We’re going to start to work towards what will become your final paper, which wi

We’re going to start to work towards what will become your final paper, which wi

We’re going to start to work towards what will become your final paper, which will be the most significant assignment in this class for this semester. This “quiz” is important too, though, in that it will act as a starting point, and ask you to consider a handful of questions about the place you work, would like to work, or build for yourself and others.
Since I work for GVSU, I’ll use that as an example of what I mean (bear in mind that GVSU, as a public university, is legally a not-for-profit, and that difference will matter as you work out your own first take on these kinds of questions).
Grand Valley’s mission is to “empower learners in their pursuits, professions, and purpose. The university enriches society through excellent teaching, active scholarship, advancement of equity, and public service.” (GVSU Home page)
So GV has both individuals (“learner”) and the broader community in mind (“society”). I think I know what we mean by excellent teaching and active scholarship, but I’m less clear on “advancement of equity and public service.” I’ll need to do a little more research on GV’s website or talk to someone in administration who can help me out with that – what do they mean? “Equity,” for example, can have a number of meanings, some of which might flow from ethical commitments or a fidelity to social justice. What does GVSU actually do to promote equity? Then I probably want to compare what I’ve learned with what other similar universities say about themselves. After that, I probably want to ask myself if I think this mission is one I’m on board with. If so, why? If not, why not?
It turns out that at Grand Valley “sustainability is one of our core values. We value the guiding principles of sustainability in helping to meet the current needs of our faculty, staff, and students without compromising the needs and resources of future generations. We model best practices and provide our students with excellence in sustainability education by imbedding theory, systems-oriented thinking, and service learning into our curricular and extracurricular programs.” (GVSU)
That’s a bit jargonny for me, though I need to be fair: GVSU does rank high, nationally, when it comes to sustainability. It is recognized by any number of agencies for its effort and results in that area, variously defined. So in this case I need to root around in that particular website more carefully, as well as look at some external reviews. Again, I’d like to know what they (we) mean by the term, and what actions are taking place to bring those goals about? For example, we are committed to being carbon-neutral by 2045 – how will that happen?
And it may sound stupid to ask well, why do we want to be “sustainable” in this way or that, but I think at least some of you (and of course many people in the larger community) are skeptical about the whole sustainability business, and so people who claim that it is important should be able to tell you why. The bigger question I might ask GV is, OK, good for you that you are in the top 15% of universities when it comes to being green, but how does that stack up against what consensus science is telling us we need to be doing to achieve actual results vis a vis the viability of the environment? In other words, we can all hand out trophies to ourselves for our good efforts, but if we still end up doomed what was the point? In other other words, how radical do the changes need to be as compared to what they actually are? Maybe everything squares, maybe it doesn’t – I’d like to get a handle on that.
Again, to be fair, from GVSU’s Sustainability page: During the last 15 years, Grand Valley has implemented more than 250 energy-savings projects, which total more than $2 million annually in cost avoidances from long-term, energy-efficient projects and $1.5 million in cost avoidances from energy conservation programs and initiatives, which change each year, such as the Energy Competition.
Great news, and we are to be congratulated. But is it enough? Are we being honest with ourselves? What other opportunities do we have? Is a public university part of the “regenerative capitalism” that Elkington is hawking? Should it be?

OK, so that was about 700 words right there. You can approach this assignment as either a)doing what I just did but with your business – what do you know about it and what critical questions can you ask of it? Or b) you can begin to write out at least some tentative answers to the kinds of questions you want to ask of it. Do not take on everything in this short paper – the “Everything” paper is for later. This is your thinking-out-what’s important-to-know-and –what-to-ask-and-to-research paper.
Keep the readings in mind. You don’t have to agree with everything in them, of course, but if they help you frame up some of your questions or investigations, great. And finally, and this is inspired by a few of you who are making this point in your writings to me, ask if it is even possible for your business to be truly sustainable, or ethical, at all. The argument was that Patagonia, if it really cared in the ways it says it does, would get out of textiles altogether, since that is an especially dirty, resource-dependent industry. You don’t have to take this question on right now, but file it away – are there some businesses that just have to go IF we are going to talk about ethics or sustainability with any integrity?
Let me know, as you get started, if you have questions.

