Category: Ethics

Overview
You will write a critical and evaluative paper in which you apply philosophical theories to a recent, controversial environmental issue that involves human agency. Using these theories, you will then create your own argument for how to assess the ethics of the actions surrounding the issue. Analyzing an environmental issue or event in terms of harms done and in terms of moral responsibility is a crucial skill needed for making policy decisions. In professional settings in which environmental issues are discussed, you will need to be able to demonstrate the ability to apply ethical theories to environmental issues and events, and present your own conclusions about how best to morally evaluate the situation.
The project is supported by four formative milestones, which will be submitted at various points throughout the course to scaffold learning and ensure quality final submissions. These milestones will be submitted in Modules Two, Three, Four, and Five. The final paper will be submitted in Module Seven.
This paper will assess your mastery with respect to the following course outcomes:
Appreciate the relationship between humans (especially yourself) and the environment
Write and speak persuasively about ethics and be able to defend your own views, and the views of others, on topics and problems in environmental ethics (communication)
Apply ethical principles to environmental related situations and problems (personal and social responsibility)
Understand environmental issues, and critically evaluate positions and perspectives of representative philosophers – including the analysis and evaluation of ethical thinking (knowledge)
Apply knowledge of basic principles, concepts, methods and arguments to support positions in environmental ethics
Prompt
Your paper should answer the following prompt: What is the proper moral evaluation of the actions that led to the environmental disaster you chose as your topic? What are the strengths and weaknesses of the two ethical theories you applied to the environmental disaster?
Specifically, the following critical elements must be addressed:
Introduction
Provide background information on your chosen event, by addressing the following:
What is the event?
When and where did it occur?
How were people affected by the event?
How was the environment affected by the event?
What is the impact of the event? (For instance, based on the event that you chose, there might have been a significant impact on individuals who live in the area or work in the area, harms to wildlife, contamination of water or air, significant harm to an endangered population, etc.)
Include other information relevant to an assessment of moral harm or moral wrongdoing. (For example, if corporate policies were made which ignored the risk of dangerous consequences, or if someone acted in a negligent way, that should be included. If the event was an unforeseeable accident, that should be included.)
Application of Approaches in Environmental Ethics
How does contemporary environmental ethics help explain the ethical evaluation of the event?
Theory I: Select a theory from the course that could assess moral harm and moral wrongdoing. Include at least one representative, peer- reviewed article that presents central ideas from the theory, and use the article to illustrate how the theory would apply to the event.
Theory II: Select a second theory from the course that could assess moral harm and moral wrongdoing. Include at least one representative, peer- reviewed article that presents central ideas from the theory, and use the article to illustrate how the theory would apply to the event.
Critically evaluate these applications.
Assess strengths and weaknesses in the two applications. For example, does one theory (or do both theories) fail to acknowledge a serious moral harm that occurred as a result of the event? Does one theory provide a superior analysis of the moral wrongdoing that occurred?
Ethical Evaluation
What is the appropriate ethical evaluation of the event?
Provide an argument for the appropriate assessment of moral harm in this case. (For example, what objects, beings, or persons should be considered to have been morally harmed?)
Provide an argument for the appropriate assessment of moral wrongdoing in this case. (For example, what person or persons should be considered morally responsible for the event, and what specific wrong was committed?)
What conclusions should be drawn about the ethical theories you applied? (For example, is one of the theories clearly superior to the other? Are both theories flawed? Is one better suited for application to the kind of event you considered?)
Milestones
Milestone One: Discussion
In task 2-2, you will choose an environmental disaster that was caused, at least in part, by human agency, and that occurred in the past five years. This disaster will be the one you focus on for your final paper. Find an article that describes the event. In this discussion, post a link to the article and present a brief summary of the event. The ethical dimensions of an environmental disaster cannot be analyzed until the basic information about what actually happened is understood, so being able to explain the event and its consequences is a crucial first step to performing an ethical analysis. See Discussion topic 2-2 for a full description of this assignment. This milestone is graded with the Discussion topic Rubric.
Milestone Two: Short Paper
In task 3-2, you will carefully describe the event you have selected, explaining the consequences of the event to living and non-living things. Then, you will assess the damage that occurred as a result of the human agency. In other words, you will begin to assess the moral responsibility attached to the event. Your paper should be 3-5 pages long with at least one scholarly resource. Refer to the Final Paper Guidelines and Rubric found in the Assignment Guidelines and Rubric Folder for a full description of the requirements for the final paper. This milestone is graded with the Milestone Two Rubric.
Milestone Three: Discussion
In task 4-2, you will find an article that assigns moral responsibility for the environmental disaster you chose in Module Two. Share the link to the article (or provide the bibliographical information) and briefly summarize the argument given in the article. Once you have posted your article and summary, reply to at least two of your classmates. Objectively evaluate the argument presented in their article. Do you agree or disagree? Explain your reasoning. See Discussion topic 4-2 for a full description of the assignment. This milestone is graded with the Discussion topic Rubric.
Milestone Four: Presentation
In task 5-2, you will submit a presentation of your final paper. Presentations are important part of policy discussions and decisions. Often you will need to present your ideas and findings to a group of people. Being able to effectively present information and crucial claims is a skill needed in the field. This assignment is worth 200 points, should be a minimum of 10 slides (not including the title and reference slides), and should include at least two resources that you will use in writing your final paper. The presentation will include the same elements as the final paper, but will be in outline form. These elements include: an introductory section, which includes a brief summary of the environmental disaster you have chosen, the human actions which contributed to or caused the disaster, and the harm resulting from the disaster; two ethical analyses of the disaster, which include an explanation of how each approach would assess moral responsibility for the environmental disaster and strengths and weaknesses of each theory’s analysis; your position, which includes a discussion of which theory, in your view, provides the best analysis (If you conclude that neither theory adequately addresses the situation, you should explain this instead), your conclusion about the appropriate assignment of moral blame and moral harm, and your conclusions about the ethical approaches you applied. This list is derived from the critical elements, which will be used for grading the final submission. Your instructor will provide feedback on the current state of your argument, with a specific aim to provide feedback on your inclusion of the critical elements. This milestone is graded with the Milestone Four Presentation Checklist.
Final Submission: Final Paper
In task 7-2, you will submit your final paper, which will include a description of an environmental disaster caused at least in part by human agency, the application of two ethical theories to the disaster, your evaluation of those analyses, and your own argument for how we should assess moral responsibility attached to the event. This milestone is graded with the Final Paper Rubric (below).
What to Submit
This submission should conform to APA formatting guidelines. The completed paper should be 8-10 pages in length (not including the cover and Works Cited pages), with standard fonts and margins, and at least three scholarly resources.
I will attach all the milestones for this . They just need to be put together .

