this? A CEO or chairman of the board of a restaurant chain remarks in an interview that he/she thinks that gay marriage ought not be legal. Would it be morally permissible – not legally, which would be a different issue entirely – to organize a national boycott against that company? Or to bring pressure on the corporation to fire the CEO in favor of some person with ideas more congenial to protestors? What is there to be said on either side of this issue?

GOSSIP

If the wrongness of gossip and slander derives from the harm of gossip and slander, then if the gossip or slander is harmless, then are they permissible? Why or why not?

Ref: (Moral Literacy, Chapter 7)

At least 2 paragraphs for each question.

 

Deontological Ethical Theory

/in /by

Deontological Ethical Theory

1- This discussion will require you to have carefully read Chapter 4 of the textbook, as well as the assigned portions of Immanuel Kant’s (2008) Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals.

Kant’s text and the textbook discuss two “formulations” or ways of expressing Kant’s Categorical Imperative, the “Formula of Universal Law” and the “Formula of Humanity.” For each formula, Kant considers four test cases to explain how it applies: Suicide, False Promises, Cultivating One’s Talents, and Beneficence.

  1. Engage with the text: Choose one of these test cases (it can be from either formula), and explain in your own words the reasoning that leads to the conclusion Kant defends. You should first explain the Categorical Imperative itself, focusing on the particular formula you are considering, and then carefully show how that principle leads to a particular conclusion.
  1. Reflect on the theories: Would a utilitarian come to a different conclusion? If so, explain why. If a utilitarian would come to the same conclusion in this case, could there be a variation in the case that would lead the utilitarian and Kant to come to different conclusions?
  1. Reflect on yourself: Do you agree with Kant’s conclusion? If not, explain the flaws in his reasoning. If you do agree, and you think a utilitarian would come to a different conclusion in this or a slightly varied case, why do you think that Kant’s reasoning is superior to the utilitarian’s? (You may want to consult section 4.3, “Challenges to Kant’s Theory” for help with this section)

450 words

2- In the Ancient Greek world (the world of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, often regarded as the birthplace of philosophy) a “symposium” was a banquet held after a meal, an “after party” of sorts that usually included drinking, dancing, recitals and engaging conversations on the topics of the day.

For our purposes in this course, the Symposium discussions will not involve dancing, recitals or a banquet, but they will provide food for thought on current ethical issues and direct application of the ethical theory discussed in each of these weeks.

It is almost impossible these days to turn on the news or log onto social media without encountering a controversy that cries out for ethical discussion. For these Symposium discussions, your instructor will choose a topic of current ethical interest and a resource associated with it for you to read or watch. Your task is to consider how the ethical theory of the week might be used to examine, understand or evaluate the issue.

This week, you will consider how deontology applies to a controversy, dilemma, event, or scenario selected by your instructor. It is a chance for you to discuss together the ethical issues and questions that it raises, your own response to those, and whether that aligns with or does not align with a deontological approach. The aim is not to simply assert your own view or to denigrate other views, but to identify, evaluate, and discuss the moral reasoning involved in addressing the chosen issue.

Your posts should remain focused on the ethical considerations, and at some point in your contribution you must specifically address the way someone with a deontological view would approach this issue by explaining and evaluating that approach.

350 words

additional resources

https://ashford.instructure.com/courses/78043/page…

Gender and Sexuality Mesoamerica

/in /by

Gender and Sexuality Mesoamerica

Write a two page paper on : must use references attached an YouTube videos

Considering the readings by Carrasco, Marcos, and the films on Menchú and “The Mission,” answer the following questions in essay format:

1) Explain the non-binary Mesoamerican view on gender and sexuality. (See Marcos)

2) How does the Virgen de Guadalupe and Rigoberta Menchú represent the two major dimensions of religious life in Mesoamerica: walking and transculturation? (See Carrasco)

3) After watching the “Mission,” consider the problems with the male-centric Catholic approach to religious leadership versus the more inclusive Mesoamerican view?

– Use at least three academic sources. You may use outside sources, but make sure to use at least two from the course’s module. Cite them and include examples from your sources.

– Cite correctly and use MLA style.

– Follow essay format: introduction, body, and conclusion.

– Check your grammar and composition with our FIU’s writing center.

