1 / 80

Week Two CJC4650 Ethics January 27, 2006

Mississippi Burning. Discussion(next Slide). Discussion. Divide into the defined groups. Each student presents their thoughts about the approach the FBI took.Did the end justify the means?Develop a description as to how group members made the decisions they made and present this to the class.Complete the Group Activity Report.(Stop).

hanh
Download Presentation

Week Two CJC4650 Ethics January 27, 2006

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

    1. Week Two CJC4650 Ethics January 27, 2006

    2. Mississippi Burning Discussion (next Slide)

    3. Discussion Divide into the defined groups. Each student presents their thoughts about the approach the FBI took. Did the end justify the means? Develop a description as to how group members made the decisions they made and present this to the class. Complete the Group Activity Report. (Stop)

    4. Ethics and Morals Ethics is a philosophy that examines the principles of right and wrong, good and bad. Think about if ethics applies to profession? Morality is the practice of these principles on a regular basis, culminating in a moral life. Capacity to make value judgments – determine right from wrong. Behavior that is consistent with ethical principles, and the relationship to professional ethics.

    5. Ethics and Morals Are morals personal? Do personal morals apply to the profession? What are the implications if they do?

    6. Professional Ethics A theory, or description that explains the worth or propriety of an act on the basis of the values inherent in such an act. The analysis or arguments used in support of ethical acts, or, conversely, in denouncing unethical acts. The inquiry into the nature of morality and how this fits into ethics, values, and beliefs of the profession. The identification of what is ethical in the profession and what makes an act ethical.

    7. Ethical Theory Ethical theories (professional ethics policies) reduce complexity by introducing general principles that can explain a wide variety of cases or situations. Ethical theories determine the validity (truthfulness of the theory) by checking internal consistency and ensuring the absence of contradiction in their premises and conclusions.

    8. Conflict of Interest? How do we determine a conflict of interest? Discussion (hold)

    9. Ethics – Black and White?

    10. Or are they?

    11. If ethics are gray: Are values, beliefs, morals, and ethics relative? If they are relative – is anything always moral or ethical?

    12. If ethics are gray: What causes one system to be more acceptable than another? How do we decide – or is everything relative?

    13. Relativism: Do we just accept everything? Is it possible to review what is happening and to determine some actions that apply to all?

    14. If ethics are relative? How do we determine what is unethical? Do we turn to the professional standards? Other thoughts? (hold)

    15. Three Contexts of Understanding Justice, Crime and Ethics

    16. Or is it: Three Contexts of Understanding Justice, Crime and Ethics

    17. Five Goals of Exploring Ethics Greater awareness of moral/ethical issues. Develop critical thinking/analytical skills. Become personally responsible. Understanding coercion in criminal justice. Develop wholesight. (continue)

    18. Five Goals of Exploring Ethics Greater awareness of moral/ethical issues. When is something an ethical issue? Open discussions of them as issues. Willingness to see that others views are understandable and possibly correct?

    19. Five Goals of Exploring Ethics Develop critical thinking/analytical skills. Critical thinking and analytical skills help us to distinguish concepts such as justice and liberty from principles such as “the ends do not justify the means.” These skills allow us to think of how others may view us, now or in the future.

    20. Five Goals of Exploring Ethics Become personally responsible. As we become more responsible, we must increase our ability to respond. We are more empowered and have more hope for the future.

    21. Five Goals of Exploring Ethics Understanding coercion in criminal justice. Having the power to force people to do things they don’t wish to do and how we exercise our discretion and authority.

    22. Five Goals of Exploring Ethics Developing wholesight. Make use of our intuitive nature. To explore issues not only with our minds but with our hearts. Both work together for the common good.

    23. Differences of View Where do all of the below fit together? Are these different? Would one make different decisions based on the contexts listed below? Religious Questions Social Questions Legal Questions Ethical Questions Moral Questions

    24. Decision by Consensus What is Consensus? All participants contribute. Everyone’s opinions are used and encouraged. Differences are viewed as helpful rather than hindering. Those members who continue to disagree after full discussion indicate that they are willing to experiment for a prescribed period of time. Enough time will be spent that all voices are heard and understood before an effort to finalize a decision is made by the group. All members share in the final decision.

    25. Decisions by Consensus Advantages: Members are more likely to support the decisions. Provide for a win-win solution. Facilitates open communication. Requires member to listen and understand all sides of the issue. Sets the stage for action – Who, What, Where, When.

    26. Decisions by Consensus Disadvantages: Takes more time. Trust is needed. Group leaders must facilitate rather than control.

    27. Decisions by Consensus Steps: Describe and define the problem, situation, or issue. Brainstorm a list of alternatives. Review, change, consolidate, rewrite and set priorities. Make a decision. Evaluate later.

    28. Cases – Handout (Case Series one) Discuss (next slide) Tasks: The Pandemic. Develop a listing of how you make an ethical decision. Use the Group Activity Report form.

