Ethics

Tell me about an event or action that someone you personally know engaged in or did that you thought was ethical and then tell me why it was ethical.  Examples drawn from your own experience in business are preferred (but not necessary if you cannot think of one from that arena of life). To complete the assignment, you must address two parts: Describe what happened? Include enough information to describe the action so that it and its context are understandable to the reader (one-half of one single-spaced page should suffice for this part, though it can be longer if necessary). Explain why you think the event or action was ethical? For this step, you must address three things: What is your definition of “good”? (Do not simply assume that everyone agrees with your idea of what good means. Feel free to draw upon your own personal experiences, upbringing, religious beliefs, community standards, studies, observations, etc.) What is a strong objection to your vision of the good? (Why would someone reject your theory?  Really think of a strong objection to your idea of the good (think of a way you yourself might disagree with your own notion of good, and explain how). Be careful to analyze the good you are defending and not the goodness of the particular action.  They are different things.) Why is your theory still compelling? (why is your idea of good better than the objection(s) you address.

Ethnic Notions (Marlon Riggs 1987) 1. What stereotypes and characters based upon and/ or imposed upon African Americans appear in the film? 2. What anti-black prejudices/ beliefs resulted from the cultivation of the stereotypes discussed? 3. What impact has the stereotypes in the film had on African Americans? 4. How do these anti-black prejudices show up in American society and the psyches of people in America? Link to the Documentary: https://digitalassets.lib.berkeley.edu/mrc/ucb/video/ethnicnotions.mp4

Choose ONE of the following to answer on this Discussion Board: A: To what extent do you feel the purpose of punishment is to (a) protect society, (b) punish criminals, or (c) rehabilitate criminals? Explain your position using ethical theory and/or reasoning. Or B: Provide an example of one occupation or profession that you feel is underpaid in our society and one that you feel is overpaid. Explain your reasons for selecting your examples by applying ethical theory and/or reasoning. How could this injustice be corrected?

Time to write up your social contract! I want you to explain your idea of the correct American social contract as pertaining to the American welfare system. This is an ideological document in which you will need to express the following items: A. What kind of creatures are human beings and why should they live under a government of any kind? (10 pts) B. If humans are going to live under a government, what is the best sort of “contract” that we should engage in between ruler and ruled? Or put another way, what sorts of duties/rights do the government and people owe each other? (15 pts) C. What rights should citizens enjoy, and what duties should they shoulder, in terms of their employment? Try to consider how we deal with different work statuses (permanently unemployed, temporarily unemployed, underemployed, self-employed, between jobs, etc). (15 pts) Note: This is not an assignment asking you what kind of social contract that we do have. I’m asking what kind of social contract do you wish that we would have in relation to work (employment and unemployment)? Very different question. So don’t get into explaining Constitutional history to me. You’re allowed to start completely from scratch. What sort of social work arrangement is best for human beings living in a diverse society? Facts, expert authorities, and logically reasoning from premise to conclusion in a consistent manner will all be helpful in making your point. You will need to complete this assignment in less than one single-spaced page or roughly 500 words. I will not set a minimum but rest assured that a 2-paragraph answer will not be sufficient to effectively complete the assignment.

Assessment task details: You are an ethics and governance officer working for a listed corporation Copco. The board of Copco has asked for a briefing paper to be prepared in one of the cases below.  In the essay, you are required to outline and then analyze the case using the concepts and ideas outlined in Gioia 1993; Husted 1993, Jons & Ryan 1998, Victor & Cullen 1998 and Monahan & Quinn 2008. Explore the interaction between organizational context and the issue (moral intensity, moral language, and framing) then and then address the following questions.  1. What role does organizational schemas/scripts/moral language/ethical work climate splay in ethical decision making within this case? 2. How can unethical/poor decisions be avoided? 3. Are ethical leadership, codes, and raining adequate responses to preventing similar problems at CorpCo, or does the board need to do more? Critically discuss with reference to the course and assessment task 1 literature, theory, concepts, and further research.  You are required to formulate an argument, undertake research to locate academic references, and support your argument with theories covered in this course.  You are also required to table recommendation for the board to consider based on your analysis of the issue, including future action and possible barriers (these must be theory-driven/evidence-based) You have at least 12 academic references to support your argument from online databased such as EBSCO, ProQuest, emerald, science direct, etc) Below are the topic that I have chooses.  Topic: “Greg Mortimer Cruise Ship” In 2020 Covid19 has rocked the Globe. The board would like a board paper with recommendations on the Greg Mortimer Cruise Ship case. Explore the interaction between organizational context and the issue (moral intensity, moral language, and framing) then and then address the following questions. 1. What role does organizational schemas/scripts/moral language/ethical work climates play in ethical decision making within this case? 2. How can unethical/poor decisions be avoided? 3. Are ethical leadership, codes, and training adequate responses to preventing similar problems at CorpCo, or does the board need to do more? Critically discuss with reference to the course and assessment task 1 literature, theory, concepts, and further research. Literature pointers: Alexander, H (2020) ‘Give limited information truthfully’  (Links to an external site.) : The extrication of a cruise ship, The Age  Gioia, D (1992) ‘Pinto fires and personal ethics: A script analysis of missed opportunities’,  (Links to an external site.)  Journal of Business Ethics,  Vol.11(5), pp.379-389 Husted, B. W. (1993) ‘Reliability and the design of ethical organizations: A rational systems approach’, Journal of Business Ethics, 12(10), 761-769. Jones, T.M. & Ryan, L.V. (1998) ‘The effect of organizational forces on individual morality: Judgment, moral approbation, and behavior ‘, Business Ethics Quarterly, 8 (3), 431-45. Monahan, S. C., & Quinn, B. A. (2006) ‘Beyond ‘bad apples’ and ‘weak leaders’ Toward a neo-institutional explanation of organizational deviance’, Theoretical Criminology, 10(3), 361-385. Victor, B., & Cullen, J. B. (1988) ‘The organizational bases of ethical work climates’,  Administrative Science Quarterly, 101-125. Chicago