For help submitting your assignment to Turnitin, review the how to submit a Turnitin Assignment page.

https://youtu.be/-WndkHH4new

The Nicomachean Ethics of Aristotle

/in /by

The Nicomachean Ethics of Aristotle

nichomachean Ethics” by Aristotle (starting on page 179)

Write a short, objective summary of 250-500 words which summarizes the main ideas being put forward by the author in this selection.

Use of Marijuana

/in /by

Is the Use of Marijuana Safe

This final writing assignment allows you to present an analysis of the best reasoning on each side of your issue. In the process, you will get to demonstrate some of the key skills you have learned during this course. In particular, you will demonstrate the ability to create high-quality arguments on both sides of an issue, to support your reasoning with scholarly sources, and to provide a fair analysis of the strength of the reasoning on each side. Use the same topic as you did on your previous papers and make sure to incorporate any relevant feedback you got from the instructor on your previous writing assignments. For an example of how to complete this paper, take a look at the Week 5 Example paper (in the classroom).

Your paper must include the following sections, clearly labeled:

  • Introduction
    • Introduce readers to your topic; include a brief preview of what you will accomplish in this paper. (approximately 150 words)
  • First Argument
    • Present the best argument on one side of the issue. (approximately 150 words)
      • Express your argument in standard form, with the premises listed one by one above the conclusion.
  • Defense for First Argument
    • Support the first argument as well as you can, using academic sources to demonstrate the truth of key premises. You may also choose to clarify the meaning of key premises and to explain how your reasoning supports the conclusion (approximately 250 words).
  • Opposing Argument
    • Present the best argument on the other side of the issue (approximately 150 words).
      • Express your argument in standard form.
  • Defense of Opposing Argument
    • Support the opposing argument as well as you can, using academic sources to demonstrate the truth of key premises. You are welcome as well to clarify the meaning of premises and/or to explain the reasoning further (approximately 250 words).
  • Analysis of the Reasoning (approximately 350 words)
    • Evaluate the quality of each argument, addressing whether key premises are true and whether the conclusion logically follows from them.
    • Analyze arguments for any fallacies committed or for any biases that may influence either side. Do you feel that one argument makes a much stronger case than the other and why? (There is no need to “take sides,” only to assess the quality of the arguments.)
    • Support your analysis with scholarly sources.
  • Conclusion (approximately 150 words)
    • Provide a brief conclusion and summary of your issue and how it can best be addressed by critical thinkers.

The Analyzing Reasoning on Both Sides Final Paper

  • Must be 1,200 to 1,600 words in length (not including title and references pages), double-spaced, and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center’s APA Style (Links to an external site.)
  • Must include a separate title page with the following:
    • Title of paper
    • Student’s name
    • Course name and number
    • Instructor’s name
    • Date submitted

Privacy a Function of Digital Selves

/in /by

 Privacy a Function of Digital Selves

Learning objectives:

The purpose of this writing assignment is to synthesize and apply information in a compact, precise form.

Submission:

S1) This assignment is due online, see listed due date in weekly content.

S2) This assignment should be 2 single-spaces pages. Our focus is structure and precision. With a longer assignment we can expand conditions. But this is not our purpose for these analytical summaries.

Assignment:

1) To what extent does our privacy change as a function of our digital selves? Explain your answer by using concepts from Tavini.

Your conditions:

A1) Have you captured the proper concepts from each author?

A2) Have you used relevant original examples to illustrate either your exposition OR your counter argument?

A3) Have you prepared the reader to understand both parts of your discussion on the assumption that the reader has not mastered technical concepts?

A4) Have you created a thorough argument that unifies all of your smaller claims?

Have you presented a cohesive total discussion?

A5) Does each paragraph have a descriptive function in your overall argument? And, is this function evident from the structure that you have set up?

A6) Is your summary sufficiently different from other summaries? As expected, all of the summaries will converge on certain intrinsic properties. But remember, we are concerned with process. I want to see how you get there.

A7) Always cite your work.

Moral and Ethical Challenges

/in /by

Moral and Ethical Challenges

Compose a 2-3 page paper in which you respond to a simulated medical ethics dilemma by applying the three normative theories of ethics.

