Choose one of the following prompts: 1

Subject:SociologyPrice:18.89 Bought3

Share With

Choose one of the following prompts: 1. Consider one of the theories we have examined over the course of the semester, or an issue on which the theories weigh (e.g., how should we think about moral responsibility, or what matters, etc.), and evaluate it, drawing on the concepts we have examined over the course, and considering possible criticisms or objections that might be made against the relevant position or view, and respond to those objections. 2. Consider a policy that governs or shapes some aspect of community life within LA (e.g., neighborhood oil drilling, healthcare, housing, or labor policy), and identify the ways this policy affects a community or subcommunity within LA. Apply one of the moral theories that we have examined over the course of the semester (Plato’s theory of justice, Aristotle’s virtue ethics, utilitarianism, Kantian ethics, etc.) and determine the moral value of the policy--in doing so, explain the basic elements of the theory which you apply, identify the relevant material details of the case, and evaluate the policy in light of these considerations. Does the policy adequately respond to the needs of the community, and if not, what do you think ought to be done? Identify and explain what you take to be the most powerful objection or counter-argument to the position you have developed. Explain how you think the objection can be responded to. 3. Choose a contemporary moral issue (you can draw from the cases in the "Prompt 3" document, or any other topic about which there could be reasonable moral disagreement) and argue for a position with regard to the issue by applying one or more of moral theories we have examined during the course. Explain the basic elements of the theory which you apply, identify the relevant material details of the case, explain their moral significance, and the appropriate course of action or policy that should be taken in response. Identify and explain what you take to be the most powerful counter-argument to this position. Respond to the objection and explain either why you think the objection fails or how it can be responded to. Your essay should be around four pages, double-spaced, in twelve-point font, with 1" margins. In the paper, your aim should be to develop a position by explaining the details of a situation and constructing arguments that could convince a reasonable interlocutor who isn't knowledgeable of the subject matter. That means your paper should both provide context for understanding the theory discussed, and you should clearly detail the reasoning process by which you arrive at your conclusions. For additional guidance in planning and developing your paper, see: http://www.jimpryor.net/teaching/guidelines/writing.html, and feel free to contact me with questions. You may use either MLA or APA formatting, and you should cite any relevant article or text in developing your argument. For additional scholarly research and explanation, the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is an excellent starting point: https://plato.stanford.edu/ This paper is worth 60 points and will be graded on the clarity of your thesis (6 pts), its being well formatted, grammatical, and well written (12 pts), the accuracy and informativeness of its content generally (18), your use of sources (6 pts), and the structure and thoughtfulness of your argument (18 pts). Ethics Bowl Cases Develop an argument for a particular moral response to the situation in question. Explain the background moral theory and its application to the particular situation. If using, e.g., virtue theory, explain the basic mechanics of virtue theory, identify and characterize the relevant facts of the situation, the normative significance of those facts, and the course of action that should be pursued as a response. Consider the strongest counter argument to this conclusion and explain how you would respond to this objection. Summarize the main points of your argument. Cases are drawn from the Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl: http://ethics.iit.edu/teaching/ethics-case-archive CASE 1: IRAQI TRANSLATORS One of the first things most people learn in school is not to be a tattletale. No matter how appropriate it might be to let the authorities know what is happening, everyone learns that the consequences of “telling” are severe. Such people are viewed as “collaborating with the system” and putting their own personal advancement ahead of their friends and community. Throughout human history people seen as collaborators are, at best, ostracized; at worst they are killed. During and after World War II, women who fraternized with Nazi forces in order to survive and sustain their families were beaten, shunned, and had their heads shaved as a sign of their “guilt.” Vietnamese who worked for the U.S. government or military were the first people imprisoned, tortured or killed after the U.S. left their country. The West lacks fluent speakers of most non-western tongues. Few westerners have any significant knowledge of history, culture, and society outside Europe and the U.S. (Even knowledge there is seldom incisive.) This is especially true in the Middle East. With hundreds of thousands of western soldiers and civilians on the ground in Iraq, Afghanistan and their surroundings, the ability to