(1) Question:
Do human beings have the natural tendency to good, a natural tendency to evil, or some combination of tendencies? What are the implications of the answer for ethics?

(2) Conceptual Clarifications:
Natural Tendency - means to approach or direction with no other factors affecting

Good - favorable conduct

Evil - bad conduct

(3) Answer:
Human beings don't have an extreme of a tendency to be evil, only good. Everyone is all raised to do the righteous act of good. However, others might confuse the act or were raised in an evil system of some sort. Everyone has a good tendency to either help themselves or others with no intention on harming or affecting others. An evil tendency is knowing that the decision was unethical and knowing that the decision would only harm and/or affect others in a negative manner. In any kind of dilemma, we go through a mental process to weigh our consequences, ideals, obligations in order to make a more educated decision. When you do weigh the consequences everyone normally doesn't approve the consequences regarding getting penalized. Also no one doesn't have any intention on destroying there own ideals they grew up to learn and live by. Some might ruin obligations but normally don't because it might have a factor on their own dignity. So human beings at first glance of a dilemma have a tendency of good, unless being acted upon by another factor might make them make a more evil tendency. Aristotle's ethics states, "The good of human beings cannot be answered with the exactitude of a mathematical problem since mathematics starts with general principles and argues to conclusions"(Aristotle). This might sound like it contradicts my issue, but if the natural tendency has no factors or additional problems(arguing) then all that is left is just the good for human beings.

(4) Example:

A man is leaving a local Wal-Mart store, you've seen him around before, so you know hes a local of the area. Upon checking out he leaves a whole bag of expensive electronic items; mp3 players, video games, and accessories for phones. He most likely has bought these items for his children who are around your age, and you have an interest in all he had just purchased. You notice he leaves the bag by accident but the cashier is too busy to notice. Your immediate ethical dilemma is whether you should take the bag and keep it for yourself, or return the bag to the rightful owner. In your mind you quickly weigh your consequences, obligations and ideals. Being caught and accused of stealing is the last thing you would want, and that would be your good conscience shining right away before your bad conscience does. Your good conscience represents your good tendency and bad conscience represents your evil tendency. However if another factor was to come into play, your decision might be different. Lets say it is near Christmas, and you are in poverty and cannot get another for your family and friends. Seeing the bag full of merchandise might be a lot more appealing to take rather than weighing the consequences. So with a change in the scenario the tendencies change, but naturally really just depends on the position and scenario of the problem or dilemma. So the natural tendency with no other factors involved would be the intention of a good tendency.

(5) Word Count:
534

(6) Image:
Ying Yang represents the good and evil of decisions.

(7) References:

Ruggiero. (2008). Thinking Critically About Ethical Issues. McGraw Hill.

Kraut, Richard. "Aristotle's Ethics". Philosophy 302. 20 April 2009 http://philosophy.lander.edu/ethics/aristotle1.html.

Blog Assignment #10

Ethical Decision Making Framework
FOCUS: IDEALS
NAME: Michael Mills

STEP ONE: THE DETAILS OF THE CASE
(1) Choose one inquiry, from inquiries 1 - 28 (pages 114 - 117). Indicate which inquiry you chose, and then briefly explain it in your own words:
- I choose number 10, in which a officer overhears a description of a robber. The description sounds exactly like the officer's brother, and the officer pretends he did'nt hear any of the conversation from the victim to the desk sergeant.

(2) Stakeholders: Name each person, group, organization, etc., that has a stake in this outcome.
- The officer, officer's brother, the victim, police department, officers family, and desk sergeant.

(3) Are the details given sufficient? Why or why not?
- No, doesnt explain the type of robbery, whether it involved physical complications or just verbally.

(4) What additional questions does this inquiry raise?
- Was the victim hurt? Where was the officer's brother? How much was robbed?

