Use the two ethical theories Rawls Theory of Justice and Utilitarianism

Use the two ethical theories Rawls Theory of Justice and Utilitarianism

Use the two ethical theories Rawls Theory of Justice and Utilitarianism to explain why so much of humanity still lives in poverty and discuss how the existence/persistence of global poverty is endorsed by each theory’s central tenets.

Summarize each theory (Rawls Theory of Justice and Utilitarianism) and explain the connections (or disconnections?) between the theory and the existence/persistence of global poverty.  Considering these three reasons: minimum wage, investing in affordable, high-quality childcare and early education. To enhance the argument. 

  1. Do you consider poverty to be a valid global ethical concern? Is it an issue that “we are all concerned about” as Widdows posits in her introduction (Widdows, 1)? Or do you think poverty is a local issue or an issue to be addressed by people who are poor?
  2. What ethical frameworks support your answer? Highlight elements of ethical theories that support your position on whether or not poverty is a valid global ethical concern.
  3. Describe any personal, core beliefs that affect your own views on global poverty. Where did these beliefs come from?
  4. Connect your beliefs to the ethical framework(s) that most resonate for you. Highlight elements of theories that best support your personal beliefs.

Describe the organizational structure and hierarchy.

 

The Organization

[WLOs: 1, 2, 3] [CLOs: 2, 3]

Submit an academic paper using APA style and formatting that is 1,750 to 2,450 words long and covers the following topics:

First section: Write an original description of your organization that encompasses the mission, values, and purpose that you might find on the “About Us” page of the website, but in terms that are more practical. The language should be descriptive and from an insider’s point of view rather than persuasive, which is the approach that information on organization websites often takes. What is the purpose of the organization? What does it produce? What services does it provide? What audience does it appeal to or serve?

Second section: Describe the organizational structure and hierarchy. Who are the key leaders? What do each of the different divisions or departments do? How do different employees, departments or divisions work together? What communications strategies does the organization employ? If possible, diagram the decision-making and/or communication hierarchies.

Third section: Describe the organizational culture. What are the demographics and, if relevant, psychographics of the employees or volunteers? How do they relate to each other and to management? Do they communicate well with one another? Identify the strengths and weaknesses in the organizational culture.

Fourth section: Describe whether your company will follow a Social Entrepreneurship or traditional entrepreneurship model.

Fifth section: The focus of this course is social networking and social media. If there are problems or issues within the organization that might be solved using social media strategies, begin to examine them here.

Resources:

TEXTBOOK
Keyes, J. (2013). Enterprise 2.0: Social networking tools to transform your organization. CRC Press.

OTHER ARTICLES

 

Bacq, S., & Janssen, F. (2011). The multiple faces of social entrepreneurship: A review of definitional issues based on geographical and thematic criteria. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 23(5-6), 373-403.

  • The full-text version of this article is available through the EBSCOhost database in the Ashford University Library

Boyd, D. (2010). Streams of content, limited attention: The flow of information through social media. EDUCAUSE Review, 45(5), 26–28. http://www.educause.edu/ero

Trentin, G. (2009). Using a wiki to evaluate individual contribution to a collaborative learning project. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25(1), 43–55. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2008.00276.x

Zeyen, A., Beckmann, M., Mueller, S., Dees, J. G., Khanin, D., Krueger, N., Zacharakis, A. (2013). Social entrepreneurship and broader theories: Shedding new light on the ‘bigger picture’. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 4(1), 88-107. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.646.1821&rep=rep1&type=pdf

xplain scientific cognitivism and how proponents of such a view would explain our aesthetic appreciation of the Grand Canyon

social science

Instructions:

– Explain the Idea, Address the prompt in the Q, Talk about the argument or any other supporting question, ALL IN YOUR OWN WORDS. 

– DO NOT use Quotes!!!

– Be sure to answer all portions of the prompt!