Critical Reflection #1
Written Essay
Based on your understanding of the readings and videos, films, and documentaries provided in Modules 1 & 2, address the following questions in your essay:
Overarching question (thesis question): What did it mean to be ethnically Mexican in the U.S. between the 1840s and 1940s?
Guiding Subquestions (body paragraphs):
In what ways have ethnic Mexicans/Mexican Americans and their communities been perceived/viewed as, and dealt with, as “problems” for U.S. society? What were some significant changes over this time period? What were some significant consistencies throughout this time period? Be sure to provide examples for at least 3 different historical eras/periods.
In what ways have ethnic Mexicans/Mexican Americans countered, responded to and resisted such historical policies, practices and (mis)representations? 
What does learning this historical context tell us about issues beyond race, such as: indigeneity, class, gender, and immigrant/citizenship status in the Chicana/o/x community.
must use/reference or cite at least 4 course reading sources
must use/reference or cite at least 3 course films/videos
Short Essay Paper Requirements:
This essay has a word count minimum of 800 words.
Please make sure to have a clearly articulated Introduction, Thesis, and Conclusion.
Please format your essay with: 12-point font, double-spaced and with 1-inch margins.
Please use the MLA citation format and include a Works Cited Page.
Use MLA Header – Only on the first page
Example:
Name
Professor Name
Course Name & Number
Due Date
Title of Essay 
**** Avoid using “Short Essay 1”; “Paper 1”; “Ethnic Studies Essay” or similar generic titles
Create and Use your own original title
This is a formal academic writing assignment and course assessment
I am more concerned with the content and ideas you put into the essay- YOUR ANALYSIS + COURSE ASSIGNED CONTENT
I am equally concerned with the integration, appropriate use and synthesis of course materials to support your own analysis and argument(s)
you are only required/expected to use the course materials (readings and videos) provided in this class. NO OUTSIDE SOURCES NEEDED.
I am less concerned with grammatical and spelling errors but too many poorly constructed sentences/paragraphs can result in taking attention away from your argument and content and negatively impact the overall grade.
Please make sure to PROOFREAD, EDIT and SPELL CHECK.
My strategy is to read the essay out loud to myself or to someone else. This really helps to spot errors in my writing.
You are asked to write about your understanding, perspective and arguments related to the topic. Your use of course materials should be used as supporting evidence and reveal synthesis and connections between them. Please make sure to cite the work of others. Proper citation avoids any confusion about suspected plagiarism.
DO NOT USE ANY ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (AI) WRITING GENERATORS FOR THIS ASSIGNMENT
Basic Rubric for Success:
Essay presents clearly articulated, organized and supported analysis & argument(s).
Essay has proper citations, and appropriate integration and synthesis of course materials
must use/reference or cite at least 4 course reading sources
must use/reference or cite at least 3 course audio/visual materials
Essay clearly addresses and responds to all 3 parts of the prompt provided above.
Essay follows MLA format.
Essay meets and/or exceeds the minimum word count.
Essay meets the assignment submission requirements and deadline.
Clearly and properly integrates and cites course materials
Write in first-person; make “I” statements; this is to express and highlight your own understanding, analysis, and arguments based on what you have learned in this class. You are just asked/required to use course reading and audio/visual materials to help you do so and provide supporting evidence.