STEP TWO: THE RELEVANT CRITERIA
1. Obligations (aka "duties"): Optional this week
2. Moral Ideals (aka "virtues"): See breakdown of ideals below
3. Consequences (aka "outcomes" or "results"): Optional this week

* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Prudence: Yes, the most appropriate response would have been telling the desk sergeant that the description sounds familiar to his brother, so if it was his brother it would be safe from anymore robberys from him.

* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Justice: Yes since were dealing with the enforcers of justice, the officer should have reported his brother.

* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Temperance: Yes, the officer lacked in temperance because of the love for his brother he had, he didnt want to turn his older brother in.

* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Courage: Yes, not directly but the officer did have to face the fact that he was not going to help this victim and fellow officers find the robber.

* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Loving Kindness: Yes, he took more of a relation to his brother in doing so gave his brother an act of kindness by not presenting him as the robber of that crime.

* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Honesty: Yes, the officer was never asked directly but still refused to assist.

* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Compassion: No, not enough information about the older brother to sense any compassion in the officers decision.

* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Forgiveness: No, not enough information about the officer and his older brothers relationship

* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Repentance: No, not enough information

* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Reparation: No, not enough information

* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Gratitude: No, not enough information

* Cardinal Ideal/Virtue of Beneficence: Yes, to have not so akward thanksgiving with family.

* Conflicting ideals--consider the relative importance of each; determine which ideal represents the greater good (or the lesser evil). See pages 110-11 for clarification.
- Justice and loving kindness conflict with one another. Justice would represent the greater good.
- Courage and honesty conflict. Honest would be the greater good.

STEP THREE: POSSIBLE COURSES OF ACTION
Alternative #1: Officer turns in the older brother to check with the victim to see if he actually is the robber?

Alternative #2: The officer leaves his decision the way it is, and let his fellow officers find the robber on their own.

Alternative #3: The officer lets his brother know what he heard, and finds out if his older brother really did commit the crime, if so, he could either help hide his brother, or give him a head start from the police.

STEP FOUR: THE MOST ETHICAL ACTION
Examine the action taken or proposed and decide whether it achieves the greater good (the most widespread "respect for persons")...if it does not, choose one that will, from your alternatives. Where the choice of actions is such that no good can be achieved, choose the action that will result in the lesser evil.
- The action that will result in lesser evil would be for the officer to report his older brother as a possible suspect that fits the description. In doing so, they can prove if his older brother is the robber and goods the victim, the police officers in that station, and the officer wouldnt have a much of a guilty conscience. If it turns out not to be the officers brother, the brothers would feel alot more calm about the situation.

SELF EVALUATION
1. In your own words, describe something new that you learned from this week’s assigned reading material and guidance.
- I learned that comparing each other ideals and virtues you find your greater good decision alot easier rather than deciding off your own personal choice.

2. In your own words, describe in detail some insight you gained, about the material, from one of your classmates' blogs this week.
- Jason Moniz, my good buddy right here, and also did the same inquiry as I. Jason and I also disagree when it comes to the virtue of reparation, he believes that on hearing about the crime, the officer feels obligated to undo his harm. I disagree because the officer did nothing to his brother, so there is no need from the officer to undo something he hasn't done.

3. Did you post a thoroughly completed post to your blog on time this week?
- Yes I completely finished the blog, and I have 28 minutes left till the exact due time. YaY! x]

4. Did you ALSO print this out, so you can bring it to class and earn total points?
- I sure will when I finish the last question from this assignment.

5. Of 25 points total, my efforts this week deserve:
- I deserve a 24 out of 25, I really understand more of all moral ideals that go through a ethical decision being made.

Blog Assignment #9

In this section, we're going to return for a moment to Chapter 7, to the section that discusses errors that are common in the analysis of moral issues (p. 89). Briefly explain each of the following errors in your own words, as if you were explaining the concept to a friend who had never taken this class (consider who, what, when, where, why, how, when); and then give an example of each one, preferably from your own past experience.

Unwarranted Assumptions:

- I would define unwarranted assumptions as more of a accidental mistake. It occurs only when one is being careless and unaware of what is really happening in the problem. An example of this would be a student reading a problem but read too quickly to understand the entirety of the problem.