Throughout the course, you encountered a number of different moral theories. Whi

Throughout the course, you encountered a number of different moral theories. Whi

Throughout the course, you encountered a number of different moral theories. While you had enough exposure in the first few weeks to build a moral compass, you have had more time to get to know the theories better and may be morally motivated by a different primary theory or set of theories than you used for the week three assignment. The goal here is to pick just one theory you feel is a “best guide” for moral behavior.
Then you are to create an Infographic promoting that theory, either on its own or by comparing it to other theories. Consider yourself as being in marketing and you are trying to convince others to choose your theory. Describe situations where this theory provides good guidance. Focus on the positives (i.e. consequentialist theories allow you flexibility while treating everyone equally, non consequentialist theories provide solid rules to follow and proper justification, virtue theories focus on the person and not the action, etc.)
Details:
Using one of the following programs, create an infographic that promotes your theory in a convincing way as an ideal guide for future moral decisions. https://piktochart.com/ https://www.visme.co/ https://prezi.com/ or MS PowerPoint
Have fun and try to be creative.
It is not bad to display some of the negatives, but the goal here is to promote your theory.
Be sure you submit as a PDF or that the link works (send it to others to see if they can open it). Keep in mind if your instructor cannot see it, he or she cannot assess it.
Please do not purchase a subscriiption, unless you want to, and do not submit anything one needs a paid subscriiption to see. Again, if free viewing is not possible, it will not be graded.
Lastly, when using resources, be sure to have a citation where the information is used on the presentation and include a references/works cited section at the bottom.

1) COVID-19 – Vaccine – Is requiring adults to get vaccinated or risk losing the

1) COVID-19 – Vaccine – Is requiring adults to get vaccinated or risk losing the

1) COVID-19 – Vaccine – Is requiring adults to get vaccinated or risk losing their job ethical?
2) Apply an ethical theory to the topic and do a counter-argument.
3) Introduction: With a hook sentence; Background information on an ethical dilemma; and Writer’s claim – a thesis statement.
4) Body Paragraph: Argument state a position of an argument;
support this position with evidence; explain how this evidence is right toward this argument;
5) Counterargument: Provide a counterargument to a position in the first body paragraph; include their support point of view;
6) Rebuttal: Define the weaknesses of a counterargument;
cover credible evidence that supports such weaknesses;
write how these weaknesses make a counterargument irrelevant;
7) Conclusion: Restate a thesis; Summarize the argument, counterargument, and rebuttal.
8) Scholarly sources with citations

Directions – Discuss and/or Answer the questions: 1. Recall that there is a nati

Directions – Discuss and/or Answer the questions:
1. Recall that there is a nati

Directions – Discuss and/or Answer the questions:
1. Recall that there is a national “do not call” number where consumers can register to opt out of telemarketing.
2. Could the same type of centralized system be implemented to allow consumers to opt out of spam?
3. Why or why not?

Explain the difference between the public and private spheres; 2) Why is there

Explain the difference between the public and private spheres;
2) Why is there

Explain the difference between the public and private spheres;
2) Why is there so much controversy relative to religion in the public sphere?; and
3) What do you think about this?
HELPFUL LINKS:
Casanova, Jose. Public religion in the modern world, Chicago. University of Chicago Press. 1994. Accessed May 1, 2016. http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/docview/233615726?pq-origsite=summon.
Habermas, Jürgen. “Religion in the Public Sphere.” European Journal of Philosophy, vol.14, no 1 (2006). Accessed July 19, 2019. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1468-0378.2006.00241.x.
Marx Karl. On the Jewish Question. 1844. Accessed May 1, 2016. http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/jewish-question/
Mendieta, Eduardo, Vanantwerpen, Jonathan (eds.). The Power of Religion in the Public Sphere. Essays by BUTLER, HABERMAS, TAYLOR, and WEST, New York, Columbia University Press, 2011. Accessed May 1, 2016. http://www.roeduseis.ro/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Judith_Butler_J%C3%BCrgen_Habermas_Charles_Taylor_BookZZ.org_.pdf.
Rawls, John. “The idea of public reason revisited.” Chicago Law Review, vol.64, no. 3 (1997). Accessed July 19, 2019. https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5633&context=uclrev.

