Sunday, May 6, 2012

Blog 6

Blog 6 - How did the third contemporary issue effect your principles? What more have you found that you need to reasonably respond to these moral issues beyond a set of principles? Are their other skills or knowledge that will make you a more effective ethical being? What are they?

The third contemporary issue we discussed in class was the death penalty. Unlike both of the articles we dealt with, I am completely opposed to the death penalty. In my eyes it doesnot make sense to prove killing is wrong by killing again. Granted the murderer or convict may have done something so awful that people may think they do not deserve to live anymore I cannot agree. I personally feel that they would suffer enough if not more by spending the rest of their lives in prison. Another reason I am opposed to the death penalty is because sometimes people could be framed or the evidence may not be accurate and the wrong person could be sentenced for the wrong crime.This wrongly accused person could possibly be sentenced to the death penalty and then afterwards new evidence could prove their innocence without the opportunity to have their freedome back.

I believe I have formed this opinion on my princinples alone. I think that the only other way that could make me a more effective ethical being would be to actually be in these situations. You can always say that is what you would do but until you actually have to decde you will never know. I feel that if I were to be put in this situation most principles don't even matter and just an internal gut feeling or human moral would kick in.




I commented on Jess Biondi's blog.
http://jessbiondi.blogspot.com/2012/05/blog-6.html?showComment=1336350799933#c9143210453328355906

Tuesday, April 24, 2012

Blog 5

Blog 5 - How did the second contemporary issue effect your principles? Are you better able to see areas where your principles need adjusting? What adjustments need to be made? Which philosopher's position was least consistent with your own principles and why?


Just as the weeks prior, my Catholic upbringing plays a big role on my view of the second contemporary issue of abortion. This is a very tcouhy subject because my religion has taught me that all life should be valued and that the right to life outweighs all other rights. However, I am also a teenager in the 21st century and know that sex as well as abortions has become a very open and accepted topic. I find abortion to be morally wrong and that has everything to do with my principles of respecting every and all human beings. I could definitely see where my morals could need adjusting because for some people abortion may be their only or best option and I understand that. For some people it may be the only answer however, for the most part I am an advocate for pro-life. Some adjustments could be that in order to respect all life, the mother's life also needs to come into consideration. For this reason I do not judge those who have had abortions or are pro-choice, but I can say that I would not have an abortion. I was particularly fond of Noonan's article because it defined when a human life begins to the best ability. I also enjoyed the counterpoint section. I found myself and my own principles least consistent with Warren's article bause she claims that the rights of the fetus should not come before the right of the woman carrying it. I find this absurd because if a mother was to carry the child nine months and have a baby clearly she would need to put the child before herself. Why should it be any different while in the womb? I find it to be selfish.



I commented on Beck's page.
http://becksbradley.blogspot.com/2012/04/blog-5.html?showComment=1335321458059#c1225027203746640233

Tuesday, April 10, 2012

Blog 4

How did the first contemporary issue effect your principles? Did it challenge them? Were your principles helpful in working out your response to the issue? Which philosopher's position was most consistent with your own principles and why?

After reading the articles on human cloning I obviously had conflicting views on the issue in comparison to my personal principles. At first the idea of human cloning sounded completely wrong to me because I am a firm believer in fate and what's meant to be will happen. Human cloning disproves that and basically says if your child was killed at a young age, it's okay we could just clone them which didn't sit well with me. I guess I could also be a result of my Catholic upbringing where I believe God has a plan for everyone.