– Each question answer should be elaborated

– Chapters 5-8

1. Explain what a paradox is and then explain the particular issues the paradox of fiction highlights. List the three premises of the paradox of fiction. Describe one of the responses to the paradox covered in class and identify which premise it targets. Be sure to fully explain the response! Do you agree with the response you explained? Why or why not?

2. What is the issue that the moralist and autonomist disagree about? Explain what the general position of the moralist is and then explain the general position of the autonomist. Describe one particular moderate moralist view and give an example of when a work would be deemed to be immoral on that specific account. Be sure to fully explain view! Do you agree with the moralist or the autonomist, and why?

3. What is cultural appropriation? Name at least two different kinds of appropriation and give a description of each along with an original example of each (ones not found in the book or lecture). Identify and explain the two conditions when cultural appropriation causes problems that James O. Young discusses. What is the distinction Young makes between reasonable and unreasonable offense? Give an example of each.

4. Explain at least two ways that it was argued that experiencing nature is different than experiencing works of art. Why must we treat natural objects different than artworks? Explain scientific cognitivism and how proponents of such a view would explain our aesthetic appreciation of the Grand Canyon (be specific!). How would a proponent of one of the non-cognitivist theories presented (specify which theory) respond to the scientific cognitivist in this specific example? Do you agree with the scientific cognitivist, or the non-cognitivist, and why?

Contact offense against child

Locate current crime statistics in your area(TEXAS)  for one of the offenses:

  • Contact offense against child
  • Non-contact offense against a child
  • Contact offense against an adult
  • Non-contact offense against an adult

Write a 525- to 700-word paper on the specific type of offense.

Include the following:

  • Research this type of offense. What are the typical motivators for the offender?
  • Describe the characteristics of offenders who typically commit the selected offense.
  • Describe the victim’s profile (as connected to an offender’s victim pool). Include common reactions of a victim related to a sexual offense.
  • Describe the different types of laws related to the selected offense and how the offense is normally prosecuted.
  • Describe the effectiveness of statutes and laws in reducing the occurrence of sex crimes.

Sources required a minimum 2 sources.

Format any citations in your paper consistent with APA guidelines.

Define the words pseudoscience and science in a fair-minded and reasoned way.

For many years the National Science Foundation (NSF) has con-ducted surveys of the public attitudes and understanding about science and scientific knowledge. The results inform policy development, legislation, and funding for scientific research and science education in the nation. NSF reports: “In 2002 the survey showed that belief in pseudoscience was relatively widespread. . . . For example 25% of the pub-lic believed in astrology . . . , at least half the people believe in the existence of extrasensory perception, . . . 30% believe that some of the UFOs are really space vehicles from other civilizations, . . . half believe in haunted houses and ghosts, faith healing, communication with the dead, and lucky numbers.” Form a small working group with one or two others in your class. Do steps 1, 2, and 5 as a group. Divide the work among yourselves for steps 3 and 4.  1.  Review the public information on the NSF Web site, particularly the public understanding of science and technology part of the NSF’s most “Science and Engineering Indicators” report.  2.  Define the words pseudoscience and science in a fair-minded and reasoned way.  3.  Survey 10 of your friends and family members about their views on astrology, extrasensory perception, and ghosts. In each case invite them to use their critical thinking skills and explain why they believe what they believe.  4.  Objectively summarize the reasons pro and con for each of the three topics.  5.  Using the Holistic Critical Thinking Scoring Rubric in Chapter 1, evaluate the quality of the thinking pros and cons for each of the three topics. Explain your evaluation.

Plato’s Allegory of the Cave

Please submit a short commentary (around 3-4 pages long) on the following passage in Plato’s Republic —

The passage, commonly known as Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, is found near the beginning of Book Seven. The passage begins on pg. 193 of your paperback book (ed. Bloom, Plato’s Republic), pg. 216 of the PDF, or the beginning of pg. 514a in the margins, “Next, then, I said, make an image of our nature in its education and want of education…” and continues to the middle of pg. 197, pg. 220 of the PDF, “… And accomplishes this object. – So it seems, he said.”, that is, the middle of pg. 518d in the margins.