Reflection 5
Reflections Content
Write a short reflection statement (350-500 words) after reading Chapter 8. Use complete sentences and correct academic writing to complete this assignment.
Respond in writing to this question:
Explain why, according to Kant’s law of nature formula of categorical imperative, it is wrong to make a lying promise. Why would it be wrong according to his principle of ends formula of the categorical imperative? Do you agree with Kant that lying is always wrong, or are there exceptions? Explain why or why not.
Reflections 6 Content
Write a short reflection statement (350-500 words) after reading Chapter 11. Use complete sentences and correct academic writing to complete this assignment.
Respond in writing to this question:
Explain the basic idea of what your book terms “female care ethics”. How is it supposed to differ from more traditional, rule based moral theories? Finally, your book gives four options regarding gender and ethics. Describe these, and explain which one we should adopt and why.

Prepare
your responses in a Microsoft Word document. You will upload and submit your
responses to Blackboard in Week 7.5. Your response should be approximately 500
words in length and should conform to the standards of APA formatting.
Follow the link to a New York Times article titled A Family Consents to a Medical Gift, 62 Years Later. Once you’ve read the article, please answer the following question in
essay form. Use the guiding questions below to develop your response. You
should include research from at least two scholarly resources to support your
ideas. Be sure to provide in-text citations and a References page.
Did the doctors
violate Henrietta Lacks’s rights in the case presented in the article above?
·        
Briefly identify and describe the philosophical
approaches one can use to assist in the decision-making processes related to
typical healthcare scenarios. Identify the approach you would like to use in
reviewing this case.
·        
Based on your choice of philosophical approach,
identify the underlying ethical situations presented by the case and explain
how your chosen approach applies to the situation.
·        
How would you resolve the ethical dilemmas
presented in this case, based on your philosophical approach?
·        
If you were in the same situation as the doctors
involved is Ms. Lacks’s treatment, would you have made the same choices?
Evaluate their choices from a moral standpoint, along with how you think you
would have acted under the same circumstances, and explain your reasoning.
https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/a-family-consents-to-a-medical-gift-62-years-later/ 

