Ethics

From Chapter 5, read Essay, Marine Parks. Answers the following: 1. What three reasons does Bill Daly consider for keeping marine parks open? Why does he ultimately reject each of these reasons? 2. What does Bill Daly think should happen concerning marine parks? What are his reasons? 3. Do you agree with Bill Daly about marine parks? Why or why not?   Here are some links that might help you to further understand the content of this assignment. ·        The Case Against Marine Mammals in Captivity ·        Change for Animals Foundation ·        Whale and Dolphin Conservation ·        Chicago Tribune Article

1.     Final Paper Each week, we are touching on different ethical theories and ideological stances and their implications for problem definition, research and action. To better understand why educational policy making can engender heated debate, it is important to understand the myriad ways in which policy issues can be framed, the ethical theories that underlie the various frames, which stakeholders adopt which frames, and how those frames inform their positions/stances. The final paper is the ultimate assignment in this course and is designed to help you critically examine a policy issue of your choosing in order to better understand why, among other things, all of the key stakeholders believe their framing and position/stance is “right” and/or “good” while the framing and positions/stances of others’ are “wrong” and/or “bad.” Developing the final Ideology paper is a process and we will divide it into phases on which you will be evaluated: * Phase 1 we had to pick a topic for our final paper. I chose the opt out policy where parents can decide if they want their child to take standardized testing or not. Right now opt out has been mandated in only 3 states: California, Utah, Wisconsin. Sates where it is not an official law/policy, parents that decide to opt out have to state that it is for “religious reasons”.  * Phase 2: Ethics Analysis  (CURRENTLY WE ARE FOCUSING ON PHASE 2) In a 4–5 page (not counting your title page and reference list), double-spaced, 12-point font paper, you will apply the various ethical theories we have reviewed thus far in the course to your final paper policy topic.  In the first part of the paper, you should provide a brief overview of the policy issue that you will be discussing.  Then, you should discuss how adherents to the philosophical approaches of each of Kant (kantianism), the Utilitarians (utilitarianism), Rawls (social contract theory), and Noddings (ethics of caring) might apply their respective approaches to the issues relating to your specific policy, and how they would ultimately resolve the relevant ethical considerations. You should also indicate which of the resolutions you find most satisfying, and why. Your stance should be that of a research and analyst. This is primarily a research paper and not a persuasive or advocacy paper. Remember to use APA formatting and style throughout, including title page, in-text citations, reference list, etc. Be sure to proofread your paper so that it is free of spelling, punctuation, and grammatical errors.  Students will apply the various ethical theories studied during the first half of the course to their final paper policy topic, demonstrating an understanding of the respective outcomes to which the application of the different theories leads. * Phase 3: Stakeholder Analysis   This assignment focuses on the stakeholders implicated in the policy issue you are addressing for your final Ideology paper.  In it, you need to provide a brief overview of the policy issue you are considering, the key stakeholders involved in this issue, and the positions that they have taken. Using the theories from the course, you should examine why those stakeholders might hold these positions and the implications of their positions for resolution of the policy issue. The paper should be 4 – 5 pages (not including the title page or works cited), double spaced, 12 pt. Times New Roman font with one-inch margins.

The second paper is the Research Paper on a topic of the student’s choice relating to the broad issue of global sustainability. To get ideas for a topic, explore the contents of the Global Sustainability folder found in the Module Six content. Once you have chosen a topic, complete and post W. A. #4. The Research Paper must be at least 5 pages in length, not including a title page (optional) and a page of references. A minimum of three references must be used as sources and must be listed on the reference page. References should be listed in APA format, and any quote must be properly attributed. Again, students should use double- space line spacing, normal 1-inch margins, and 11- or 12-point type in an easy-to-read font (e.g. Calibri, Arial, Cambria or Times New Roman). Papers should demonstrate the student’s ability to write in proper grammatical sentences and use proper paragraph structure. Be sure to include your name on the paper itself and also be sure to number your pages! Submit the paper by the deadline specified on the Reading and Test Schedule. This paper is worth a maximum of 8 points towards the student’s course grade. My instructions: I would like to talk about the “Rights of the Nature”

First, select a topic of moral controversy, debate, disagreement, and dispute, Examples of such topics are euthanasia, the death penalty, abortion, cloning, etc. You can pick any such topic. It need not be listed here. Next, detail the positions of each side of the ethical debate. Note at least two moral reasons each side presents to show their view on the topic is correct. What would an Ethical Egoist say about this topic? What side would the Ethical Egoist take? What would the Ethical Egoist say to justify their moral position? Is there a conflict between loyalty to self and to community relevant to your topic? If so, how so? Note what you feel is the best course of action. What would a Social Contract Ethicist say about this topic? What side would the Social Contract Ethicist take? What would the Social Contract Ethicist say to justify their moral position? Does your topic involve a collision between personal obligations and national ones? If so, how so? Note what you feel is the best course of action. Finally, reference and discuss any professional code of ethics relevant to your topic such as the AMA code for doctors, the ANA code for nurses, or any other pertinent professional code. State whether and how your chosen topic involves any conflicts between professional and familial duties. incorporate outside sources, including citations. Writing Requirements (APA format) Length: 3 (not including title page or references page) 1-inch margins Double spaced 12-point Times New Roman font References page (minimum of 2 scholarly sources in addition to the course textbook)

it’s just a discussion Within this century the United States invaded Iraq, ostensibly to overthrow the dictator Saddam Hussein and to stop him from developing and selling WMD’s (Weapons of Mass Destruction – generally including nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons). Looking at the 3 major parts of a moral issue: 1. non-moral facts, 2. concepts and, of course, 3. the moral or ethical aspects. Write 3-4 paragraphs taking a position that the invasion was or was not justified, including each of the 3 major parts within your analysis.

