Category: Ethics

Learning Objectives:
CO 1: Analyze the major ethical theories in the history of moral philosophy as put forward by philosophers in key ethical texts.
CO2: Apply ethical theories to current issues and real-life scenarios.
CO 3: Evaluate different frameworks for developing one’s own ethical and moral philosophy.
Instructions: 
Choose one of the four templates, Markkula- APA or MLA, or Brown – APA or MLA, and follow directions. The information below offers an elaboration on these directions.
In a section titled “Theories” identify between 1 and 3 moral theories you will use to build your compass (deontological, utilitarian, common good, virtue, etc.) along with a short, documented definition for each theory. The definition should be in your own words. As citations are NOT just for quotations, be sure to give your resources proper credit with citations. 
In a section titled “Explanation” explain for each theory how it would help you make what you feel would be the right decision and in what situations (e.g. Using deontology at work to ensure the company’s policies are kept and its reputation is upheld; Using care ethics at home as a way to be equitable with the kids, etc.).
In a third section titled “Compass Applied” choose one topic from the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics (under “Ethics Spotlight”) or another pressing ethical situation you or others you know are facing at the moment. It must be a legitimate moral conundrum like keeping a secret about a cheating spouse, cheating on a spouse or being an accessory to a crime. You can also pick a current event like the possibility of electing a convicted felon as president, busing illegal immigrants from Texas to other states without their permission, or passing laws that allow teens to work longer hours and in dangerous situations. Then using either Framework for Ethical Decision Making (Markkula or Brown), walk through the steps to make an ethical decision and justify what you decide is the moral action to take in this situation. USE the template and DO NOT delete the section headings.

s your work on your case study, make sure you complete the following:
Choose the situation on which to write. Gather as much information as possible about the situation. You may use your text as well as outside sources. Analyze all of the elements surrounding the situation:
Stakeholders
Policies
Torts
Ethical issues
Spirituality views
Determine the final solution implemented. Critical thinking, decision making, and leadership styles will be explored. Gather information about why the solution worked. Construct a 4-page case study in APA format. You should have at least 3-4 references. Support your statements with evidence from the required studies and your research.
Examples of adverse events:
Medication errors. Medication-related harm affects 1 out of every 30 patients in health care
Surgical errors. Surgical errors continue to occur at a high rate; 10% of preventable patient harm in health care was reported in surgical settings.
Health care-associated infections. Health care-associated infections result in extended duration of hospital stays.
Sepsis. Of all sepsis cases managed in hospitals, 23.6% were found to be health care associated, and approximately 24.4% of affected patients lost their lives as a result.
Diagnostic errors. These occur in 5–20% of physician–patient encounters. Most people will suffer a diagnostic error in their lifetime. Patient falls. Patient falls are the most frequent adverse events in hospitals.
Venous thromboembolism is a highly burdensome and preventable cause of patient harm, which contributes to one third of the complications attributed to hospitalization.
Pressure ulcers. Pressure ulcers affect more than 1 in 10 adult patients admitted to hospitals. they have a significant impact on the mental and physical health of individuals, and their quality of life.
Patient misidentification.

Ethical Misconduct:
In your opinion, why is ethical misconduct more difficult to overcome than poor financial performance?
Answer with a minimum of 150 words. Points will be deducted from any question that does not meet the minimum word requirement. I look forward to reading your responses.

I am attaching all paper details, as well as the 3 citation sources needing to be used and the main source for the article.

Write a 900-1000 word response to the divorce sermons by John Piper and Kevin Deyong. Summarize each position and provide what you believe and why.

