Write a research on the question either What are the ethics of eating animals? OR Do animals have Emotions?
The ethics of eating Animals
Write a research on the question either What are the ethics of eating animals? OR Do animals have Emotions?
Write a research on the question either What are the ethics of eating animals? OR Do animals have Emotions?
College life brings with it a new set of opportunities and challenges. You have entered a community of peers; some of you are living away from home without the everyday guidance and support of parents, family and friends. You are encountering a degree of diversity in everyday living to which you are probably not accustomed. And academically, expectations have changed dramatically. College faculty do not see themselves as disciplinarians and there are no school principals monitoring your activities and attendance. You are on your own, managing your time, negotiating choices and relationships, and dealing with a more complicated set of academic expectations and responsibilities. In every setting – dorm, classroom, college activities and work – you must balance your needs with obligations to yourself and to others. And this means that you are involved in ethical decision making.
In a 4-5 page essay, discuss a real situation you have encountered this semester which had an ethical component or dimension – that is, where you had to negotiate your own interests, values and needs within the context of the needs and/or expectations of others. You can use an example taken from your own experience, current events, the readings or class discussion. Do you believe the decision/action/resolution was ethical? Explain the decision-making process. Be sure to analyze your example within the context of the differing approaches to ethics discussed in Mill, Kant and Gilligan. How did the readings help you think about the situation from a new or deeper perspective?
What do you see as the most important ethical issue raised by a specific application of artificial intelligence (e.g., self-driving vehicles, social bots, autonomous weapons)?
Who could potentially benefit from this application of AI? Who might be harmed?
Why would it be important for policies to be put in place in order to mitigate harm?
How could you apply categorical and consequentialist moral reasoning to the ethical questions the application raises?
Do you see AI impacting your personal or professional life?
Imagine a scenario where there has been a serious crime in a town and the Sheriff is trying to prevent serious rioting. He knows that this rioting is likely to bring about destruction, injury and maybe even death. The problem is that he has no leads; he has not the slightest idea who committed the crime. However, he can prevent these riots by lying to the town and framing an innocent man. No one will miss the man and he is hated in the town. If he frames and jails this innocent man, convincing people to believe that it was this man that committed the crime, then the town will be placated and people will not riot.
What would a utilitarian have us do in this case if we were the sheriff? In other words, should we lie, according to utilitarianism? What considerations would a utilitarian identify as important to think about in relation to this case? Would a Kantian agree with the utilitarian’s advice here? Why or why not?
College life brings with it a new set of opportunities and challenges. You have entered a community of peers; some of you are living away from home without the everyday guidance and support of parents, family and friends. You are encountering a degree of diversity in everyday living to which you are probably not accustomed. And academically, expectations have changed dramatically. College faculty do not see themselves as disciplinarians and there are no school principals monitoring your activities and attendance. You are on your own, managing your time, negotiating choices and relationships, and dealing with a more complicated set of academic expectations and responsibilities. In every setting – dorm, classroom, college activities and work – you must balance your needs with obligations to yourself and to others. And this means that you are involved in ethical decision making.
In a 4-5 page essay, discuss a real situation you have encountered this semester which had an ethical component or dimension – that is, where you had to negotiate your own interests, values and needs within the context of the needs and/or expectations of others. You can use an example taken from your own experience, current events, the readings or class discussion. Do you believe the decision/action/resolution was ethical? Explain the decision-making process. Be sure to analyze your example within the context of the differing approaches to ethics discussed in Mill, Kant and Gilligan. How did the readings help you think about the situation from a new or deeper perspective?
Leyla Ansari, 30, a recent immigrant from Afghanistan who is 22 weeks pregnant, is admitted to the hospital with severe cramping. She has only had 1 prenatal visit with a local OBGYN, not affiliated with the hospital. A preliminary ultrasound indicates brain abnormalities with her fetus.
Mrs. Ansari is accompanied by her husband of eight years (also an immigrant) and her mother, who speaks no English and lives with the couple. Mrs. Ansari (Leyla) also speaks very little English, though she does understand some; her husband speaks English better, though somewhat haltingly. Their primary language is Dari.
Mrs. Ansari is stabilized, and further scans are conducted on the fetus. The physicians soon discern that the fetus is afflicted with a relatively severe encephalocele; its size and location make survival outside the womb extremely unlikely. The attending physician, Dr. Fox, is not previously acquainted with the patient.
Mrs. Ansari’s other children (all girls, ages 2, 5, and 6) are in the outside waiting area, accompanied by an aunt. Noticing a look of deep concern on the doctor’s face, Mr. Ansari asserts that his wife is sick with fear and anxiety and that she herself would prefer that her husband handle any news of the situation. He requests that Dr. Fox meet separately with him first, outside of his wife’s room. Moreover, it is the traditional time for Muslims to offer prayers, and, since he and his family are devout Muslims, they would prefer to do so before any difficult conversations are had with the doctor. Mrs. Ansari, obviously upset but remaining silent, makes no visible objection to her husband’s wishes. Mr. Ansari repeats his request that the doctor meet separately with him.
Dr. Fox, unsure of how to proceed but not wanting to stress Mrs. Ansari further, agrees to meet the husband separately after they complete their prayers.
When they finish praying, Mr. Ansari meets separately with Dr. Fox. She discloses the most recent scan results to Mr. Ansari. Dr. Fox recommends termination of the pregnancy. Stunned, Mr. Ansari sits in silence for several minutes.