how do moral standards differ from law, etiquettes, and commandments

1) Summarize the arguments employed by the authors to support their claim that the moral judgment of psychopaths is impaired and that therefore, psychopaths should not be prosecuted in the criminal justice system.  2) Critically evaluate these arguments – that is, are the authors’ arguments for why psychopaths have impaired moral behaviour strong or weak? Back up your evaluation of these arguments using the basic theories of ethics discussed in the first week of class.

Students will use their allocated topic to develop a sound ethical argumentative opinion piece. Assignment details: During the 1st week of lectures your tutor will allocate a topic for discussion from the prescribed four options. Using the allocated topic given to you construct an argumentative essay.   Purpose: The purpose of this assessment is for students to demonstrate the capacity to develop an ethical argument/s based on the four ethical principles: autonomy, justice, beneficence, and non-maleficence.   TOPIC 4. Governments should have the authority to stop citizens from participating in community activities when they refuse immunizations.

As a principal, you will be expected to make numerous sound and moral legal decisions regarding student rights in the school setting. Examples of such student rights issues include freedom of speech, locker and backpack searches, personal privacy, and due process for students with exceptionalities. A principal must act with integrity and fairness to ensure the school system is held accountable for every student’s academic and social success. To be an effective leader and decision-maker on such issues, the principal should be familiar with cases that specifically speak to student rights in the educational arena. Part 1: Case Analysis Using the “Case Analysis Template,” address each step of the decision-making model to render a decision for Case 14. Part 2: Rationale Support the case analysis with a 500-750 word rationale explaining the decisions you made and how those decisions: Support the school’s vision and mission and safeguard the values of democracy, equity, and diversity. Promote social justice and ensure that individual student needs inform all aspects of schooling. Promote collaboration, trust, learning, and high expectations. Cite the case and any other source documents as appropriate. APA format is not required, but solid academic writing is expected.

In Chapter 1 of your text, you saw how moral reasoning involves moving back and forth between general, abstract ideas like principles and values and particular concrete judgments about what is good or right, and seeking to find a kind of agreement or equilibrium between those. In Chapters 3, 4, and 5, you were introduced to utilitarianism, deontology, and virtue ethics. Each of these ethical theories represents different ways of reasoning about ethical questions, based in different account of the principles, values, and other conceptions that inform the “abstract” side of the dialectic. In this course, and in much of life, the “concrete” ethical issues that receive the most attention are frequently those that elicit passionate responses and widespread debate, affect large numbers of people, involve matters of deep significance like life and death or fundamental rights, and so on. However, as important as these issues are, there is often a limit to how much impact most individuals can have on such matters; instead, the place where ethics and moral reasoning have their greatest impact is in one’s local community. Thus, in this final discussion board, you will demonstrate your grasp of the relation between the abstract ideas in one of these theories and a concrete ethical issue or social problem in your local community. Engage the community: Begin by finding an ethical issue or social problem that currently impacts or has recently impacted your local or regional community (such as your neighborhood, town or city, county, school district, religious community, or something of similar scope to any of these). Briefly summarize the issue or problem, and provide a link to a news article, video, or some other resource that documents the issue or problem so that your fellow students can learn more about it when formulating their responses to you. Apply the theory: Next, choose one of the ethical theories and discuss how the moral reasoning of the theory might be used to address or resolve the issue or problem. Evaluate the reasoning: In evaluating the application of the moral theory you may, for example, consider one or more questions like: Does this differ from the way this issue is currently being addressed? Does it present a better response than another ethical approach would? Does the theory present an adequate response to the issue, or does it leave significant aspects of the issue unresolved? Does applying the theory to this issue raise other problems or concerns? In light of this issue, are there ways the principles or values of the theory might need to be modified from the form that we studied in class?