    29. Process Think about the process you used to make a decision. What did you think about in deciding what to do? What was important? Why was it important? (next slide)

    30. What is an Ethical Framework A list of thoughts, items, etc. that help you decide if something is an ethical issue. A list of things to consider when making an ethical decision. A way of deciding if something is an ethical issue. A method of determining if an action is ethical. A way of seeing the forest, for the trees. (stop)

    31. Principles of Justice Richard Wright

    32. Equal Dignity of Persons Every individual member of the human species, as a rational being, has the “dignity of being a person.” This dignity flows form the consciousness of one’s choosing and acting self as a self-determining being. The ultimate good for any person is fulfillment.

    33. Common Good A state is a community of families and aggregations of families in well-being. Such a community can only be established among those who live in the same place and intermarry. A person alone cannot be self-sufficient, not only because of individual needs and common interests, but also because “man is by nature a political (social) animal.” Equal freedom theory focuses on the promotion of each person’s equal freedom to pursue a morally meaningful life.

    34. Justice and Law Each person has the right, indeed the ethical duty, to assert her moral worth in interactions with others by, among other things, resisting non-rightful coercion by those others.

    35. What is Morality? Michael Perry

    36. Morality is: The set of duties to others (not necessarily just other people – the duties could run to animals as well, or importantly, to God) that are supposed to check our merely self-interested, emotional, or sentimental reactions to serious questions of human conduct. Acting to serve to serve the welfare of others, especially strangers – and, sometimes, the sole reason – is religiously based reason; it is, moreover, a reason that appeals directly to one’s emotional concern for the Other, as sister/brother.

    37. Morality is: Reasons: Morality demands that one do so (an act to assist another). One would be acting irrationally if one chose to not do so. Innate human altruism.

    38. Elements of Ethical Reasoning – What needs to be taken into account. Purpose – goal, objective. Question at issue – problem, issue. Information – data, facts, observations, experiences. Interpretation and Inference – conclusions, solutions. Concepts – Theories, definitions, axioms, laws, principles, models. Assumptions – presupposition, taking for granted. Implications and Consequences – what may happen. Point of View – frame of reference, perspective, orientation. What should happen.

    39. Process (one Concept)

    41. Case Series (Power Point) Class divide into established groups. Group discuss. Report back to class. Decision How did you make the decision? The process of decision making, apply what you developed last time. Complete Group Activity Report. (Sexual Assault Case)

    42. End of Exercise Stop

    43. History of Ethics An overview of what others have said and thought.

    44. The Masters

    45. Utilitarianism and Deontological Ethics Utilitarianism: All action is for the sake of some end, and some rules of action, it seems natural to suppose, must take their whole character and color from the end to which they are subservient. (Mill)

    46. Utilitarianism and Deontological Ethics Deontological: deos meaning duty, logos meaning study. Human beings sometimes have duties t perform certain actions regardless of the consequences. Even if the action does not result in the greatest good for the greatest number. (page 17)

    47. Utilitarianism and Deontological Ethics Groups: Take 15 minutes and develop a strategy to explain the two theories. Tell us if they fully apply and should we follow them? Complete the Group Activity Report. (stop)

    48. Ethics Hall of Fame

    49. Ethics Hall of Fame

    50. Socrates 469 B.C. – 399 B.C. Raised questions about the meaning of life. Challenged people to rethink and reasons their lives rationally. Believed that an unexamined belief is not worth following. Socratic Reasoning: What is it? What is it good for? How do we know?

    51. Socrates 469 B.C. – 399 B.C. A Life Unexamined is Not Worth Living – how applied to our situation? A belief unexamined is not worth following? A policy unexamined is not worth executing? A practice unexamined is not worth adhering to? We need to see that all citizens have liberty and justice? Call attention to system failures?

    52. Socrates 469 B.C. – 399 B.C. What is it? What is it good for? How do we know?

    53. Ethics Hall of Fame

    54. Plato 428 – 348 B.C. Plato’s hierarchy: - Reasoning (top) Scientific Knowledge Belief Conjecture and Imagination Reasoning transcends science and overrides its investigatory value.

    55. Plato Morality and Justice If you want justice you must be moral. The Supremacy of Knowledge There is no convincing evidence that absolute truths exist at all. Even if these truths exist, there is no demonstrable way by which they could be learned and applied in a uniform manner. There is no guarantee that philosophy-kings would not be corrupted at a later date, given the absolute power they would be able to wield.

    56. Plato The Tripartite Soul and Achievement of Justice Spirit (passion), appetite (desire), and reason, (intellect). The Idea of Goodness Goodness is higher than virtue. Plato’s Theory of Ideals, Forms and Essences. There are absolute moral truths

    57. Ethics Hall of Fame

    58. Aristotle 384 – 322 B.C. Nature of Philosophical and Political Inquiry. There is an ultimate good. Happiness and the Concept of Eudemonia. (Eudemonia) concept of well-being. Moral Character as the Temple of Virtue Character – temple of virtue

    59. Aristotle 384 – 322 B.C. Moral Character as the Activity of the Soul. The soul is divided in three parts: sensation, desire and reason. Moral Virtues and the Golden Mean. Between the ends of inadequacy and excessiveness.