communicate reliably with natives is necessary for survival. For that reason one of the most effective ways for natives with linguistic skills to support their families has been to become translators for government, business and the military. But this employment is not without risk. As in previous conflicts, translators risk being seen as collaborating with the “occupiers” and to date more than 250 Iraqis who have worked for allied forces or western businesses have been executed, often quite brutally, by factions who oppose the U.S. presence there. Estimates suggest that a similar number of translators’ family members have suffered as well. One of the reasons translators still work for the U.S., despite threats on their lives and those of their families is offers of political asylum from countries such as the U.S. Translators conclude they only need to hide their identities long enough to make enough money for their new lives in the States. Others identify with the stated goals of the U.S. occupation and believe that translating might help ease tensions between rival factions, paving the way for non-violent political solutions to the country’s problems—perhaps even paving the way for a Western-style democracy. It appears, however, that western governments are not protecting those who have helped them. For instance, the U.S. State Department processes applications for refugee translators. These translators who have worked for the U.S. are given preferential treatment when the State Department considers them for immigration. Despite such preference, the process requires that the translators have already fled Iraq. Even after they have fled, the process of reviewing their applications is often very slow “for security reasons.” Moreover, many who have gone through the difficulty and cost of fleeing Iraq cannot even apply for asylum since they do not qualify as “refugees” according to the United Nations definition (which is the one the U.S. currently employs in its considerations). Those individuals who worked with the U.S. have routinely had their applications for immigration (even as seekers of political asylum) refused by the very societies they have assisted. Justifications offered for such rejections include concern that some applicants might turn out to be sleeper agents, that the allies cannot afford to grant exceptions to their established immigration laws, or that the risks to such people are not grave. Even without outright denial, the processing of applications, which often takes many months, leads many to turn back to Iraq because the wait creates an insurmountable hurdle. CASE 2: GUNS ON CAMPUS- TEXAS UNIVERSITIES Almost 50 years ago, the first mass shooting at a college happened at the University of Texas (UT), resulting in the deaths of 14 people. Now, the frequency and severity of such incidents are increasing. In response, college campuses across Texas are becoming “concealed carry zones.”2 At UT Austin, students may carry concealed weapons in the classroom but not in dormitories. In the classroom, students must keep weapons holstered and may not keep a bullet in the chamber of a semi-automatic weapon.3 Supporters of the law assert the need for greater safety on college campuses given the proliferation of mass shootings across the country.4 Since concealed carry bans have been ineffective, they argue permitting weapons will increase campus security. In the words of one supporter, Virginia Tech’s concealed weapons ban left people “defenseless as a cold-blooded gunman methodically killed 32 of them over the course of two and a half hours.”5 By allowing everyone to have a gun, so the argument goes, potential victims will have the ability to defend themselves. Opponents point out that there are, in fact, very few instances of gun violence on college campuses. The LA Times reports that, “[o]f the 18,536 homicides in Texas between 2001 and 2013, only five—that's right, just five—occurred on or near college campuses.” At present, suicide is the second leading cause of death among college students (behind only vehicle-related deaths) and the proliferation of weapons on campus may increase the risk of successful suicide attempts.6 Further, some worry that allowing concealed carry will increase the likelihood that a professor will be shot by a disgruntled student. In a recent editorial for The New York Times, philosopher Simone Gubler criticizes the Texas law for being anathema to the values of higher education (i.e., academic freedom, intellectual debate, etc.).7 Moreover, she worries that the presence of guns might transform the nature of personal interactions through the introduction of an object that alters power and authority structures: “When I strap on my gun and head into a public space, I alter the quality of that space. I introduce an object that conveys an attitude in which people figure as things—as obstacles to be overcome, as items to be manipulated, as potential corpses.” This debate raises important questions both about public safety and the nature of academic spaces. Do you think that we should permit guns on campuses or not? 1 History.com, “An Ex-Marine goes on a killing spree at the University of Texas,” http://www.history.com/this-dayin-history/an-ex-marine-goes-on-a-killing-spree-at-the-university-oftexas. 