Your commentary should achieve two goals.

One is descriptive. You should tell me what is happening in these paragraphs in simple language. Figure out what the views  are and describe them to me. What is the context of the discussion, or how does the passage I’ve selected relate to bigger thematic issues at work in the Republic? Perhaps you want to draw attention to thematic issues that are present in earlier or later Books as well. Aim to restate the protagonist’s view here in a few short sentences before further describing the structure and content of the passage selected. Accuracy is important, but so is recognizing when the speaker is, in fact, developing a valuable aspect of their argument. Your primary aim here is to CLARIFY the selected material. Think about what steps the discussion takes, and why it takes those steps.

The second goal is evaluative. You should tell me how strong you think SOCRATES’ argument(s) is (or are), and why. Is he persuasive? How compelling is the evidence he provides for his view(s)? Consider possible objections to your own position, and consider how you can stand up to criticisms of your EVALUATION.

Remember to use extra sign-posting! This means: tell me what you are going to say, what you are saying, and what you’ve just said. Being clear with the structure of your paper is a big asset. And remember to go over any notes you have from the reading, from the discussion board posts (where we have covered this material), from earlier class meetings, etc. Above all, engage directly with the text whenever possible. This means CITING the text. Additional secondary sources are NOT required, but are always welcome. However, if you are CITING the text, this means you will need minimally a single-entry bibliography, where you indicate the text you are citing.

explain the meaning of freedom.

Please answer three out of these eight questions. Please do not answer the topic you discuss in your final paper.

  1. In light of what we have read this semester explain the meaning of freedom.
  2. On abortion: Steinbeck bases her defense of the morality of abortion on the “interest view,” and makes a strong argument against the anti-abortionist “potentiality argument.” On the on the other hand, thinking he has overcome the “interest view” and the “potentiality argument,” Don Marquis argues that abortion is immoral. Steinbeck disagrees. Explain the issues involved in the “interest view’ and the “potentiality argument.”
  3. On the death penalty: In our discussion of the death penalty, Bright emphasized (among other reasons) the failures of the system to argue against death penalty, while Pojman focused on the importance of “retribution” and “deterrence.” Explain the argument you find more persuasive?
  4. Gun Control: Explain how the notions of right and harm affect the two views of gun control that we have seen this semester.
  5. Animal rights: Peter Singer and Posner agree that the animal industry should revise their policies regarding animal welfare but they strongly disagree regarding how we should relate to animals in general. Discuss the differences between these two authors regarding the status of animals and animal welfare.
  6. On terrorism: Explain how the definition of terrorism affects the discussion about the moral status of terrorism.
  7. On performance enhancing drugs: Explain the role that the idea of freedom plays in the discussion of the morality of PEDs (Performance Enhancing Drugs).
  8. Prostitution: Ericsson’s interpretation of prostitution is based on the contractarian liberal idea of individualism, equality and free market sexuality to sexual life, but Carole Pateman thinks that he has misunderstood the problem. Why does she say that? Answer the question using the terminology involved in the discussion.

How should we demarcate genuine science from pseudo-science?

This essay is due noon Monday 14th December.

Choose one of the questions/topics below and write a 1000-1500 word essay with at least 3 credible sources. Make sure to clearly state the question you are answering at the start of your essay. The essay will be submitted through Turnitin so no plagiarizing. Use MLA format.

Questions:

(1) What is the ‘Mary’ problem against physicalism, and how effective is it?

(2) What are philosophical zombies, and what problem are they meant to pose for physicalism? How plausible is the zombie argument?

(3) What is the argument from illusion, and how is it used to motivate indirect realism over direct realism? Is it effective?

(4) What is the problem of fiction, and how do you think one should respond to it?

(5) Can the B-series capture everything there is about the nature of time? If not, what does it leave out?

(6) What are abstract objects? Are there any?

(7) What is the most persuasive mereological account of the relationship between parts and wholes? Defend your answer.

