The main character of the novel In the Wake is named Arvid Jansen, and you are able to see the entire story told from within the character’s head. As you begin the story it is in a rather disoriented and confused state where you slowly are able to tell Arvid has lost his sense of time. He is found banging desperately upon the door or a job he has long since left. As the story continues you find yourself within flashbacks in his mind giving you little bits of new information each time, but still keeping the reader in the dark to the bigger issues. One of the biggest battles Arvid is dealing with the loss of both his family as well as learning how to cope with the divorce and distance from his wife and children. He is not alone, for his brother is mourning the loss as well and distancing from his own family as well. The brother, taking things more harshly than Arvid himself, attempts suicide and fails. Arvid is unsure how to handle this having already lost a lot, he is reluctant to go visit his brother in the hospital.At the end of the novel you see the two brothers come to the conclus...
In “Alternate Possibilities and Moral Responsibility”, Harry Frankfurt attempts to falsify the Principle of Alternate Possibilities. The Principle of Alternate Possibilities is the principle where a person is morally responsible for what he has done only if he could have done otherwise. A person would be morally responsible for their own actions if done by themselves. If someone else had forced that person to do the action, then the person doing the action is not morally responsible. Frankfurt does not believe this to be true and that the person doing the action is morally responsible. Frankfurt’s objections towards the Principle of Alternate Possibilities shows the refutation of natural intuition and places moral responsibility upon those who deserve it.
In her essay “A Question of Ethics,” Jane Goodall, a scientist who has studied chimpanzees for years, tries to resolve a heavily debated ethical dilemma: Under what circumstances is it acceptable to cause animal suffering to prevent human suffering? Her answer, however, remains uncertain. Although Goodall challenges scientists to avoid conducting unnecessary tests on animals, she does not explain the criteria by which scientists should determine necessity.
The primary issue that was addressed in the Journal article, “Moral Reasoning of MSW Social Workers and the Influence of Education” written by Laura Kaplan, was that social workers make critical decisions on a daily basis that effect others. They influence their clients’ lives through giving timely and appropriate funding to them and their families, through deciding should a family stay together or should they have a better life with another family, or connecting the client with appropriate resources that can enhance their lives. The article addresses data from an array of students from various universities. The researcher posed these questions; “Would social workers use moral reasoning (what is right and what is wrong) more prevalent if it was taught through an individual class during your MSW graduate studies, or if you obtain any other undergraduate degree, or if the ethic course was integrated in the curriculum?”
Throughout Kai Nielsen 's book: Ethics Without God, he attempts to use logic and reason to show that there can be ethics without God. Nielsen is a Professor of Philosophy at the University of Calgary. Having written several books and holding a P.h.D, it seems that he is a credible source of knowledge. Yet despite his seemingly good arguments, they turn out to be statements that can 't take scrutiny.
Without Conscience: Book Report Psychopaths all have something in common, and that's luring unexpected people in their traps. Its part of human nature to wonder and question the unknown. Psychopaths are a clear example of the unknown with their personalities and behaviors that are far from the norm on a continuum. We wonder what makes them do some of the unimaginable and horrific things to people and/or animals.
The vignette described a woman who comes in for a session in an agitated state. The psychologist has worked with her for a few weeks and she was not overtly suicidal or homicidal. On this visit, the psychologist decided to refer her to an inpatient due to her becoming unreliable and taking 17mg of Xanax in 30 hours instead of 2.5mg prior to her appointment.The decision making process for this vignette is very important because of the dilemma involved. The ethical decisions-making process I am going to engage in will be the Canadian Code of Ethics for Psychologist and the decision- making process that accompanies it.
In everyday experience one is likely to encounter ethical dilemmas. This paper presents one framework for working through any given dilemma. I have chosen to integrate three theories from Ruggerio Vicent, Bernard Lonergan and Robert Kegan. When making a deceison you must collabrate different views to come to a one conclusion. Ruggerio factors in different aspects that will take effect. Depending on which order of conciousness you are in by Kegan we can closely compare this with Ruggerio's theories also. As I continue I will closely describe the three theories with Kegan and how this will compare with Lonerga's theory combining the three. While Family,
Richard Kyte starts out his book An Ethical Life by saying “To engage in ethics is to engage in a particular type of human activity, one that involves thinking and talking about how we should act—what we should do, say, think, or even feel in certain situations.” Kyte also states that ethics is not easy, simple or straightforward in any situation. Furthermore, ethics can vary based on your perception of what is true and what is just. So, what is ethics exactly? What is my understanding of ethics? Where did I get this tool box of values, morals, ethical understandings and virtues?
Sometimes in life there are instances in which and individual must make a decision that will question their moral fiber. These instances could vary from whether or not to help others in need, decide whether an action is right or wrong or even when deciding who should live and who must die. How does one logically reason to an ethnical conclusion to these situations?
Review of “Situationism and Virtue Ethics on the Content of Our Character” by Rachana Kamtekatar
Philosophical Ethical Theories As we know, philosophers divide ethical theories into three major classes. They are Metaethics(descriptive), Conceptual(applied), and Normative(prescriptive). Metaethics basically takes the scientific approach to concocting where exactly our ethical principals and philosophies come from (Feiser, 2005). Descriptions and explanations of moral behaviors and beliefs are provided on the basis of facts studied by such specialists of anthropology, sociology and history (Beauchamp & Bowie, 2005).
Ethics is a branch of philosophy that deals with the moral principles and values that govern our behavior as human beings. It is important in the human experience that we are able to grasp the idea of our own ethical code in order to become the most sensible human beings. But in that process, can ethics be taught to us? Or later in a person’s life, can he or she teach ethics the way they learned it? It is a unique and challenging concept because it is difficult to attempt to answer that question objectively because everybody has his or her own sense of morality. And at the same time, another person could have a completely different set of morals. Depending on the state of the person’s life and how they have morally developed vary from one human
Human beings are confronted with numerous issues throughout his or her lifetime that would require him or her to examine the best action to take to avoid the damaging consequences. In most cases, individuals restrain his or her action to take into consideration the consequences that may lead to the right or wrong behavior. One’s ethical and moral standards are first learned at an early age from his or her culture, how he or she is raised, religious background, and social system. Scientifically, there are various ethical theories, such as the virtue theory, deontological ethics, and utilitarianism (Boylan, 2009). By understanding these theories one can compare, contrast and uncover the reasoning behind his or her ethical and moral standards.
Every day we are confronted with questions of right and wrong. These questions can appear to be very simple (Is it always wrong to lie?), as well as very complicated (Is it ever right to go to war?). Ethics is the study of those questions and suggests various ways we might solve them. Here we will look at three traditional theories that have a long history and that provide a great deal of guidance in struggling with moral problems; we will also see that each theory has its own difficulties. Ethics can offer a great deal of insight into the issues of right and wrong; however, we will also discover that ethics generally won’t provide a simple solution on which everyone can agree (Mosser, 2013).
The concept of morality differs for every individual. Morality is one 's concept of right and wrong as defined by the individual 's society, family, religion, ethnicity and even gender. It is also subject to the individual 's interpretation and experience. This lends credence to the idea that no one 's morality is exactly the same. The next logical question to answer would be how does one develop their morality? Developmental behaviorist such as Piaget and Kohlberg developed theories for this moral development and how it progresses from childhood into adulthood (Barsky, 2010). Kohlberg 's theory centers around three levels of growth: preconventional reasoning, conventional reasoning, and postconventional reasoning. The levels progress from