Category: Ethics

In a US military writing essay style you will write a two-page (maximum) essay to include a reference page and two references in APA format addressing: How do you contribute to the training management and proficiency of your subordinates? 
Your essay will be formatted as shown below:
Introduction (1-2 paragraphs)
1)
Opening statement
2)
Background information
3)
Purpose statement
Body (2-4 paragraphs)
Point A
Point B
3)
Point C
C. Conclusion (1-2 paragraphs)
1)
Summarize the main points.
2)
Make a strong, memorable final statement.
3)
Restate the purpose of the essay.
4)
Do not introduce

Overview and Instructions
You have now written four (4) case analyses. You will develop one of these three, Welfare, Univeral Health Care as a right, or Capital Punishment, for your second and final essay in connection with the topic you choose from below. Be sure to include ideas from the readings on what grounds our basic human rights. 
You must answer all parts of the question to receive credit. Your answers need to be written as short essays (200-350 words for each question and 1000-1500 words total). You must include an introduction and conclusion, and quotations or paraphrases must be appropriately cited.
In addition, it is essential to think of this essay as a development of your previous work — you won’t merely copy over that earlier work and then add an introduction and a conclusion. Instead, you will use my feedback, reflections, and review to revise and expand the case analysis you chose for this final essay. This project will open up in week seven, giving you more time. It is not included because you will need feedback on the affirmative action case.
If you have questions about any of this, please email me immediately. You can also check out this material on philosophical essay writing. 
Topics
Welfare
In this essay, you have five tasks:
Give a clear and concise explanation of the case at hand.
Give a thorough, philosophical exegesis of the relevant aspects of Walzer’s and Murray’s arguments. (Click here for some tips on how to do a successful exegesis.)
Present an argument applying the relevant philosophers to the case at hand. This should include an argument justifying who each philosopher would give the welfare to and why.
Present an argument explaining why one of the philosophers can be viewed as offering a more successful solution to the case at hand.
In no more than one paragraph, explain what solution you would propose for Rebecca and Jimmy.
Consider Rebecca, a single mother of 4 who has been a long-term welfare recipient. Rebecca is a weekend meth user who often spends her money on meth. However, without her welfare money, her children would not have any food or medical treatment and would most likely be placed in foster homes where their lives would go worse than they currently are. Rebecca’s yearly welfare application is due.
Now consider Jimmy, a veteran of both Desert Storm and Operation Iraqi Freedom. During the battle, Jimmy was wounded and now suffers from some moderate physical disability and post-traumatic stress. Sadly, although Jimmy tried to find a job, there weren’t many systems to help him re-integrate or work through his issues. Each day, Jimmy begs for money at his local off-ramp. Jimmy has fallen through the proverbial cracks through no fault of his own. Jimmy applies for welfare.
You are the welfare overseer. At most, one person can get welfare. You can make ONE of the following three decisions:
Give the welfare only to Rebecca.
Give the welfare only to Jimmy.
Don’t give any welfare.
Healthcare
In this essay, you have five tasks:
Give a clear and concise explanation of the case at hand.
Give a thorough, philosophical exegesis of the relevant aspects of Bradley’s and Peikoff’s arguments. (Click here for some tips on how to do a successful exegesis.)
Present an argument applying the relevant philosophers to the case at hand. This should include an argument justifying in which world each philosopher would place Jim and why.
Present an argument explaining why one of the philosophers can be viewed as offering a more successful solution to the case at hand.
In no more than one paragraph, explain what solution you would propose for Jim.
Consider Jim. Jim has worked in middle management his entire life. He had the option of paying into his company’s managed healthcare system but decided he wanted to keep the money instead and invest it in case he ever needed acute medical treatment. Unfortunately, on his 40th birthday, Jim bought a red Corvette with that money. 6 months later, Jim went to a doctor to see why he felt so awful. The doctor diagnosed Jim with emphysema, diabetes, and kidney failure. All three of these conditions are the result of Jim’s lifestyle choices: smoking, poor eating and exercise habits, and excessive drinking. These conditions are chronic and will require treatment for the rest of Jim’s life, including cutting-edge lung and kidney treatments and weekly meetings with a nutritionist, endocrinologist, cardiologist, etc.
Here are the two possible healthcare “worlds” for Jim (he must be “placed” in one of them):
Participate in a universal healthcare system, paid for by income taxes, which doesn’t provide Jim with the latest and greatest medical technology but does meet basic standards of care.
Participate in a pay-for-service system, which allows Jim to pay for whatever treatment he wants and/or can afford but will not treat him unless he pays for the service.
Capital Punishment
In this essay, you have five tasks: 
Explain your understanding of the case. 
Give a thorough, philosophical exegesis of the relevant aspects of the ACLU paper, Kant and Van den Haag’s arguments, and the readings on the grounding of human rights in nature or personhood. Integrate the ideas and videos of what grounds rights. Also integrate other readings from the course as you are able. Please note that virtue ethics and natural law both work well with human rights as natural rights and the dignity of personhood. Give a thorough discussion of The Essential View of the Dignity of Each Human Person grounded in nature or personhood.
Present an argument applying the relevant philosophers to the case at hand. Th
Present an argument explaining why one of the philosophers can be viewed as offering a more successful solution to the case at hand. 
In ONE paragraph, please explain how you think we should treat Bob.
Consider Bob. Bob was raised by wolves (literally – don’t ask me how). Although his IQ would probably be average, there is no way to test it since Bob doesn’t speak or read human language. One day, Bob emerged from the wilderness and ended up in downtown Long Beach. He was hungry (presumably), so he “found” some food in the usual wolf way: he stalked a mother walking her baby and, deciding it was easiest to prey on the weaker, killed and ate the baby. There’s no question that Bob is “guilty” of the crime. He did it, and there were lots of witnesses.

