1. Carefully read pages 255 through the middle of 258 of this article. Full citation: Katz, S. B. (1992). The ethic of expediency: Classical rhetoric, technology, and the Holocaust. College English, 54(3), 255-275. If you have questions, email me. Pay close attention to the sorts of analysis Katz conducts on the memo.
2. By Wednesday evening at 11:59PM, in a discussion thread, reply to the following prompts in 300 words or less (total- concision is key!):
a. Do you agree with Katz’s assessment of the memo? If so, what strategies did he use that were convincing? If not, why not?
b. Reread the memo only as well as this primer/framework on ethical decision making. Consider your own ethical frameworks for assessing such materials. Articulate your ethical framework and apply it to this memo as an additional analysis that buttresses, problematizes, or expands Katz’s analysis.
* Some key terms to look into, if this is new territory for you, are: communitarian, utilitarianism, deontology, consequentialism, justice as fairness, etc.
* You can also investigate principles such as justice, autonomy, beneficence, and malfeasance to frame your position.
d. Find and include a link to an example where technical or professional communication has obfuscated, elided, marginalized, or standardized ethical violations in writing. Share a link to the textual artifact.
https://www.scu.edu/ethics/ethics-resources/a-framework-for-ethical-decision-making/
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.