Starting Something Versus Finishing What You Started, Including Life Be sure you

Starting Something Versus Finishing What You Started, Including Life
Be sure you

Starting Something Versus Finishing What You Started, Including Life
Be sure you support your views with one or more underlying moral principle(s) that have not already been shown to be flawed unless you can say why and how the flaws do not apply or are not really flaws.
Read the set of questions carefully. It is not about abortion, but is primarily about conception versus euthanasia (of an adult). The principle to be developed will apply to abortion, but the question itself is not specifically about abortion.
Keep this in mind while answering the set of questions below: The whole purpose of these questions is to understand whether the criteria that justify finishing something you started and have put time and energy into are the same criteria that would justify beginning it in the first place. Address that general question in answering #10 below.
Suppose you go to a 3 hour and 20 minute play on Broadway that your parents have given you tickets they received for free as part of some advertising promotion they could not attend and were not really interested in anyway, and that they thought you and your spouse might enjoy. The first three hours are somewhat okay, but not all that great, with some of it pretty boring, and the last intermission is about twenty minutes before the end of the show. The last twenty minutes may tie it up real well and make it worthwhile having gone to or it may not. I won’t tell you which way that works out, but the overall experience was not anything to rave about, though it was also not the worst night of your life. On your way out of the theater, the management selects you to give two free tickets to give to friends.
1) Should you accept the tickets and give them to your friends? If you do, you are not allowed to tell them anything about the play or your experience and feelings about it. You either give them the tickets or you do not. If you give them the tickets, they will go (because they will take it as a recommendation and because they won’t want to spurn your offer or offend your apparent generosity). Basically you are controlling whether they go or not, so you have to decide for them by deciding whether to give them the tickets or not. The idea is that this is just like conceiving a child, where what you do doesn’t give the child any real choice in the matter and you don’t get to consult with it, to see what it wants, and it can’t research to see whether it wants to be born or not. (And remember, we are talking here only about conception — which is about fertilizing the egg and creating a pregnancy in the first place, not about abortion. If you conceive the child, you will carry it through to birth. This is not an abortion question. So you have to decide whether to conceive and therefore bring a child into this world or not, and in the same way you have to decide whether to send your friends to this play or not. Giving them the tickets is analogous to conceiving the child.)
The play is not about a subject they are known to be any more or less particularly interested in then you are, so you have no reason for thinking they will enjoy the play any more than you did. They may or may not, but the odds are they won’t like it any more than you did. So, would you accept the tickets to give to your friends or not? Why or why not?
2) Should you stay for the last 20 minutes, or should you have just leave during that intermission at the end of the first three hours? Why?
3) Would you have gone to the show in the first place if you had known it was going to be like this, or would you have told your parents you couldn’t go and suggest they give the tickets to someone else or sell or return them? Why? It will not hurt their feelings if you can’t accept the tickets.
4) Would it make any difference in your decision to give your friends the tickets if you were also given $1,000 on the condition you gave them the tickets and they went to the show? Why or why not? But again you are not allowed to tell them anything about the play or how much or little you liked it. And you are not allowed to share any of the money with them or use it to buy them anything to make up for sending them to this play, even if they do not enjoy it.
5) What if your friends were disabled and though they could go, it would be a hardship for them to travel and get into the theater, and they had to secure a baby sitter for their children, go out on a weeknight, etc? Would you give them the tickets? Why or why not?
Explain and justify your answers. Then suppose that this is an analogy, where the play represents life in general, and giving your friends the tickets represents conceiving and giving birth to a child. The $1,000 represents any pleasure you get at having the child regardless of what pleasure or pains the child finds in life (or the couple has in going to the play). 6) Should you conceive a child and give birth to it under any of these conditions? Why or why not?
To help make clear the premise of the scenario, consider this scenario also, which is supposed to be the same basic problem: Tickets go on sale two months ahead of time for a concert by a band you are somewhat interested in seeing, but it is not a must-see band for you, not one of your favorite bands. You go to the box office (because the tickets are not on sale online) and the line is long but should move quickly. However, it does not move quickly, and after various promising starts you find you have been waiting in line for nearly three hours, but it will be just twenty more minutes (for sure). 7) Should you wait the twenty minutes, or should you leave and do without the tickets? 8) If you had known the total wait would have been 3 hours and 20 minutes, should you have gone to get the tickets in the first place? 9) Should you call a friend to come down to get in line at the end of the line (so the friend has to wait 3 hours and 20 minutes to get his/her tickets — because you can’t let the friend cut in and you can’t buy more than your own ticket at the window) or not? If you call the friend, you are not allowed to tell him/her about the length of the wait in line. The friend has about the same level of interest in this particular band that you do, as far as you know.
10) The purpose of these questions is to understand whether the criteria that justify finishing something you started and have put time and energy into are the same criteria that would justify beginning it in the first place. Why or why not? Are the grounds for remaining alive, for someone who suffers, the same grounds for their being conceived in the first place? What about when they are still in the womb with regard to being born or carried to term? Explain and justify your answer, and use an underlying general moral principle for support (as I used my principle for support in the “supermarket examples” in the Introduction to Ethics).