Oversimplification:
- Oversimplification is a statement that is simplified too much. Simplification is usual when one wants to make it simpler to understand for themselves, but oversimplification is an accidental occurrence when one attempts to simplify too much that not even he/she can understand. An example would be a student copying notes down and attempting to simplify but simplifies too much to where not even he was able to understand it after reading it again.

Hasty Conclusions:

- Conclusion to where a strong personal belief clouds the his/her judgement on the issue. Usually caused from past experiences, or raised in a certain culture that would give a strong personal belief to make hasty conclusions. For example, a student makes a quick decision with a partner, without even acknowledging his partner his decision which was a hasty decision.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSIGNMENT PART TWO
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Briefly answer the following "chapter opening" questions, in your own words, based on what you learned by studying chapter eight:

1. What do we do in situations where there is more than a single obligation?
- When two obligations are present, sometimes they conflict with each other. It creates a dilemma that one has to weight them both.

2. How can we reconcile conflicting obligations?
- We decide among them through weighting the possible outcomes from the obligations. We weight them by choosing which obligation would be better suitable for the situation.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASSIGNMENT PART THREE
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. In a nutshell, what is the most important thing, for you, that you learned from this assignment?
- The most important thing I learned from this assignment is the different kinds of errors commonly made like; unwarranted assumptions, oversimplification, and hasty conclusions.
All of those errors will all result if one doesnt take the time to look over carefully and make a good decision.


2. How will you apply what you learned through this assignment to your everyday life?
- We already apply these concepts to our everyday life, some of us look over our work, and make sure we dont make the usual kinds of errors made. Then we all also deal with multiple kinds of obligations that conflict with one another, by weighting them to choose the best one for the situation.


3. What grade do you believe your efforts regarding this assignment deserve? Justify your answer.
- I believe i deserve a 23 out of 25, because I understood a majority of the assignment, and honestly did learn more about decision making and errors we normally make by accident.

Blog Assignment #6

Part 1
Question #1:
If an action that is praised in one culture may be condemned in another, would it be correct to say that all moral values are relative to the culture they are found in?

ANSWER 1A:
Yes it would be correct to say moral values are relative to the culture they are found in. Moral values are usually developed in someone as they are being raised. While being raised they are taught the moral values depending on their culture. That is why in most cultures there is some kind of folklore stories that teach a lesson of some sort. Sometimes within a culture, one must do an action that isnt acceptable in another culture in order to survive. Also, might need to be done to be accepted into that culture.


ANSWER 1B:
P: Moral values are taught at a young age just like other customs to that culture

P: The moral values are followed in order to survive

P: Also might be needed to be accepted

------------------------------

C: So, yes, i believe that moral values really are relative to the culture, no matter how obsurd the value might just be.


QUESTION #2:
Isn’t it a mark of ignorance to pass judgments on other cultures or to claim that one culture is better than another?

ANSWER 2A:
It isnt a mark of ignorance to pass judgments on other cultures but it is a mark of ignorance to claim that one culture is better than another. There is no fact that any culture is better than any other, maybe better in a certain location, but no universally better culture. It is ignorant to just claim a culture better than another just by personal taste, one must actually know and understand the history and process to come up with that specific culture.

ANSWER 2B:
P: No reasonable fact that any culture is better than the other

P: Personal views is unacceptable because its moral views from another culture

P: Cultures are sometimes developed to survive in that certain location

-------------------------------

C: So, this is a yes and no, it isnt wrong to pass judgements of a culture, but it is to claim one culture better than another.


Part 2
Arguable Issue: Whether or not to judge the morality of, Imelda Marcos, actions?

Answer A:
Yes we can judge the morality of Imelda Marcos actions. In the Philippines at that time, there was a majority of citizens living in poverty from a corupt government. Imelda knew of this, and though her conscience told her else, she went out and excessive amounts of money for her own personal gains. This might not be the same culture as ours, but its pretty universal that greed is a terrible thing and makes you make bad decisions sometimes.