2 Molly Hennessy-Fiske, “Texas universities brace for concealed guns in campus buildings,” Los Angeles Times, Nov. 10, 2015, http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-texas-campus-guns-20151110story.html. 3 Associated Press, “University of Texas regents set to consider gun rules for campuses,” May 12, 2016, http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-texas-campus-gun-rules-20160512-snap-story.html. 4 Jonathan Zimmerman, “Like Prohibition, the fight over guns is about something else,” Los Angeles Times, Oct. 27,2015, http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-1027-zimmerman-campus-carry20151027-story.html. 5 Jacob Sullum, “The Gun Ban and the Gunman,” Reason.com, April 18, 2007, http://reason.com/archives/2007/04/18/the-gun-ban-and-the-gunman. 6 Doris Iarovici, “Perspectives on College Student Suicide,” Psychiatric Times, July 27, 2015, http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/suicide/perspectives-college-student-suicide. 7 Simone Gubler, “Philosophizing with Guns,” The New York Times, April 11, 2016, http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/04/11/philosophizing-with-guns/?_r=0. CASE 3 IS THAT BLOOD ON YOUR SHIRT? When American consumers shop for clothing, they think about how much the clothes cost, how they look, and how they fit. These may seem like the most important considerations when one is standing in front of a rack of clothes, trying to pick out the perfect dress for a special event or replace a favorite shirt that has been stained. However, studies have shown that consumers also care about ethical consumption practices, such as avoiding the purchase of goods produced under unfair labor practices. 26 The paradox is that, while many people describe themselves as ethical consumers, few actually act on this conviction. A recent tragedy in Bangladesh has brought these issues into the public eye and reignited the debate about consumers’ ethical obligations. In May 2013, a garment factory near Dhaka, the capital of Bangladesh, collapsed, killing 1,127 people. The building, allegedly built without permits and using low-grade materials, was eight stories high with another story under construction. Workers reported cracks and creaking sounds, but were told not to worry and to return to their sewing machines.27 Bangladesh has become the second-largest apparel exporter in the world, and the apparel industry makes up 80% of Bangladesh’s exports. There are several economic reasons that explain why the garment manufacturing industry is so successful in Bangladesh. The country allows workers to be paid relatively little compared with western standards. For example, the minimum wage is $37 a month. Overhead costs are also significantly lower in Bangladeshi factories, because environmental, labor, health and safety and building standards are minimal or non-existent. It would be easy to attribute consumers’ apparent insouciance to the fact that tragedies like the one in Bangladesh often occur a world away. Mark Magnier from the LA Times agrees: “One problem... is the geographical and psychological distance most Western shoppers feel toward Bangladesh, making it easier for them to forget about the shocking loss of life by the next news cycle.” However, the reasoning behind consumers’ choices is much more complex. A 2010 study has found that consumers explain their inability to follow their convictions by invoking three justification strategies: economic rationalizations (e.g., “I cannot afford ethically-sourced goods”); institutional dependency (e.g., “unethically produced good dominate the market; it is the responsibility of governments, not the consumer, to make sure that workers are not exploited”), and developmental realism (e.g., “even if the conditions are bad, sweatshops offer much-needed employment to people in developing nations”). Are economic rationalization and developmental realism good reasons for supporting industries like the one in Bangladesh? Could we be held responsible for these industries’ practices? 26 Giana Eckhardt, Russell Belk, and Timothy M. Devinney, "Why Don't Consumers Consume Ethically?," Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 2010, 9(6): 426-436. 27 Mark Magnier, In Bangladesh, Shock May Give to Status Quo, The Los Angeles Times, May 15, 2013, http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-bangladesh-garment-workers-20130516,0,1203787.story Maria Hengeveld, Nike’s Supply Chain doesn’t live up to the ideals of its girl effect campaign: https://slate.com/business/2016/08/nikes-supply-chain-doesnt-live-up-to-the-ideals-of-its-girl-effect-campaign.html CASE 4: RESPONSIBILITY TO VOTE Contrary to the USA policies on voting—where citizens can choose whether they register to vote and whether they actually vote—voting is compulsory for Australian citizens 18 years of age and older.1 Australia imposes a penalty on Australian citizens who do not vote and cannot provide a valid reason for failing to vote. As in the USA, Australians can choose to leave the ballot blank, declining to vote for any candidate. Penalties for not voting range from $20 to $50.2 Such a measure results in much higher voter turnout—approximately 95% in Australia, as compared to typical voter turnout in the US, which usually ranges from around 38% for mid-term elections to 55% for presidential elections (and solely local elections typically garner even lower voter turnout).3 Americans cite various reasons for choosing not to