1st Paper: In this pre-workshop reading reflection, you will write a 600-800 word essay (approx. 2-3 pages double spaced). Your
response should substantially and thoughtfully engage with AT LEAST THREE readings – including at least one
from EACH of the disciplinary perspectives (Moral/Political Philosophy & Media Studies). Reflection papers
should not be summaries but, rather, are opportunities for you to critically reflect on readings from both disciplines, and
to use these readings to engage thoughtfully with the ethical themes related to the topic of technology, such as the
relationship between knowledge, power, and surveillance. You are encouraged to identify questions, connections to
other readings, and ideas triggered by the readings
Readings for this paper are:
Mona Simion. (2023). Knowledge and Disinformation. Episteme, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1017/epi.2023.25
Mark Coekelbergh. (2023). Democracy, Epistemic Agency, and AI: Political Epistemology in Times of Artificial
Intelligence. AI and Ethics, 3, 1341-1350. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-022-00239-4
Virginia Eubanks. Automating Inequality: How High-Tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor. New York: St Martin’s
Press. Chapter 1: From Poorhouse to Database
I have attached all of these readings
2nd Paper: In this pre-workshop reading reflection, you will write a 600-800 word essay (approx. 2-3 pages double spaced) that
responds to the following lines of inquiry, in light of the readings:
1) What difference (if any) does it makes that any given observer of (or contributor to) the debate over the
ethical management of Artificial Intelligence possesses certain prior theological or philosophical commitments?
(i.e., does it matter that one’s starting point includes a theistic worldview, or perhaps a proclivity towards
embracing consequentialism or deontology, etc.?); and
2) How would you characterize the existing and the expected effect of a rapid acceleration of the use of Artificial
Intelligence in the workplace? Based on what you know (and what you read for today’s unit of our course), do
you expect an amplification of currently observed effects, or might we expect something qualitatively different
from what we have witnessed thus far?; and
3) What labor issues are emerging from the use of algorithmic management? In what ways are these distinct
from ethical issues that have arisen in the workplace previously?
Reading for this paper:
Encountering Artificial Intelligence: Ethical and Anthropological Investigations, AI Research Group for the Centre for
Digital Culture of the Dicastery for Culture and Education of the Holy See, edited by Matthew J. Gaudet, Noreen
Herzfeld, Paul Scherz and Jordan J. Wales. Eugene, Oregon: Pickwick Publications, August 2024.
This book-length Vatican document is available at this url link: https://jmt.scholasticahq.com/article/91230-
encountering-artificial-intelligence-ethical-and-anthropological-investigations
Read the following chapters:
Preface (pp. x – xii)
Introduction (pp. 1-23)
Chapter 1 “Approaches to AI Ethics” (pp. 24-40)
Chapter 2 “AI and the Human Person” (pp. 43-68)
Chapter 6 “Artificial Intelligence and Catholic Social Teaching” (pp. 147-60)
“Message of Pope Francis for World Day of Peace, 1, January 2024: Artificial Intelligence and Peace.”
Available via Blackboard or, directly at the Vatican website (in several languages) at:
https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/messages/peace/documents/20231208-messaggio-
57giornatamondiale-pace2024.html
SOCIOLOGY
Rob Kitchin. (2017). Thinking critically about and researching algorithms. Information, Communication & Society, 20(1),
14-29.
Mike Cook. (2021). The Social Responsibility of Game AI. 2021 IEEE Conference on Games (CoG), Copenhagen, Denmark,
2021, 1-8.
Jamie Woodcock. (2021) The Limits of Algorithmic Management: On Platforms, Data, and Workers’ Struggle. The South
Atlantic Quarterly, 120(4), 703-713.
Sherry. (2020) Living as a Turker. Notes from Below, Issue 13: From the Workplace.
Alice Barker. (2020). Cycling in the City. Notes from Below, Issue 13: From the Workplace.
John Holland. (2020). Amazon Inquiry. Notes from Below, Issue 13: From the Workplace.
Igor Burtan. (2020). The Work that Helps You Get Back to Streaming. Notes from Below, Issue 13: From the Workplace.
I have attached all of the readings
3rd Paper: In this pre-workshop reading reflection, you will write a 600-800 word essay (approx. 2-3 pages double spaced). Your
response should substantially and thoughtfully engage with AT LEAST THREE readings – including at least one from EACH
of the disciplinary perspectives (Bioethics & Social Work). Reflection papers should not be summaries but,
rather, are opportunities for you to critically reflect on readings from both disciplines, and to use these readings to
engage thoughtfully with the ethical themes related to the topic of technology, such as the relationship between social
and structural justice, and the ways in which algorithmic tools can reify inequalities or ameliorate them. You are
encouraged to identify questions, connections to other readings, and ideas triggered by the readings.
Readings for this paper:
Specker Sullivan, Laura. (2023). “Health and Digital Technology Partnerships: Too Close for Comfort?” Oxford Handbook
of Digital Ethics. Edited by Carissa Veliz. Oxford University Press.
McKeown, M. (2021). “Structural injustice.” Philosophy Compass, 16(7), e12757. https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12757
Taylor, Linnet. (2017). ‘What is data justice? The case for connecting digital rights and freedoms globally’
,Big Data & Society, 2, 1-14.
Goldkind, Lauri, Wolf, Lea, & LaMendola, Walter. (2021).
‘Data justice: social work and a more just future’
, Journal of Community Practice, DOI: 10.1080/10705422.2021.1984354
Pohl, Barbara and Goldkind, Lauri. (2023) ‘AI Folk Tales: How nontechnical publics make sense of artificial intelligence’, Research Handbook on Artificial Intelligence and Communication, 246-266.
All readings are attached
It is important to have at least the first paper done by May 14th at 8am or sooner.