his assignment works in tandem with our other assignments.
Overview
Your task is to write a short argument paper that addresses a problem a thought experiment can help us think through. 
We want you to build a sound argument, one that is both valid and has true premises. The most interesting arguments are ones that propose imaginative but coherent solutions to questions we don’t have a census on yet. Sound arguments are ones that are both:
Have a valid form
Have premises that are true.
By valid form, all we mean is that the structure of the argument supports the conclusion. We always want to use and be able to show that our claims are true and that they reasonably reflect the best of what we think is going on in the world. Here, you’ll show that by providing citations and telling us why the citation is a good one.
Finally, arguments are not trophies, they are instances of communication between real and thoughtful people. Have that guide your work; imagine your reader is really curious about what you have to say and actually wants to collaborate with you on the problem.
Be curious!
Directions.
1. Think of some interesting philosophical question or social issue this class might help illuminate. You’ll be using one of the many thought experiments from the Choosing a Thought Experiment assignment to frame and reply to the question you select, so make sure they vibe well together.
2. Complete the Annotated Bibliography Entries 1 and 2 Worksheet and Annotated Bibliography Entries 3 and 4 Worksheet assignments to get a basic level of understanding the issues and concerns that your thought experiment might help us think through.
3. Complete Validity of Standard Argument to develop your own solution. (Do not cop out and leave it at “people disagree” or “it’s hard, so… yeah.” levels of analysis.  Be bold and make a good and reasoned proposal.)
4. With all the core work out of the way, it is time to write your paper! You need to use the following template:
Paper-Short Argument Template-v.1.0-FA23.09.docxDownload Paper-Short Argument Template-v.1.0-FA23.09.docx
5. With that loaded, watch the video directions:
Required Outline
You will need to use the following structure in your paper.  You will be graded on each component.
Components 1-4 are worth 25% of the assignment points.
Introduction
Sketch out what we are talking about and what’s at stake by writing out a few paragraphs that cover the following:
What thought experiment are you using?
What makes it interesting to you?
What area of philosophy or society does the thought experiment help us think about? What themes does the thought experiment address?
What difficulty in philosophy or problem in society do you want to address with the thought experiment?
What is the solution, otherwise known as the conclusion, to your argument?
How does the thought experiment help address the difficulty or problem?
The 3-line argument itself
Now you need to list your argument in what’s known as standard form. This will let us create and verify a valid deductive argument, one that is true any time you plug true premises into.  All you’ll have is a three-line argument or a chain of three-line arguments, where you re-use the conclusion of the first argument as a premise in the next.
So, all you need to do is list the
2 premises and
Conclusion
Explanation of Soundness
Pull out your Validity of Standard Argument. In it, you used the chapter from Weston on deductive arguments Download chapter from Weston on deductive arguments.
Write up a paragraph or two explaining how the argument form you used above has the same structure as one of the valid forms he lists.  The emphasis is on form and structure, not content. Take note of how the premises and conclusions are worded in each example from Weston.
Explanation of True Premises
The other part of a sound argument is that the premises are true.  You have already done the legwork here by completing the Selecting a Thought Experiment, Annotated Bibliography Entries 1 and 2 Worksheet and Annotated Bibliography Entries 3 and 4 Worksheet assignments. 
So, your task in this section of the paper is to explain how the reader can trust your premises from your argument. 
You will need to cite robustly from the readings here.  Remember, you need to convince an uninformed reader that they should accept the claims you make in a three-line argument.
Bibliography
This is a simple list of all sources you touched, thought about, quoted, and referenced while doing this assignment, both the ones listed below and the ones used to support your claims. Alphabetize these by author.
Self-Assessment
Thoughtfully and critically reflect on your work. How good is it? Is it good enough? Is it excellent? 
Submission format
You will submit this as a DOCX file[1] 
Resources on Paper Writing in Philosophy
Harvard Philosophy’s Guide to Writing Philosophy PapersLinks to an external site.
Myers, Brendan, Charlene Elsby, Kimberly Baltzer-Jaray, Nola Semczyszyn, and Alex Zieba. Clear and Present ThinkinLinks to an external site.g. Edited by Brendan Myers, Natalie Ellen, and Melinda Reidinger. Gatineau, Québec, Canada: Northwest Passage Books, 2017.
Smith, Nathan, Gregory Browne, Parish Conkling, Naomi Friedman, Allison Fritz, Daniel Garro, Jeremy Gallegos, et al. Introduction to Philosophy. OpenStax, 2022.
“Logic and Reasoning, Chapter 5.” in Introduction to Philosophy. OpenStax, 2022.
“Critical Thinking, Research, Reading, and Writing, Chapter 2.” In Introduction to PhilosophyLinks to an external site.. OpenStax, 2022.
Weston, Anthony. “Composing an Argumentative Essay.Links to an external site.” In A Rulebook for Arguments, 1992.
“Deductive Arguments.” In A Rulebook for Arguments. Hackett, 2009.
“Short Arguments—Some General RulesLinks to an external site..” In A Rulebook for Arguments. Hackett, 2009.
Self and Peer Assessment
You and two peers will assess your work. If there is a broad and reasonable consensus, I’ll go with one or an average of your scores. I may judge a different score is warranted for the final grade.
Criteria to Assess
Is the 3-line argument itself a sound (valid + true premises) argument?
Is the form explained with references to the valid form used?
Is the trustworthiness of the sources both accurate as well as thoughtfully reflected upon?
If this was given to a thoughtful friend of yours, would they learn something?
Here is how I want you to think through assessing work.
Grade Tier Level Notes
A (100%) Excellent This is reserved for work of exceptional quality. Think about the meaningful length, cleverness, critical and sound thinking, carefully examining evidence or reflecting upon claims.
B (85%) Pretty Good Work that goes well beyond merely meeting the requirements. This can be in terms of prose, clarity, wit, depth, extra research, etc
C (74%) Just Fine This is your baseline. Work that meets the requirements and does so reasonably well with sufficient depth to cover the basics of the assignment earns this grade. Make sure there are no major problems.
D (62%) Meh Something is wrong.  Most of the work isn’t bad, but there’s a problem. Maybe it is a lot of rhetorical questions in a row, wordy prose, etc.
High F (50%) Doesn’t Cut It Work that gets at the core of the assignment but is incomplete, incoherent, or has multiple significant problems.
Looooow F (0%) Can’t Even Work that is missing, plagiarized, or has extreme problems.

Topic B: Abortion
Abortion is always a sticky subject. Taking the notions of care ethics and relationships in moral matters into consideration, present a researched argument that there are times when having an abortion is the morally right thing to do.
Before you post, please thoroughly edit your writing to ensure it is professional and academic.