register to vote. One reason is that courts select jurors from registered voters and many people wish to avoid being called for jury duty.4 (Perhaps jurors can be chosen by casting a wider net—for example, by using drivers’ license numbers, as has been proposed in Arkansas.) Others complain that they do not have time—that they are too busy to be involved in politics and vote. Often, people who choose not to vote say that they do not like any of the candidates and believe that their vote will not matter at all. Compulsory voting traces its origins to the Athenian concept of direct democracy, which held that it was every citizen‘s duty to participate in decision making.5 Proponents of compulsory voting argue that it would make elections less expensive since the parties would not have to spend money and resources to ?get out the vote.? A higher election turnout would result in a higher level of democracy, as the elected officials would be chosen by a more representative sample of the public. On the other hand, those who oppose compulsory voting argue that people may resent being forced to come to the voting place. Moreover, they argue that individuals forced to vote will not be educated about their choices, which will lead to poorer quality elected officials. In sum, they contend that it represents an imposition on the free will of citizens and that it trivializes the process inasmuch as those compelled to vote may cast invalid or spoiled votes. Should be voting compulsory? Should we be forced to vote? 1 See generally, the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) at: http://www.aec.gov.au/. 2 Voting Within Australia – Frequently Asked Questions,? Australian Electoral Commission, http://www.aec.gov.au/faqs/voting_australia.htm 3 Matt Rosenberg, ?Compulsory Voting: Australia is Well-Known for its Compulsory Voting Laws,? About.com Guide, http://geography.about.com/od/politicalgeography/a/compulsoryvote.htm ?National Voter Turnout in Federal Elections: 1960–2008,? Infoplease.com, 2008, http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781453.html. Note that voter turnout in the last federal election (2008) was the highest in decades. See Curtis Gans, ?African-Americans, Anger, Fear and Youth Propel Turnout to Highest Level Since 1964,? American University News, Dec. 17, 2008, http://timeswampland.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/2008turnout-report_final11.pdf. 4 Charlotte Dixon, ?The Right and Responsibility to Vote: Non-Voters Take Our Freedom For Granted,? Associated Content, Sept. 10, 2007, http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/367768/the_right_and_responsibility_to_vote.html?cat=9 5 For more sources and community content, see ?Compulsory Voting,? Wikipedia (article), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_voting CASE 5: WOMEN AND HEALTH INSURANCE Roughly 10% of Americans, including 6% of American women, who have health insurance purchase that coverage as an individual, rather than through an employer1. Premiums are generally higher than one would pay through one’s employer, but one need not worry about losing the insurance due to job loss. According to a recent article in the New York Times, however, the deal may be more costly if you don’t happen to be male. Women pay between 20% and 50% higher premiums than men for the same insurance coverage2. (Employer-subsidized insurance plans offer all employees the same benefit plan, regardless of sex or gender.) Furthermore, women are charged more even if they decline maternity coverage. Only ten states have passed laws prohibiting this kind of discrimination in the individual insurance market, leaving the vast majority of women unprotected on the open market.3Insurance companies argue that the higher cost for women is justified. Women use more healthcare services than men, including a broad array of services associated with maternity and reproductive health, and are thus more expensive to insure. In this respect, the high premiums women pay are like the higher premiums associated with age, despite one’s inability to choose one’s sex or stop getting older. The higher premiums simply reflect the higher expenses to the insurance company. Men and women seeking insurance on the individual market can expect to pay more for a policy if they have a pre-existing condition or other factors that cause them to use more healthcare services. Women use more services in general, particularly regular checkups and screenings, and unfortunately happen to be the only demographic that can get pregnant. Others claim that despite the business logic behind the higher premiums, they are discriminatory. A significant wage gap already exists between men and women who work similar jobs. To expect women to pay more on the individual insurance market increases the wage gap even more. Charging higher premiums based on racial or ethnic differences has been banned for some time, despite the potential for differences in healthcare consumption between races. These and other reasons fuel the contention that sex-based insurance premium differences should be outlawed. Of course purchasing insurance on the individual market is already expensive for men, as well. Increasing their costs would introduce further disincentives to buy insurance, potentially leading to fewer insured people altogether. The concept of insurance implies that all of the people who pay premiums subsidize others who use more than their “share” of medical care, but the line between dispassionately pricing risk and sexism remains extremely controversial. 