part 1 
Imagine you’re in a situation where you might need to assess trauma in a client. What potential challenges do you think you could encounter? How could you use the ACEs assessment to help you?
part 2
Identify your specialization (clinical mental health) and the vignette you selected. There are multiple concerns and potential legal implications in each case. For example, at what age in your state can a child/adolescent make medical decisions without parental consent? Share with us what you believe are the primary concerns to address immediately, and which ones can be addressed after the crisis has passed. School counselors should identify specific stakeholders on site they can collaborate with to support the student in the scenario. Mental health counselors should identify community resources they can collaborate with to support the client.
Vignette 2: A 17-year-old girl reveals she is four months pregnant and is terrified to tell her parents or the father of the child—she believes they will force her to keep the baby. The girl admits she has already contacted a couple she found on the Internet to discuss placing the baby for adoption when it is born. She wants your help with her mood, as she has been very sad and depressed.

USE  THESE VIDEOS FOR SOURCES:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJO8D1ovSeo

In Chapter 4 of Racism in a Racial Democracy, Winddance Twine analyzes six types of discourses that Brazilians in Vasalia present to explain “the absence of politicans, church officials, business owners, landowners, professionals, and other positions of prestige and power.” 
Select 2 of the discourses she analyzes.  In an essay, state the  two discourses you will study, summarize Winddance Twine’s analysis for each of the discourses you chose. How do Chapters 5-7 deepen your understanding of how the discourses you selected work in Visalia? What do Winddance Twine’s findings teach you about how discourses operate to normalize racism and sustain white supremacy? How might Winddance Twine’s analysis be applied to the discourses that sustain white supremacy in the United States? 
Discourses Discussed in Chapter 4
Invisibility of White Privilege
Discourses of Class Inequality, Inheritance, Mestiçagem
Demographic Defense: Whites are in the Majority
Discourse of Cultural Inferiority
Discourses of Containment: Temporal
Discourses of Containment: Spatial

This is an ethics paper, I have to get this assignment done and i already have written an outline and got feedback on it so i will be attaching both of the documents below.

Harm reduction: How can care providers best advocate for a harm reduction approach while seeking to deliver palliative care services, including hospice care?
What ethical arguments can you make base on the case study?
Why do you think that long-term care and palliative care insurance lacks of popularity among older Americans.
3. Conclusion (15%)
Briefly summarize your thoughts & conclusion to your critique of the case study and provide a possible outcome for Aging in America base on Health ethics Context?
Evaluation will be based on how clearly you respond to the above, in particular:
The clarity with which you critique the case study;
The depth, scope, and organization of your paper; and,
c) Your conclusions, including a description of the impact of these Case study on any Health

Sexuality
You will represent individuals who believe in traditional sex roles with a progressive twist.
Sexual liberation has been and continues to be a battle zone in this nation. 
Yet, who truly has freedom and control of the privilege? .
Directions: 
You will submit a discussion regarding how you feel the conventional female should be allowed to experience the full range of sex and sexual expression, free from all judgment: no limits, no boundaries, no restrictions, and no chastising in any way. You must also explain how you plan to do this while attempting to remain equal and equitable to the progressive idea of a female.
You must include the argument of the lgggbtqqipc2naaaahh+ female.
Present how this perception provides a benefit for society and why.
Perspective Two:
You will be presenting an argument for the traditional male with a twist.
Directions: 
The conventional male has experienced the full range of sex and sexuality and is societally allowed sexual freedom. However, one segment of the traditional male population gets brushed under the rug. Often, this population segment is killed, thrown out of the home, and unaccepted by society. This is the lgggbtqqipc2naaaahh+ male. 
You will then argue how a male must maintain all the freedoms allotted over the years. You must also explain why you must be allowed to be openly lgggbtqqipc2naaaahh+ with no limits, no boundaries, no restrictions, and no chastising in any way. You must also explain how you plan to do this while attempting to remain equal and equitable to the progressive idea of a male.
Present how this perception provides a benefit for society and why.
Note: Both perspectives must be able to:
Define sex and sexuality.
Define and explain the traditional views and progressive views on sex and sexuality.
Explain the traditional views of traditional female and traditional male roles in sex and sexuality.
Explain the progressive views and roles with sex and sexuality of the current advanced view and function of the male, the female, those of different species, those non–binary, those neutral, and those of what was once imaginary now made real, et cetera.
Explain how the male, the female, those of different species, those non–binary, those neutral, those of what was once imaginary now made real, et cetera fit into your perspective.
Present how this perception provides a benefit for society and why.

This Discussion assignments requires viewing the Latinos Beyond the Reel documentary. In Latinos Beyond Reel, filmmakers Miguel Picker and Chyng Sun examine how US news and entertainment media portray — and do not portray — Latinos. Drawing on the insights of Latino scholars, journalists, community leaders, actors, directors, and producers, they uncover a pattern of gross misrepresentation and gross under-representation — a world in which Latinos tend to appear, if at all, as gangsters and Mexican bandits, harlots and prostitutes, drug dealers and welfare-leeching illegals. The film challenges viewers to think critically about the wide-ranging effects of these media stereotypes, and to envision alternative representations and models of production more capable of capturing the humanity and diversity of real Latinos.
Answer in number format 1,2,3,4,5
Explain with specific examples from the documentary how are Latinos portrayed in TV, Media, Movies in Latinos Beyond the Reel?
What impact does this portrayal have of how non-Latinos and Latinos viewers see and/or think about Latinos outside of film and entertainment? 
What impact does the absence and/or under-representation of Latinos have on non-Latinos and Latinos viewers see and/or think about Latinos outside of film and entertainment?
What are your thoughts? How did this documentary make you feel? What can you do about it? 
What else caught your attention?