(8) What is an indispensability argument? What problems do such arguments face?

(9) How should we demarcate genuine science from pseudo-science?

(10) Critically evaluate the merits of scientific realism by focusing on what you take to be either the strongest argument in its defense or the strongest argument against it.

(11) Why is there something rather than nothing?

(12) What is the problem of evil, and how compelling is it as an argument for God’s non-existence?

(13) Is it ever rational to have faith in God?

(14) Does immortality have any essential role to play in an account of the meaning of life?

(15) Is death necessary for one’s life to be meaningful?

(16) If all that exists is the natural world, then can life ever be meaningful?

Case Study Paper and Presentation – Choose Your Own Biomedical Ethics Case

Case Study Paper and Presentation – Choose Your Own Biomedical Ethics Case

Bauer – Bioethics

Length: approx. 1000-1500 words

Case Study – Submission:

1) Please submit your case study paper under Assignments on Blackboard.

2) Also, please post a link to your case, if you found it online, in the discussion forum for this assignment on Blackboard.  If you developed the case, post a brief summary of the case in the discussion forum.

Case Study – Paper: In this assignment, choose a case in biomedical ethics and analyze it by discussing a couple of important ethical concepts (from class) that are relevant to the case. Then, say what you believe would be ethically right in the case, given your analysis.

In this assignment:

1. Choose a biomedical ethics case of interest.

a. A “biomedical ethics case” is a specific situation inhealth care that involves an interesting ethical question.  It can also be a case that is more broadly related to human health.  It does not have to be a case from clinical medicine.

b. Find the case/issue online, in a book, or develop one yourself.  Online news sources are great places to find cases. Just search for a topic of interest.  Find a case with a few details and not too much ethical analysis, related to an issue that interests you.

c. I have listed a couple of good websites on bioethics on Blackboard’s announcement page. Remember, you may create an interesting case of your own, for example, from stories you’ve heard (with identities removed).

d. Choose a case that has not been thoroughly covered in class, or if it has been, use arguments that have not been thoroughly discussed.e. Please don’t summarize the case in the assignment.  A few critical elements of the case are fine. Instead, post the case on the discussion board for the assignment.

2. What are the important ethical issues in the case you have chosen?

a. Structure your assignment to focus on 2 or 3 of the most important or interesting ethical issues within your case.   Go into some detail in explaining how the ethical issues pertain to your case.

b. Use ethical concepts from class. * Please be clear about the connection between the case and the ethical concepts. You may use the 4 box Method or 4 Principles to identify ethical issues in your case.  Please only discuss elements that are relevant to the case.

c. Your case may provide a different way of looking at traditional ethical concepts. Alternatively, do any particular ethical concepts help reveal something interesting about your case?  In your analysis, keep these questions in the back of your mind, and address them if it is helpful.

3. Given the ethical analysis above, what is ethically right in your case?

What should be done? Why?  If you cannot take a side, what makes the ethical issues so hard?

 In Plato’s Apology, we hear Socrates’ tale of a philosopher’s efforts to bring others in his society to appreciate the value of seeking the truth.

 In Plato’s Apology, we hear Socrates’ tale of a philosopher’s efforts to bring others in his society to appreciate the value of seeking the truth.

Topic:  In Plato’s Apology, we hear Socrates’ tale of a philosopher’s efforts to bring others in his society to appreciate the value of seeking the truth.  In Plato’s Allegory of the Cave (Republic VII), we see the prisoners at the bottom of the cave entrapped and subject to error and illusion.  Explain how either or both of these works can help us understand the challenge to truth that has developed in our time.  Pay particular attention to Lynch’s concern that we’ve lost track of the sense that we “share a common reality”.

Length:  Short paper of 2-4 pages.

Format:  Very tight, traditional paper using an introduction, body, and conclusion. Guidelines will be found in the Writing Modules of this course in Course Resources.

Make sure to show familiarity with the course materials we’ve used up to this week.  Please use 2 sources in addition to the materials in our course.