INTRODUCTION
The field of ethics is highly personalized; each individual has his or her own view of actions that are morally and ethically sound. Rather than relying solely on personal experiences and emotions to govern ethical views, however, individuals often use ethical theories as a foundation. Ethical theories are useful in a variety of ways:

To help people think through issues that arise in their everyday life.
To make decisions, particularly those involving moral and ethical challenges.
To justify decisions to others.
To recognize types of arguments that other individuals use.
You will learn about three traditions of normative ethics:

Virtue ethics.
Deontological ethics.
Consequentialist ethics.
These three traditions have contributed to our understanding about ethics through the works of key thinkers in history. Understanding these ethical theories will help you support your positions on ethical issues you encounter. In this assessment, you will apply ethical theory to a scenario that will be provided for you.

DEMONSTRATION OF PROFICIENCY
By successfully completing this assessment, you will demonstrate your proficiency in the following course competencies through the following scoring guide criteria:

Competency 1: Explain the nature of ethical issues.
Explain the ethical issue in a scenario.
Competency 2: Critically examine the contributions of key thinkers from the history of ethics.
Apply the three traditional theories of normative ethics to a situation.
Competency 3: Engage in ethical debate.
Describe the advantages and disadvantages of each of three approaches to ethical theory as they relate to a specific situation.
Competency 4: Develop a position on a contemporary ethical issue.
Apply ethical theory to justify an ethical position on an issue.
Competency 5: Communicate effectively in the context of personal and professional moral discourse.
Communicate in a manner that is scholarly, professional, and consistent with expectations for members of professional communities.
OVERVIEW
You have now studied the three approaches to ethical theory (deontological, consequentialist, and virtue theory) as exemplified in the work of Immanuel Kant, John Stuart Mill, and Aristotle. Your assessment is to write an essay applying these three approaches to the following practical case:

You are called to consult in the critical care unit of your local hospital. The hospital admits JoEllen, 53, after she takes an overdose of prescription medications with alcohol. On admission, she says, “Not supposed to be here . . . ” and soon becomes uncommunicative. As her condition deteriorates rapidly, her son arrives with a notarized advance directive in which JoEllen specifically asks not to be placed on life support. What should you recommend to the attending health professionals?
INSTRUCTIONS
As you write your essay, consider how you would achieve the following:

Explain the ethical issue in this scenario.
Apply the three traditional theories of normative ethics to this situation.
Describe the advantages and disadvantages of the three theories as they relate to this situation.
Apply ethical theory to justify your stance on the right thing to do in this situation.
Your instructor may provide video feedback on your work, as well as complete the official scoring guide for the assessment.

ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
Written communication: Ensure written communication is free of errors that detract from the overall message.
APA formatting: Format resources and citations according to current APA style guidelines.
Number of resources: Use your judgment to ensure your topic is thoroughly researched. There is no minimum number of resources required.
Length of paper: Submit 2-3 typed, double-spaced pages.
Font and font size: Use Arial, 12-point font.

Leadership Strategies and Barriers for Innovation

/in /by

Leadership Strategies and Barriers for Innovation

Brown-Chidsey and Bickford (2016) found that implementation of an MTSS is often rushed and factors such as training, consultation, and procedures for innovation are not taken into consideration, which ultimately impedes the success of the school-wide intervention model. As teachers truly understand the nature of the innovation and why it is needed, this will result in more buy-in and support on behalf of the staff. For this Discussion, you will consider leadership strategies needed to promote innovation and barriers that may potentially arise.

To prepare

  • Review the module Learning Resources. Consider the different leadership strategies identified and potential barriers to implementing a school-wide MTSS.

An assessment of the critical leadership strategies and efforts needed to foster innovation and change when integrating the best comprehensive, systemic school-wide interventions. In your assessment, be sure to address the degree to which these strategies, in combination with an MTSS, work to support students with diverse needs and abilities.

 

Learning Resources

Note: To access this module’s required library resources, please click on the link to the Course Readings List, found in the Course Materials section of your Syllabus.

Required Readings

Brown-Chidsey, R. & Bickford, R. (2016). Practical handbook of multi-tiered systems of support: Building academic and behavioral success in schools. New York, NY: Guildford Press.