1 Kaiser Family Foundation, “Women’s Health Insurance Coverage Fact Sheet,” http://www.kff.org/womenshealth/upload/6000_07.pdf (Oct. 2008). 2 Pear, Robert, “Women Buying Health Policies Pay a Penalty,” http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/30/us/30insure.html, New York Times (Oct. 28, 2008). 3 Varney, Sarah, “Women Pay the Price for Health Insurance,” http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=102618109, All Things Considered, NPR (Apr. 2, 2009). CASE 6: SPANISH BAN ON BULLFIGHTING In March 2010, thousands of protesters gathered in Madrid, the capital of Spain, holding signs that said ?Stop Bullfighting!? and displayed grotesque pictures of bulls downed in the bullfighting arena.1The demonstration is the work of over fifty animal rights and anti-bullfighting organizations and the product of a vigorous debate in Spain over the propriety of bullfighting. ?Torture is Culture,? the protestors‘ slogan, succinctly highlights the conflict between those who advocate protecting bullfighting as an art form deeply embedded in Spanish culture and those who argue that bullfighting should be banned as animal cruelty. Bullfighting ?is an art-form that deserves to be protected and that has been part of Mediterranean and Spanishculture since time immemorial,"Esperanza Aquirre, the regional Partido Popular president of Madrid, has stated.2Indeed, despite the protests, the conservative regional government of Madrid has given bullfighting legal protections as a cultural and historical practice emblematic of Spain, and the regions of Murcia and Valencia have followed suit. News about bullfighting is published in the art section—not the sports section—of Spanish newspapers.3The spectacle of bullfighting has both inspired and been glorified by iconic artists and writers like Francisco Goya, Pablo Picasso, Ernest Hemingway, Federico Garcia Lorca, and Orson Welles. And just recently, the story of the celebrated matador Manolete, who was gored to death in the bullring in 1947, was glamorized in a film by the same name—starring Adrien Brody as Manolete and Penelope Cruz as his mistress, actress Lupe Sino.4The movie was filmed without harming real bulls, a choice that gained the approval of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals(PETA) but did not shield the film from the criticism of other animal rights and anti-bullfighting groups. ?It is inadmissible to release a film in which the hero is a matador," a French anti-bullfighting organization called Alliance Anticorrida announced in response to Manolete, encouraging its members to boycott the movie. Groups like Alliance Anticorrida, PETA, and The Humane Society believe that bullfights are simply ritualized slaughter and should be banned as animal cruelty.5They point out thatthousands of bulls are killed each year, that the animals die slow and painful deaths, and that the bullfight is not a ?fair fight.? During the first stage of a bullfight, men on horses (picadores)and men on foot (banderilleros)lance the bull in the neck and back to make it harder for him to lift his head. The banderillerosthen disorient the bull further by making him run in circles. Only then does the matador confront the bull with his cape and sword. And if the matador fails, an executioner kills the bull. Fueled by this grotesque characterization, anti-bullfighting sentiment has grown so strong that in the region of Catalonia a public petition called for a ban.6In response, the Catalan parliament has made steps to ban the practice by removing the bullfighting exemption that is currently a part of the region‘s animal cruelty laws.7The proposal will go to a final vote this year. 1?Thousands march against bullfighting in Spanish capital,? Expatica.com, Mar.28, 2010, http://www.expatica.com/es/news/spanish-rss-news/thousands-march-against-bullfighting-in-spanishcapital_33920.html; see also ?Suffering laid bare in call for end to bullfighting,? The Times, Oct.10, 2008, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world /europe/article4916866.ece. 2Giles Tremlett, ?Madrid protects bullfighting as an art form,? The Observer, Mar.7, 2010, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/mar/07/madrid-protects-bullfighting-art; Stephanie Feldstein, ?Bullfighting Demonstration: Torture is Not Culture,? Change.org, Apr.6, 2010, http://animals.change.org/blog/view/ bullfighting_demonstration_torture_is_not_culture. 3Giles Tremlett, ?Spanish region set to ban bullfighting,? The Guardian, Dec.17, 2009, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/17/bullfighting-spain-catalonia-ban. 4Anita Brooks, ?Blood, bulls, and boycotts: Manolete strikes again,? The Independent, Mar.30, 2010, http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/blood-bulls-and-boycott-manoletestrikes-again-1930679.html; Frank Gray, ?Blood of the matador,? The Guardian, Jan.7, 2008, http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2008/jan/07/spain.art.5SeePETA Media Center, ?Bullfighting: A Tradition of Tragedy,? http://www.peta.org/mc/factsheet_display.asp?ID=64(last visited June 21, 2010); The Humane Society International, ?Bullfighting,? http://hsi.org/issues/bullfighting/(last visited June 21, 2010).