Answer B:
P: Her conscience made a bad decision

P: She capitalized on the decision she made by spending more

P: Greed is bad

------------------------------

C: So yes we can judge the morality of Imelda actions

Blog Assignment #5

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-TjDGvh9q4

This video is a pure example of what we all really think about, when we do get pulled over by a police officer. Probably not as extreme as PeePee(Orange guinea pig) expressed, but the same ideas. While Buttercup(Yellow guinea pig) talks his self through the situation to calm his feelings down, and then tries to help PeePee do the same but with no effect. PeePee's feelings of fear got to the best of him and destroys his ability to think and reason. In doing so, he insults the officer and runs around the Winnebago. So this video can kinda relate to others, and the role of feelings we actually go through to making decisions. PeePee didnt actually have to make a decision, but he definitly made one for his self, and made the decision to over react.

Arguable issue: Whether or not this post deserves points...if yes, how many?
Conclusion: This post deserves 23 out of 25 points, or atleast a "B"
Premises: This post deserves 23 out of 25 points or a "B" because:
(1) It is easy to relate to
(2) I did all the work, and wrote a paragraph about the video I found
(3) To me, this video is hilarious!

Blog Assignment #4

Assignment 1
Relationship Between Laws and Ethics

1. Paragraph:
- Laws and ethics are very much related in major ways. Laws are basically positive ethical decisions decided by a group rather than just one person. All laws really depend on a group of ethical views to either get rid of or make up a law. Without laws those people who are not as wise and dont make morally right decisions would have no punishment to stop them from making those wrong decisions. So laws are morally right decisions, decided by a select group of individuals.

2. Paragraph & Link:
- I learned from the site that not all laws are morally right. Laws dont always cover unethical decision making. For example; lying, not keeping a promise, or not giving right information isnt illegal, but yet lying to an official, or hiding evidence is illegal.

http://members.tripod.com/~ansteadsue/ethics.htm

3. Arguable Issue: Whether or not we need ethics, given that we already have laws.
Conclusion: Yes we need ethics, though we are given laws already
Premises:
(1) Laws dont cover all unethical decisions
(2) Laws are decided upon selected officials, and doesnt always agree to everyones morals
(3) People will usually make a decision based on there morals, rather than following the law


Assignment 2
The Role of the Majority View

1. Paragraph:
- A majority view means the larger similar thought process made by a group of people. So in a group the larger selection have all seen and understand that view from all different positions or statues.

2. Arguable Issue: Whether or not the Majority View is a reliable basis for ethical decision-making.
Conclusion: A majoity view is not a reliable basis for ethical decision-making
Premises:
(1) Not everyones morals are the same
(2) The majority would not understand any personal feelings maybe involved
(3) Not all majority views are always the right decision

The Role of Feelings
1. Paragraph:
- Feelings are an individuals status. Feelings are what give us the ability to be so diverse from one another. Feelings are sensations of emotions that change depending on what feeling is occuring at that moment.
2. Arguable Issue: Whether or not our feelings are a reliable basis for ethical decision-making.
Conclusion: Feelings should be a reliable basis for ethical decision-making
Premises:
(1) It can help to support in making even better decisions
(2) Each decision should be decided by that individuals own personal choice, which typically involves feelings or emotions
(3) Personal decisions usually make the individual feel more comfortable with that decision


Assignment 3
The ability to express yourself in your own words is essential in this class. Did you put everything in your own words this time?
-Yes I thought up each answer on my own, only time I did look up something was for assignment two paragraphs, I only needed the definition of majority and feelings to guide me in the right direction for an answer.

What was easiest / hardest about this assignment?
- This assignment I would have to say was easy at times, since I just got to put whatever popped in my head first, and other times it was hard, because trying to come up with premises got a bit harder each time, then I had to make sure each premises followed the guidelines.

How will you apply what you learned through this assignment to your everyday life?
- Well even before this assignment, or even learned of these terms I was already adding it into my everyday life. Making choices on a group vote, and making choices off of feelings are very common in our society. Then knowing that not all laws are meant to restrict, gives me a bit more freedom in my decision-making.