After several moments, there is a knock on the door from Mrs. Ansari’s mother. The patient’s mother immediately discerns from the husband’s face that something is terribly wrong and speaks in Dari to Mr. Ansari. Dr. Fox requests for Mr. Ansari to translate.
Mr. Ansari reports that his mother-in-law insists that the medical information from the scans may be faulty, and it would be bad luck for her daughter to learn the scan results at this point. In fact, she asserts, her daughter may “lose the baby” from stress over the results. She wishes for the hospital to keep her stable and let the fetus continue to grow inside her uterus in order to see “what God intends.” She herself firmly believes that this baby is the long-anticipated boy that the entire family has been hoping for, and that God would not visit such an unhappy result on such a devout family.
Mr. Ansari then turns back to Dr. Fox and insists that the doctor refrain from telling Mrs. Ansari the scan results, assuring Dr. Fox that he will tell his wife himself once she is emotionally ready for the news.
Dr. Fox submits an emergency request to the hospital ethics committee. Your group is this committee. What is your recommendation regarding what Dr. Fox should tell Ms. Ansari and what is the best way for him to deal with this family and this situation?
https://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/video/self-serving-bias
https://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/video/role-morality
https://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/video/framing
https://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/video/overconfidence-bias
Your initial post will be evaluated using the following criteria. In the initial post the student scholar:
Uses the weekly materials to construct an academic argument that addresses the discussion question in a thorough and logical manner.
Correctly uses key terms and concepts. Thoroughly addresses all components of the prompt. Ideas are clear and on-topic.
Follows grammar conventions. The writing is concise and easy to read.
While normally a 200 word-count would suffice, please make sure to address the prompt. Likely you will need more that that for this discussion.
Your Initial post should make at least two comments/observations on each of the 4 videos (eight comments in total). Some of the things you might comment on would be your view of the accuracy of the video. Is it on target? Is it mistaken? Is it somewhat right, but missing something? What would that something be? You could also provide examples of your observation of the bias as well. ….These are just ideas to get you started.
PART 1 Question:
What do you find most revealing/interesting about capital punishment, in general? State three of your observations, elaborating briefly on each. Make sure to include inserts from the book pages and the video attached.
PART 2:
Review how the moral theories we have continued to study in this course impact on our understanding of the different beliefs regarding capital punishment. Carefully read from page 668 up through page 673.(attached) Which of the two moral perspectives would you rank as having the strongest foundations, that is, justifications? Why? Identify each as you explain why you think these two moral perspectives have the greatest merit. Explain why.
PART 3:
Finally, review the four-part argument on page 673 numbered 1-4.(attached) What makes this argument valid? Why? Read the textbook’s commentary which extends onto page 674.(attached) What do you see as the greatest tension in resolving this argument? Why?
PART 4:
Select ONE of the readings at the end of the chapter, preferably one with which you think might directly oppose what you personally believe about capital punishment. State three of your selected writer’s chief arguments, explaining why you personally think those arguments are flawed.
What measures should be taken to control the spread of infectious disease? How do you weigh public health and individual rights to make appropriate decisions?
This issue has come up before, in the inoculation debates in 1721. It became a more serious problem in the late 19th and early 20th century as microbiologists quickly realized that many diseases (cholera, tuberculosis, typhoid, diphtheria, etc.) were caused by contagious bacteria. Both the “Discussion on the Advisability of the Registration of Tuberculosis” and Leavitt’s “Typhoid Mary” discuss what powers health officials should have over the lives and rights of individuals.
These debates recurred repeatedly throughout the 20th century: can states require children to receive immunizations? Can patients with tuberculosis be confined to hospitals to receive antibiotics? (the answer to these questions is yes). They are again emerging as active policy questions: with COVID-19, will individuals be hospitalized involuntarily, can cities be quarantined? etc. Many of the most contentious past debates are related to HIV/AIDS.
The year is 1983. America (and soon the rest of the world) is in the throes of a new epidemic. Over the past few years, a series of people from specific risk groups have developed a new disease, AIDS, characterized by severe immunodeficiency and opportunistic infections. A new virus, lymphadenopathy virus, has been identified that might be the cause of AIDS; but no test yet exists to detect the virus in infected patients. Even though AIDS can be rapidly progressive, some patients can live for years after showing the first signs of the disease. This creates a dilemma for public health officials. Several people known to have AIDS, notably Gaetan Dugas, a male flight attendant from Montreal, continue to engage in high risk behavior (in his case, unprotected sex with multiple male partners).
Should public health authorities have the right to confine people, as was done with Mary Mallon, to keep them from spreading the disease? Should all patients with AIDS be reported to health officials, as has been done with tuberculosis and syphilis, do that their behavior can be monitored?
One official at the CDC is interested in your thoughts on the topic. Things are crazy here at the CDC, so keep your answer short (between 150-200 words).
Describe what you perceive of at this point in time to be your “Ethical System” as thoroughly and precisely as you can. Pull into your description clear language about your ethical presuppositions and what their bases are, as well as what you have observed happens when any of your presuppositions are difficult to apply equally or come into outright conflict. Feel free to offer brief examples from your actual experience and emphasize situations, priorities and aspects of your personal attachments that have relationship to actual or potential roles of leadership. As ever, it might be useful to refer to ideas, concepts or frameworks provided by the authors and readings we have encountered so far this semester.
Our team has experienced writers that follow all the codes used in professionalism when writing academic essays. We focus our services on satisfied clients. Through critical attention to detail, our writers abide by all the instructions given by clients. Additionally, the paper format is done according to the dictates of the client in respect to the set academic style. We are proud of completing outstanding top-quality papers.