In this assignment, you must present three types of arguments/evidence for both sides of the debate:
credible, factual arguments
persuasive appeals to morality, ethics, and/or social justice
anecdotes, humor, and/or emotional details
For credible, factual arguments, you need to be relying upon presenting credible claims backed up by evidence (such as statistics or documented research). This requirement is where you will most likely be citing the academic sources required in the assignment. Please make sure to review General Guidelines for Writing Assignments to ensure your sources meet the definition of academic sources. 
For your moral or social justice arguments, you need to be appealing to ethical principles or notions of fairness justice to support each side. For many of the debate topics, you can rely upon moral arguments regarding the obligations of a government to protect and care for its citizenry vs. individual rights.
The last requirement is use of humor, emotion, or anecdotes. Both humor and emotion can be difficult to convey through written text alone so it needs to be a bit exaggerated to really come through. An example of using humor would be calling out opposing arguments as ridiculous (and explaining why you are doing that). Some examples of using emotion would be specifically telling people that they should be fearful or empathetic or compassionate, etc., to a specific cause given certain factors. Finally, anecdotes are short one-off examples that illustrate a point. If you are looking for anecdotes, you might want to turn to popular press (this would be in addition to your academic source requirements) as news media often uses anecdotes to paint a picture. If you are writing about a topic with which you have personal experience (e.g. getting sick from consuming raw milk), you could also use your own personal story as an anecdote.
Please remember that you are required to use the provided template and that you need to follow the instructions using highlighting. 
Also, I want to remind you that you cannot submit any text generated by AI for this assignment (see Use of Generative AI in this course). I actually asked ChatGPT to do this assignment and it consistently failed. You can, however, use generative AI to help you brainstorm ideas. For example, if you are struggling to think of a moral argument in favor of foie gras production, you could ask it “What is a moral argument in favor of foie gras production?” You can then look at what it produces and build an argument from there if what it produces makes sense (which it doesn’t always). Again, you cannot just copy and paste from these sources though. 
Purpose:
The goal of this assignment to evaluate the arguments used on multiple sides of a food-related debate that we do not have time to cover in detail during the course.
Learning Outcomes:
Upon successful completion of this assignment, you will be able to demonstrate that you have the ability to…
Examine and critique multiple types of data and arguments
Develop and support ethical arguments around a key food ethics issue
Evaluate the strength of data and arguments in order to argue your own personal position on the issue
Write in a professional manner
Task:
In this assignment, you will choose a topic from a provided list of interesting and provocative food-related debates that we do not cover in detail in the course and then propose, develop, and justify two opposing arguments on this ethical issue. 
To complete this assignment, you should begin by selecting a topic from the list of Debate Essay Topics. You should then read the article that is assigned under your debate topic to get an idea of what the issue is. Next, you should begin to conduct research, collecting data to be used to justify both the pro and con sides of the debate. You need to ensure that the sources you rely on for your investigation are reputable. For this assignment, you must cite at least four (two per side) academic (i.e. peer-reviewed) pieces of literature in your essay. You may reference non-academic sources but if you are relying on a factual argument, you need to verify the veracity of the factual claims with academic or other reputable sources. Finally, you should outline and write a 1500-2000 word essay. The essay should have four parts and make use of the required template
. 
A brief (200-250 words) introduction that introduces and explains the debate and defines the key terms.
A section (~800 words maximum) where you present the pro or “yes” side of the debate.
A section (~800 words maximum) where you present the con or “no” side of the debate. The pro/yes and con/no sides should be roughly equal in length.
A brief conclusion (approx. 200-250 words) in which you state your own personal position on the debate and briefly explain your reasoning for why you have decided to support one side or the other.
For each side of the debate, you must present three types of arguments/evidence: (1) credible, factual arguments, (2) persuasive appeals to morality, ethics, and/or social justice, and (3) anecdotes, humor, and/or emotional details. See the Debate Strategies document
provided in Assignment #1 for help in understanding these requirements. In order for you to ensure that you have met these requirements AND to indicate to us where you believe you met these requirements, you are required to highlight at least one example of each type of argument according to the following:
credible, factual arguments: highlight in red
persuasive appeals to morality, ethics, and/or social justice: highlight in yellow
anecdotes, humor, and/or emotional details: highlight in green
Additionally, you will need to provide a Works Cited/References page. We strongly recommend using APA citation formatting style, however any well-regarded citation formatting style will be accepted.
You are not required to have a cover page. Your title, name, and references are not counted in the total 1500-2000 word count requirement. Your paper should be formatted with single spacing, 1-inch margins, and 12-point Times New Roman font as seen in the required template. 
Upload your assignment here. Double check to make sure that your file uploaded correctly. Only .doc(x), .pdf, and .txt file formats are accepted.
Remember that if you use generative AI in any way for this assignment, you must submit an accompanying explanation of its use. For details on the full expectations of the explanation, see Use of Generative AI in this course.
Criteria for Success:
In order to be successful in this assignment, do the following:
Check out General Guidelines for Writing Assignments. There are tips on how to find academic sources, how to avoid plagiarism, and how to use APA citation formatting.
Pay careful attention to the word count requirements. Only text that meets the allowances for maximum length in the template will be graded. 
Check out the rubric below to see how this assignment will be graded. Compare your completed assignment to the rubric to ensure you have met every expectation.
You should select one (1) of the following topics* for your Debate Essay. The provided reading will help you to get started on understanding this topic. It can also be used as one of your required academic sources.
Should governments ban meat/dairy names for vegetarian alternatives?
van Couter, Y., Mahy, A., & d’Ath, F. (2016). Belgium: Ceci n’est pas du lait—This is not milk. European Food and Feed Law Review, 328-332.
Should governments ban the production of foie gras?
DeSoucey, M. (2016). Contested tastes: Foie gras and the politics of food. Princeton University Press.Links to an external site.
Should authorities responsible for regulating food safety prohibit the sale of raw milk for consumption?
Alegbeleye, O. O., Guimarães, J. T., Cruz, A. G., & Sant’Ana, A. S. (2018). Hazards of a ‘healthy’trend? An appraisal of the risks of raw milk consumption and the potential of novel treatment technologies to serve as alternatives to pasteurization. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 82, 148-166.
Should hospitals eliminate infant formula giveaways?
Morain, S., & Barnhill, A. (2018). Do Infant Formula Giveaways Undermine or Support Women’s Choices?. AMA Journal of Ethics, 20(10), 924-931.
Should governments impose “sin taxes” on high-fat and/or high-sugar foods?
Allcott, H., Lockwood, B. B., & Taubinsky, D. (2019). Should we tax sugar-sweetened beverages? An overview of theory and evidence. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 33(3), 202-27.
Should schools ban the sale of “junk food” on school grounds?
Leonard, P. S. (2017). Do school junk food bans improve student health? Evidence from Canada. Canadian Public Policy, 43(2), 105-119.
Should governments ban palm oil from the food supply?
Koh, L. P., & Wilcove, D. S. (2007). Cashing in palm oil for conservation. Nature, 448(7157), 993-994.
Should governments require food businesses (e.g. restaurants and caterers) to publish allergen information for all food items?
Hamshaw, R. J., Barnett, J., & Lucas, J. S. (2017). Framing the debate and taking positions on food allergen legislation: the 100 chefs incident on social media. Health, Risk & Society, 19(3-4), 145-167.