  • Chapter 10, “ Exploration, Adoption, and Installation” (pp. 95–106)
  • Chapter 11, “Implementation” (107–114)

 

Chaparro , E. A., Helton, S., & Sadler, C. (2016). Oregon’s effective behavioral and instructional support systems initiative: Implementation from district- and state-level perspectives. In K. McIntosh, & S. Goodman (Eds.), Integrated multi-tiered systems of support: Blending RTI and PBIS (pp. 267–286). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

 

Kincaid, D., & Batsche, G. (2016). Florida’s multi-tiered support system for academics and behavior. In K. McIntosh, & S. Goodman (Eds.), Integrated multi-tiered systems of support: Blending RTI and PBIS (pp. 287–304). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

 

Russell, C., & Harms, A. (2016). Michigan’s integrated behavior and learning support initiative: A statewide system of support for MTSS. In K. McIntosh, & S. Goodman (Eds.), Integrated multi-tiered systems of support: Blending RTI and PBIS (pp. 305–324). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

 

Cook, C. R., Lyon, A. R., Kubergovic, D., Wright, D. B., & Zhang, Y. (2015). A supportive beliefs intervention to facilitate the implementation of evidence-based practices within a multi-tiered system of supports. School Mental Health, 7(1), 49–60.

 

Eagle, J. W., Dowd-Eagle, S. E., Snyder, A., & Holtzman, E. G. (2015). Implementing a Multi-Tiered System of Support (MTSS): Collaboration Between School Psychologists and Administrators to Promote Systems-Level Change. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 25(2-3), 160-177.

 

Witzel, B., & Clarke, B. (2015). Focus on inclusive education: Benefits of using a multi-tiered system of supports to improve inclusive practice: Bradley Witzel, Editor. Childhood Education, 91(3), 215-219.

 

Document: State-Level Multi-tiered Systems of Support Implementation Template (Word Document)

 

Document: Kansas Multi-Tier System of Support (PDF)

 

Kansas has a MTSS Innovation Matrix designed to describe the principles and practices within an MTSS. It shares essential system components across all domains.

Required Media

 

Kukic, S. [RTIActionNetwork]. (2013, August 9). NCLD’s school transformation model: Helping ALL students succeed. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKTG1vxKQuo&feature=youtu.be

Relationship Between Morality and Meaning of Life Reflection

/in /by

Relationship Between Morality and Meaning of Life Reflection

By way of your understanding of Nietzsche, explain the relationship (if any) between morality and the meaning of life. Does belief in moral truth make life more meaningful? Or does an inquiry into the history of competing moralities show that life is likely meaningless?

The goal of a reflection paper is to present your own considered and clearly articulated beliefs alongside your understanding of the philosophical material we have read in the course. To that end, please be sure it is always clear whose views are being expressed—yours or one of the authors whose works are included in our textbook. Be sure to address yourself not only to an answer to the question, but also to providing your reader with an account of why you believe your answer to be correct. What are your reasons for taking one position or another? On what basis do you say the things you say about the readings? In order to justify the claims in your paper to your reader, when discussing material from the textbook you must offer substantiation for your claims with quotations from the text. Quotations are absolutely required; papers that do not use direct quotations to support the claims they make about the readings in the textbook will receive a failing grade. Please do not consult any sources or resources other than our textbook. (This includes the scholarly introductions to each thinker and the footnotes in each chapter by the textbook’s editor.) Any paper that quotes from any other source will receive a substantial grade penalty; any paper which can be shown to be reliant upon any other source without citation will receive a failing grade and its author will be subject to the appropriate disciplinary procedures, detailed in the UHD Academic Honesty Policy (or in the UHD Student Handbook).

The paper should be 3 pages long, typed and double-spaced. Use an 11- or 12-point font with reasonable margins. Citations should be in either the MLA or Chicago Manual of Style formats (information on both of which is available on the UHD Library website, under the heading, “Citing Sources”), and as such must give full bibliographical information for the text in either a “works cited” (MLA) or bibliographical footnotes (Chicago). Quotations should be set off from the rest of the paper (typically by quotation marks), and you should cite the page numbers in the text where the quoted passage appears. The paper is worth 15% of your grade for the course, and is to be submitted online via Blackboard by 11:59 p.m. on Sunday, June 14. Late papers will not be accepted unless you have arranged an extension with me before the stated due date and time.