    60. Aristotle 384 – 322 B.C. Moral Development as the Actualization of Potential. Moral character grows from modest means as the acorn into the Oak tree. Man’s Three Dimensions, a Profile of Moral Character. Knower of truth Doer of goodness Maker of beauty

    61. Aristotle 384 – 322 B.C. Aristotle’s Rules of Syllogism Classic Rule Major Premise: All humans are mortal Minor Premise: Socrates is a human Conclusion: Socrates is mortal

    62. Ethics Hall of Fame

    63. Morality and Ethics Ethics is a philosophy that examines the principles of right and wrong, good and bad. Morality is the practice of these principles on a regular basis, culminating in a moral life.

    64. Morality and Ethics Standards of morality are not formulated by a legislative act, nor are moral standards subject to review by a court of law. Immoral acts are sanctioned by words or gestures of social disfavor, disapproval, or ostracism, illegal actions are punishable by legal sanctions.

    65. Morality and Ethics Situational Views of Morality Sophists argued that: All things are the creation of one’s consciousness at the moment. The individual is the measure of all morals. Things are not what one says they are. All truths are relative to the social, cultural, and personal predisposition of the individual. (all things are relative?)

    66. Morality and Ethics Situational Views of Morality (The ends of liberty and justice that justify actions in one situation may not justify it in another – Mississippi Burning?) The values of goodness, truth, and humanity are all neutral. One person’s moral judgment is as good as another’s. Morality depends on who one is, where one is, and the point at which a decision is made. Spiritual and philosophical doctrines are non-binding and, therefore, of no particular significance.

    67. Ethics Hall of Fame

    68. Goodness and Choice The question is – all goodness equal? Enforcement of all laws. Ignoring the acts of one’s workers – that are illegal, or unethical? Intrinsic – objects, actions, or qualities that are valuable in themselves. Non-intrinsic are objects, actions, or qualities, the value of which depends upon serving as a means for bringing about or maintaining an intrinsic good, (money, food, discipline and personal loyalty).

    69. Goodness and Choice Intrinsic good supersedes non-intrinsic good Personal loyalty is a non-intrinsic value that only serves the need to maintain discipline. Honesty, on the other hand, is an intrinsic value that is good in itself. (think of the Watergate scandal, or Enron) Levels of goodness (or evil) are hierarchically ranked. A lower-grade good cannot be justified in the presence of a higher-grade good. Judging grades of happiness, there is the physical, emotional and intellectual level – with intellectual being the highest.

    70. Goodness and Choice Killing: Self defense? (probably highest level of agreement in class?) Euthanasia (the Florida case) How does one decide (level of agreement)? Abortion (level of agreement)? Capital punishment (level of agreement)? Who is right? Why are they right?

    71. Ethics Hall of Fame

    72. Actions and Consequences “Good” actions that lead to “good” consequences. “Bad” actions that lead to “bad” consequences. “Bad” actions that lead to “good” consequences. “Good” actions that lead to “bad” consequences. (continue)

    73. Actions and Consequences Cases One and Two are relative simple. The other two are not. “Bad” Actions/”Good” Consequences: Physical discipline leading to better behavior of a child? Dropping of the atomic bomb on Japan? Disciplining of employees on the job? Others? “Good” Actions/”Bad” Consequences: Giving money to a street person? Others?

    74. Actions and Consequences Utilitarianism: Act-utilitarianists – judge the morality of an act only on the basis of its propensity to produce happiness or pain. Thus, “bad” acts can not lead to good. Rule-utilitarianists – if the rule is conducive to good consequences, then the act is justifiable.

    75. Ethics Hall of Fame

    76. Determinism and Intentionalism Determinism: All thoughts, attitudes, and actions result from external forces that are beyond human control. Predestination – an interpretation of a “gods” will? Astrological forces? Cosmic power? Genetic conditions? Climate and geography? Society and culture? Education and socialization? Some view these as forces, not facts, others view these as absolute.

    77. Determinism and Intentionalism Intentionalism: External forces of heredity and environment are merely influences. By virtue of human intellect, people are still capable of reasoning their way out of the grip of the “elements” and making good choices.

    78. Ethics Hall of Fame

    79. The Ethical Person Maslow’s Profile of the ethical person.

    80. Maslow’s Description (Selected listing) Delight in bringing about justice. Delight in stopping cruelty and exploitation. Like happy endings. Hate sin and evil. Good punishers of evil. Try to set things “right” Manage to love what the world is and try to improve it. Respond to a challenge of a job. See hope. Enjoy bringing about law and order in chaotic situations. Like doing things well.

    81. The End

More Related