The third contempory issue of the death penalty effected my principles in a way that challenged them. The pro death penalty argument was very compelling but I, personally, dont think as a society we can execute people justly. To be human is to erre. Society is not perfect, we dont get it right 100% of the time, and because of our prejudices, class division, and mistakes someone is bound to be falsely accused and executed. It is this margin of error that is just too great for us to overlook.
I need more experience and worldly insight to reasonably respond to these moral issues beyond a set of principles. I think the skill of objectivity would make me a more efficient ethical being because sometimes issues get muddled when we're too self involved.
I commented on http://ashantijones.blogspot.com/
Monday, April 23, 2012
Wednesday, April 18, 2012
BLOG 5
The second contemporary issue, which was abortion, caused me to first examine and then apply my principles. I tend to lean more towards John Locke, therefore, I had depended on his wisdom of "natural rights" to be applied to the issue of abortion. On the foundation that you have to be born to obtain these rights, I must conclude that abortion is indeed moral. These stipulations seem to be very staight forward and the compelling arguement of Warren and her 5 criteria for being human does support it, so, I see no need for adjustment.
I least argee with the arguments of Noonen because although he so easily can refute the shakey arguments of pro-choicers, I havent read anything from him that can stand up to Warren's 5 criteria that, to me, puts thing in perspective minus centement and decentcy that can cloud moral judgement.
I commented on : http://becksbradley.blogspot.com/2012/04/blog-5.html?showComment=1334770090819#c8616831924868977971
I least argee with the arguments of Noonen because although he so easily can refute the shakey arguments of pro-choicers, I havent read anything from him that can stand up to Warren's 5 criteria that, to me, puts thing in perspective minus centement and decentcy that can cloud moral judgement.
I commented on : http://becksbradley.blogspot.com/2012/04/blog-5.html?showComment=1334770090819#c8616831924868977971
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
Blog 4
The first contempory issue strengthened my original principles. My prinicples, similar to Locke's about natural rights, actually made the cloning issue a little fuzzy. How can give rights to someone who wasn't born and it 100% of you? Are they property? Eventually I had to back to nature. There are natural clones exsisting now--identical twins! Do are they own each other? Is there some type of test that determines which was the original and which was the clone? No! They're seperate people firmly deserveing equal rights. Now that does mean I'm in support of cloning anyone--I'm not. However, the implications made in class about the use of clones as organ donors I think is unethical. We can't treat human beings as bags of organs nor is it perimissible under today's law to experiment in such a way on humans.
I believe Kass's argument pulled the most weight with me. Losing the family dynamic, incestuous nightmares, and the utter repugnace he speeks of about all of that was enough to win me over.
I believe Kass's argument pulled the most weight with me. Losing the family dynamic, incestuous nightmares, and the utter repugnace he speeks of about all of that was enough to win me over.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)