After studying the course materials located on Module 5: Lecture Materials & Res

After studying the course materials located on Module 5: Lecture Materials & Res

After studying the course materials located on Module 5: Lecture Materials & Resources page, answer the following:
Name some very important organs that are not vital organs.
List the functional descriiption of all the normal vital organs, including today’s exceptions.
Is it possible to live without a vital organ? Why? Example?
Distinction between assisting or substituting vital organs. Bioethical analysis.
Do the following practices assist or substitute the vital organ? Why?
Dialysis
Respirator
Ventilator
Tracheotomy
CPR
Read and summarize ERD PART FIVE Introduction.
Unconscious state: Definition.
Clinical definitions of different states of unconsciousness: Compare and contrast
Benefit vs Burden: bioethical analysis.

Submission Instructions:
The paper is to be clear and concise and students will lose points for improper grammar, punctuation, and misspelling.
If references are used, please cite properly according to the current APA style. Refer to your syllabus for further detail or contact your instructor.

1) In Dale Jacquette’s work, A Dialogue on the Ethics of Capital Punishment, cha

1) In Dale Jacquette’s work, A Dialogue on the Ethics of Capital Punishment, cha

1) In Dale Jacquette’s work, A Dialogue on the Ethics of Capital Punishment, chapter three explores the conditions for the right to life. What are they? What do you think about them?
2) What does retribution mean to you? Is capital punishment just retribution? Why?

Guide word count is 300 words and there are no penalties for over or under. may

Guide word count is 300 words and there are no penalties for over or under. may

Guide word count is 300 words and there are no penalties for over or under. may reference guidelines (based in Ireland) or academic sources
1. You are working in primary care as a doctor and your patient comes from a culture in
which it is considered wrong to tell patients that they are dying. The family explain the
cultural context and requests you not to tell the patient they are dying. Discuss FOR
informing the patient?
2. You are working in primary care as a doctor and your patient comes from a culture in
which it is considered wrong to tell patients that they are dying. The family explain the
cultural context and requests you not to tell the patient they are dying. Discuss
AGAINST informing the patient?
3. A medical student falsifies a logbook to say they had attended a home visit to a child
with special needs. The parents contact the school to ask about the visit and the
student’s logbook is reviewed. Discuss FOR the student failing the module
4. A medical student falsifies a logbook to say they had attended a home visit to a child
with special needs. The parents contact the school to ask about the visit and the
student’s logbook is reviewed. Discuss AGAINST the student failing the module?
5. You are aware that there is no evidence for an effective treatment for a particular
condition but the patient and their family are requesting you try an unproven treatment.
Discuss FOR using this treatment?
6. You are aware that there is no evidence for an effective treatment for a particular
condition but the patient and their family are requesting you try an unproven treatment.
Discuss AGAINST using this treatment?
7. You have administered an out of date but still effective vaccine to a patient. Discuss
FOR informing the patient?
8. You have administered an out of date but still effective vaccine to a patient. Discuss
AGAINST informing the patient?