Argumentative Essay about Ethics of Profiting from War. Paper should have: A claim of definition A definition Reasons why your claim fits your definition Evidence to support your reasons A counter argument Your rebuttal

Conduct research on the New York City Police Department corruption case brought to the attention of the world by Frank Serpico. 9 pages Double spaced 12 point font Times New Roman or Courier New font 1” margin Include reference page using American Psychological Association (APA) format guidelines (not included in word count) Organization: Part One: An opening paragraph describing the topic and ultimate conclusion Part Two: A detailed description of the events that occurred and the ethical issues involved Part Three: Relate the actions of both the unethical officers and of Detective Serpico to the philosophical precepts we have discussed in class this semester. Part Four: Conclusions based on your research and class readings as to the consequences of unethical behavior to the system, society, and individual citizens. The following issues must be covered within the report: Organizational Cultural issues, (how did this environment affect the level and duration of the corruption?) Historical context, include your theories on why the corruption occurred Moral courage, (For example, – what were the particularly courageous acts involved?) Politics (Note, in this context “politics” refers to the personal and/or group dynamics within the NYPD. It does NOT relate to political parties or affiliation with any political party.) Additionally: Create a cover page for your assignment Include an abstract

Weeks 3-8: Theme Critical Reflections Throughout this course you will be asked to engage critically with the theme, which requires not only reading/viewing the background materials but reflecting on how they relate to your own values, experiences, and growth as a business leader. Instead of looking at this as just an assignment, look at these reflections as part of your development as a leader. You will write about what the theme of the module means to you. Over the span of the course, you will have considered thoughtfully what constitutes your own statement of business leadership and human values. This is NOT an assignment to summarize the readings. You may refer to a passage or a particular resource that you find intriguing, but refrain from simply restating what is in the readings. Instead, please consider these questions when reading/watching preparatory material for the theme (pick one or two questions from the questions below for your two-three paragraph post). Don’t answer all, but use these to guide your thinking. 1. What does the material you read/watched have to do with you, personally, and with your life (past, present or future)? It is not acceptable to write that it has NOTHING to do with you, since just about everything humans can write has to do in some way with every other human. 2. How did you develop the view about the theme that you currently hold? Was there a time when you believed something different than you do now? How did your view change? 3. How much does the material agree or clash with your view of the world, and what you consider right and wrong? Use quotes as examples of how it agrees with and supports what you think about the world, about right and wrong, and about what you think it is to be human. Use quotes and examples to discuss how the text disagrees with what you think about the world and about right and wrong. 4. Write a persuasive paragraph synthesizing an argument in favor of a position about the material this week that challenges your perspective or position on the matter. Make sure to synthesize it accurately. What different assumptions about the world might you hold and build upon to develop this position? 5. How much were your views and opinions challenged or changed by this material, if at all? Did it communicate with you? Why or why not? Give examples of how your views might have changed or been strengthened (or perhaps, of why the material failed to convince you, the way it is). Please do not write “I agree with everything the author wrote,” since everybody disagrees about something, even if it is a tiny point. Use brief quotes to illustrate your points of challenge, or where you were persuaded, or where it left you cold. 6. How well does it address things that you, personally, care about and consider important to the world? How does it address things that are important to your family, your community, your ethnic group, to people of your economic or social class or background, or your faith/religious tradition? If not, who does or did the text serve? Did it pass the “Who cares?” test? Word limit 250-400 words.

Week 8: End-of-Course Reflection As this course closes, please reflect on what you are taking away from this term. The following questions are suggestions and you may also expand on anything else that you found meaningful in the readings, discussions, or your exploration of your own moral compass. 1. After taking this course, has your understanding of “Business with humanity in mind” changed at all, and how? 2. How has your understanding of your own moral compass (your values, how you distinguish right from wrong, why you make the choices you make etc.) changed as a result of this course? 3. In thinking about your future as a business leader, what new skills are you taking from this course to help you? 4. What personal commitments will you make in order to continue to grow as a person who stands up for one’s own values? Limit: 600 words, one page or a 2-minute video. This will be graded complete/incomplete

Once you have formulated your question, conduct research from non-scholarly sources on the internet (e.g., news articles, op-eds, etc.) that present substantive reasoning on each side of the issue. Your task is to present and evaluate the reasoning from a non-scholarly source on each side of your issue. There is no need to take sides on the issue at this stage. In your analysis, strive to be as objective as possible, evaluating the reasoning from a neutral point of view. Introduction (approximately 100 words) Explain your topic. State the specific question that you are addressing. Presentation of an Argument Describe the non-scholarly source (e.g., an op-ed, newspaper article, website, etc.) on one side of the issue. Summarize the key points made (approximately 50 words). Present what you see as the main argument from that source. Make sure to present your argument in standard form, with the premises listed above the conclusion. (approximately 100 words) Evaluate the quality of the reasoning in this source (approximately 200 words) In completing your evaluation, consider assessing how well the research supports the premises of the main argument and how strongly the reasoning supports the conclusion of that argument. Presentation of an Argument on the Other Side of the Issue Describe the non-scholarly source on the opposite side of the issue. Summarize the key points made. (approximately 50 words) Present what you see as the main argument from that source. (Make sure to present your argument in standard form, with the premises listed above the conclusion.) (approximately 100 words) Evaluate the quality of the reasoning in this source (approximately 200 words) In completing your evaluation, consider assessing how well the research supports the premises of the main argument and how strongly the reasoning supports the conclusion.