- Week 1 Assignment: Cultural Relativism and Moral Action
Required Resources
Read/review the following resources for this activity:
- Textbook: Chapter 1, 2
- Lesson
- Minimum of 2 scholarly sources in addition to the textbook
Instructions
For this assignment propose a scenario where you or someone you know are confronted with a moral dilemma relating to cultural diversity and multiculturalism. It cannot be the same as what was covered in the week one discussion.
Cultural diversity refers to religious, sexual, racial, and other forms of social difference. A moral dilemma is a situation in which one must make a decision between two or more options such that the options involve seemingly ethical and/or unethical conduct. Address the following questions:
- What was the situation? What did the dilemma involve?
- What would a subjective moral relativist say is the right approach to the dilemma? Why would that kind of relativist say that?
- What would a cultural relativist say is the right approach to the dilemma? Why would that kind of relativist say that? Is that approach correct?
- What did you the person confronting the dilemma decide to do? What moral justification did they give? Is that approach morally correct?
- Was there an objective moral truth (the objectively right thing to do) in this situation? Why or why not?
Remember, the dilemma should be detailed with description and dialogue. Regard the questions as requirements. This is an essay, so rather than simply providing a list of brief answers to questions, provide an in-depth reflection regarding a difficult ethical situation..
Cite the textbook and incorporate outside sources, including citations.
Writing Requirements (APA format)
- Length: 1.5-2 pages (not including title page or references page)
- 1-inch margins
- Double spaced
- 12-point Times New Roman font
- Title page
- References page (minimum of 2 scholarly sources)
2. Week 1 Discussion: Is it Right to be a Relativist?
Required Resources
Read/review the following resources for this activity:
- Textbook: Chapter 1, 2
- Lesson
- Minimum of 1 scholarly source (in addition to the textbook)
Initial Post Instructions
The study of ethics and philosophy is one that brings many different kinds of “thinkers” together. One person’s philosophy on ethics is another person’s philosophy on evil. We will be working this term on constructing personal ethical bases and understanding how ethical codes (both personal and professional) are created and followed.
To start us thinking about the different areas of philosophy and ethics, and how we fit into the different molds or world views, let’s imagine the following scenario:
It is 2019. The federal law banning female circumcision is still under appeal in the courts. You are a nurse assisting a plastic surgeon at a local hospital. The plastic surgeon comes from a country where they practice “female circumcision”. This practice is also sometimes called “female genital mutilation”.
You are not a member of the doctor’s culture, but reside in a state where this practice is still legal. The plastic surgeon has agreed to perform this practice on a young girl, the daughter of a friend of the surgeon. The friend has authorized the procedure. The girl only knows this is a custom. You did not know that today you would be asked to assist in this procedure. You can refuse to participate (your job may be on the line in the future due to that decision). Or, you can assist the surgeon. What ought you to do? We now want to examine the ethical issues involved. To do this, let’s look at the role of relativism, moral truths, and other issues.
Initial Post Instructions
For the initial post, address the following questions:
- What would a subjective moral relativist say about what this doctor is doing? Do you agree with the subjective moral relativist? Why or why not?
- Examine what a cultural moral relativist would say here. Do you agree with the cultural relativist? Why or why not?
- Name and evaluate general criticisms of cultural relativism as being the wrong moral approach.
- Is there an objective moral truth about any of the possible actions by the nurse and/or doctor in this case? Why or why not?
Follow-Up Post Instructions
Respond to at least one peer. Further the dialogue by providing more information and clarification.
Writing Requirements
- Minimum of 2 posts (1 initial & 1 follow-up)
- Minimum of 2 sources cited (assigned readings/online lessons and an outside scholarly source)
- APA format for in-text citations and list of references
Grading
This activity will be graded using the Discussion Grading Rubric. Please review the following link:
- Link (webpage): Discussion Guidelines
Course Outcomes (CO): 1
Due Date for Initial Post: By 11:59 p.m. MT Recommended by Wednesday
Due Date for Follow-Up Posts: By 11:59 p.m. MT on Sunday
3. Week 5 Discussion: Kant’s Ethics and Our Duty
Required Resources
Read/review the following resources for this activity:
- Textbook: Chapters 9, 10
- Lesson
- Minimum of 1 scholarly source (in addition to the textbook)
Introduction
Kant’s famous First Formulation of the Categorical Imperative reads, “Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.” Kant taught morality as a matter of following maxims of living that reflect absolute laws. “Universal” is a term that allows for no exceptions, and what is universal applies always and everywhere. Don’t forget about the second formulation of the categorical imperative which states, “Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of another, always at the same time as an end and never simply as a means.” It is just as important.
Initial Post Instructions
For the initial post, address one of the following sets of questions:
- What are the personal and/or communal ethical factors that may be involved in determining the moral position of either side given a contemporary debate, such as those concerning animal rights, stem cell research, abortion, the death penalty, and so forth?
- Elaborate in detail the ethical positions arrived at by using the Kantian categorical imperative relative to the long standing debate surrounding the death penalty or abortion. Argue the ethics from the point of view of the prisoner or from the fetus
- Evaluate the ethical positions in part two. You will want to detail whether they are convincing, logical, correct, consistent, etc.
Follow-Up Post Instructions
Respond to at least one peer. Further the dialogue by providing more information and clarification.
Writing Requirements
- Minimum of 2 posts (1 initial & 1 follow-up)
- Minimum of 2 sources cited (assigned readings/online lessons and an outside scholarly source)
- APA format for in-text citations and list of references
Grading
This activity will be graded using the Discussion Grading Rubric. Please review the following link:
- Link (webpage): Discussion Guidelines
Course Outcomes (CO): 5,6
Due Date for Initial Post: By 11:59 p.m. MT Recommended by Wednesday
Due Date for Follow-Up Posts: By 11:59 p.m. MT on Sunday
Posts must be on two separate days.