How well do you think you did on this assignment? Explain.
- I am going to say i deserve a 23 out of 25, or atleast a "B" for this assignment. I answered each question in my own words, followed the 7 guidelines for each argument element form, and I answered each question about a paragraph each.

Blog Assignment #3

1. Explain what “to give an argument” means in this book.
- The book defines "to give an arguments" as "to offer a set of reasons or evidence in support of a conclusions." In others words, Weston wants us to view giving arguments as supporting details, or premises towards our own view.

2. What are the reasons Weston gives in support of his claim, “arguments are essential”?
- Weston claims arguments are essential because there are no such thing as pointless arguments. He reasons that views are totally different from one another, and are never evenly argued. Arguments use detailed views to reason why one view is better than the other. Once your down to the conclusion, the arguments is what gives reasons and details bout your conclusion.

3. Explain why many students tend to “write an essay, but not an argument”.
- Students tend to write an essay instead of an argument essay is mainly because they do not understand the small difference between a simple essay and an argumentive essay. Students are accustomed to always use straight up facts into essays, but in an argumentive your own personal reasons is what makes an argumentive essay argue.

4. Construct two short arguments (one "for" and one "against") as modeled in the Week 3 Assignment section in Blackboard. Put each one in "elements form".
- Against
Arguable Issue: Should hybrid classes be permitted for high schoolers?
Conclusion: Hybrid classes should not be allowed for high schoolers.
Premises: Hybrid classes should not be allowed for high schoolers because;
(1) It can cause more problems concerning of plagerism, and cheating,
(2) It can cause students to slack off more and become lazy, and
(3) Not everyone has access to the internet, or a computer.

- For
Arguable Issue: Should hybrid classes be permitted for high schoolers?
Conclusion: Hybrid classes should be allowed for high schoolers.
Premises: Hybrid classes should be allowed for high schoolers because;
(1) Gives students a more flexible schedule,
(2) Gives students more experience on computers and internet, and
(3) Can give students a break from the usual pencil and paper work.

5. Review the seven rules in chapter one. Briefly discuss how your argument demonstrates that each rule was applied, in the construction of your arguments above.
- I reviewed each of the seven rules and added it correctly into my 2 short arguments. Rule #1 is distinguishing premises and conclusion, I have that rule clearly labeled above. Rule #2 is to present my ideas in natural order, my "against" section is in natural order, but my "for" section doesnt have much of an order, because the premises dont unfold as easily. Rule #3 is having reliable premises, and my premises are fairly good reasons. Rule #4 is be concrete and concise, my arguments are pretty straight forward. Rule #5 is avoiding loaded language, and like I said for the last rule, mine is pretty straight forward. Rule #6 is using consistent terms are evenly used. Finally Rule #7 is sticking to the meaning of each term, and also like I said before, mine is pretty straight forward.

6. Review the three rules in the appendix named, “Definitions”. In your own words, discuss how you took these rules into consideration as you constructed your arguments.
- I took these rules and constructed my argument a bit better. I didnt use over loaded words but I was still specific enough to make it clear to the reader without contesting the term. I also didnt use definitions to explain everything to my readers, I clearly stated that for both "for" and "against."

7. Good posts demonstrate:
Sincere reflection, effort, and analysis

Answers that are substantial (at least one large paragraph each)

Consistent mention, citation, and integration of the assigned readings (explained in YOUR own words, though)
Correct spelling, grammar, and punctuation

Correctly titled posts!
How many points do you honestly feel your post this week deserves? Justify your answer.
- I honestly feel i deserve a 23 out of 25, or atleast a "B". I put almost everything into my own words, and also added my own personal reasonings into each answer. Most of my answers are atleast a paragraph long, or somewhat extended and detailed senteneces, I might have missed acouple of grammar and punctuation, that where some points will probably be marked off. Im also pretty sure I have the right title.