Explain the differences, importance, and purpose of both the code of conduct and the code of ethics. Secondly, tell me about some of the factors that you would use to make ethical hiring decisions in an organization. Why would these be important to include in the hiring process (Example of things that you might include: Legal Ground Rules or other items in our reading material or library that would be considered in the process). Format: APA Paper (With an abstract).

I want to do a critique against those who think that medical assisted suicide isnt moral or ethical. 
instructions: 
Your Name
Critique of “Title of the Thing Being Critiqued”
Summary (150-300 words) – Begin with a summary of the work. Since you are finding your own sources, tell your reader about that source including why you believe this source is trustworthy.
Restatement of argument (100-200 words) – Just like the module critiques, restate the author’s main point in your own words. This is where you 1) tell the reader what you understood the author(s) to be saying and 2) set up exactly what claim or point you will be critiquing.
Thesis (1-2 sentences) – Begin this section with a clear statement of your assessment. This can be positive, negative, or mixed, but you should be able to convey your main claim in 1-2 sentences.
Context (REQUIRED, 200 words) – Since the topic of this critique should be related to your EIML project topic, you should have some background knowledge. Situate the article in the debate or context of this topic, the author(s), or anything else that you think is relevant to your reader’s understanding of the issue and your position on it.
Argument (400-600 words) – Finally, you will provide your reasoning behind your assessment. Choose 1-2 reasons max and write them in a clear and precise way to convince your reader.

First, read Case Study: 11.3 (Ethical Diversity Scenarios) in Johnson (2021). Select one of the scenarios in Case Study 11.3 (A, B, C, D, or E) for analysis. Be certain to indicate which scenario you selected in your post. Determine which region of the world the scenario takes place in. If the scenario does not explicitly indicate a country, select a country from within the region to investigate. If you choose to analyze Scenario “B,” you must select Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, or UAE (United Arab Emirates) as your hypothetical country.
Now, visit the following website to investigate the culture in which the case study hypothetically takes place:
Compare Countries (Hofstede Insights, 2022).
Use the country comparison tool to analyze your hypothetical country on the following dimensions. Be sure to share what you learn in your post.
Power distance
Individualism vs. collectivism
Masculinity vs. femininity
Uncertainty avoidance
Long-term orientation
Indulgence
Next, apply one of the three methods for making a cross-cultural ethical decision (ISCT, HKH, or Metaethics) to the scenario. Be sure to cite one of the following sources in your response, depending upon the method you select:
ISCT: Donaldson (2009), Baird & Mayer (2021), or Ast (2019)
HKH: Hamilton et al. (2009)
Metaethics: Ting-Toomey (2011)

In light of the legal and criminal implications of the Theranos scandal, analyze the extent to which Elizabeth Holmes and other key figures were held accountable for their actions. Discuss the role of regulatory bodies and law enforcement in prosecuting cases of corporate fraud and deception in the healthcare sector. What role do you think a board of directors or other high level employees have a stopping such an eleborate fraud or other illegal act.

Your assignment is to create an ethics code for a hypothetical government entity or agency. Please describe the agency you propose, then create an ethics code for your agency. You can find helpful suggestions at the Institute for Local Government. This should run 2-3 pages in length. It should not be solely an aspirational code, meaning you need additional details on actions that are considered ethical or not such as details on gifts, political activity, etc. You can start with the broader concept of acting ethically and being inclusive but this should not be the extent of the code. Think of what you would want to see as an employee working for a government agency to give you a good understanding of what is or is not considered ethical in the agency. The agency you choose may have an impact on the type of code you design.