However, one of my other main principles is do unto others what you would want to have done to you which made me take a second look at the issue. This is where I found I agreed mostly with Michael Tooley's arguement. Two of the things he talked about that made me change my views were the topics of cloning to better the society and to save lives. Tooley talked specifically about Einstein and explained that if we would have been able to clone Einstein the possiblities and opportunities he would have proved us with for scientific improvements would be limitless. However, the only thing I was still stuck on was the fact that who decides which people should be cloned and who shouldn't be. For example someone could pay to clone great people such as Einstein but they could also clone awful people like Hitler. Also, when they talked about how cloning blood marrow would be able to save a teenagers life from leukemia this hit home with me and was the real selling point. A number of important people to my life have died from things such as cancer and I know that personally if there was any way I could bring them back I would, and cloning provides people with this opportunity. Even though I'm completely for letting things happen as they are meant to be, when you put yourself in such a situation your views change. I'm glad we read these two articles because they did in fact broaden my horizons and challenge my views. It makes you see both sides to the arguement.



I commented on Luke's blog.
http://lukedemuro.blogspot.com/

Tuesday, March 27, 2012

Post 3

Blog 3 - What Social / Moral Principles do you find compelling and why? How do these principles fit with the personal principles you identified in Blog 2? Do they conflict at all? Do you think you can live according to both? How will you go about doing so? i.e. Prioritize them? Adopt specific ones for specific contexts?

Over the course of the last few weeks we have covered several topics and social issues. Locke and Marx's views on society were very different but both represent different ideas of today's society. Some people agree more with Locke and have a libetarian outlook on life while others find themselves siding with Marx and his views towards equality. It's interesting because both are a part of today's society and yet both ideas go against each other. In order to have personal freedom you cannot be equal and being equal takes away from personal freedoms.


For my Blog 2 I mentioned that my personal principles consisted of treating others the way you would like to be treated. Therefore I find myself relating more with Marx and his belief in equality being the fundamental principle. Marx is an advocate for Communism where everyone is treated equally which follows the golden rule. However, I don't disagree completely with the libertarian views because I do believe in having some personal freedoms. Societies could live by following both principles such as America does. They clearly promote personal freedom, but they also try to instill equality by offering things such as welfare and the no child left behind act. This is an example of how people could live according to both, but in the end one will always outweigh the other. 










I commented on Evon's blog.
http://evonsommerville.blogspot.com/

Sunday, February 26, 2012

Blog 2

What personal principles did you adhere to before entering this course and where did they come from? Were they taught to you? Did you develop them on your own? How have our readings and discussions impacted those principles? Of the principles covered which are you drawn to the most and why?




Even before taking this Ethical Well Being class I lived my life by the Golden Rule, treat others how you would like others to treat you. I was born and raised in a Catholic home where I was taught at a young age to respect others and to always be conscientious of my actions. I believe that my religion and my upbringing in this faith helped me to become the person I am today. These principles shine through in my actions everyday in not only major ways but also the smallest of actions. For example, I was taught that if someone holds a door open for you to always say thank you, when you see a friend or even a stranger in need always lend a helping hand, and you should do it out of the kindness of your heart not for the approval of others. It’s hard to always follow this rule because sometimes when a person treats you badly you would rather get even with them than forgive them, however I’ve learned that being the bigger person pays off in the long run.

            Our readings and discussions have actually had a bigger affect on my beliefs than I expected. First of all, our readings have taught me that there really is no purpose to life and that life is much more about one’s self than I realized. I always thought you were supposed to respect others but after the readings I saw a lot talked about making yourself happy, and striving for virtues, and that there is no one better to judge our lives than ourselves. This went against everything I was brought up believing. Also, our discussions tested my principles so much because during our discussions it’s evident that different people have different views on issues and some people like to make their issues know more than others, sometimes to the point it seems like they are criticizing others in a way that makes it seem like their thoughts are wrong. This obviously finds a way to get under my skin I’m sure like most of you however; I try to let it go in one ear and out of the other. Out of all the topics covered so far I found myself most drawn to Taoism simply because it seems like the only concern is happiness and I would love for my life to be that simple and carefree. I tend to worry a lot which I wish I didn't do so often and I feel as though Taoist have very little to worry about.


I commented on Dallas Smith's blog.

 http://dallaslrsmith.blogspot.com/