Blog Assignment #9

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ASSIGNMENT PART ONE

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In this section, we're going to return for a moment to Chapter 7, to the section that discusses errors that are common in the analysis of moral issues (p. 89). Breifly explain each of the following errors in your own words, as if you were explaining the concept to a friend who had never taken this class (consider who, what, when, where, why, how, when); and then give an example of each one, preferably from your own past experience.

Unwarranted Assumptions: Unwarranted Assumptions are simply assuming things that you have no fact based information to bring to the table to support your theory. Take for example if Ms. Pierce is getting a fee for us to attend these seminars or group Philosophy events but if we were to go and show up our beliefs or ideals could be challenged and we could leave very unhappy or worse with a lose of respect for her inviting us out there. Not that I assume that would happen but what if she knew the topic could be something offensive and just didn't inform us on purpose? :)

Oversimplification: Oversimplification is nothing more than leaving out key pieces of information that are important to the topic or issue at hand. Say for example Ms. Pierce hosted class and people just rose up and interupted her and didn't care. Well she could just tell each person to shut up everytime she does it and that would fix the issue. Well there is more to it than that. Can she even tell us to shut up? Is there a serious penalty if she does? If she can what tone of voice can she use for it? These are all issues that complicate the quick fix.

Hasty Conclusions: Hasty conclustions are nothing more than jumping to a decision without doing due diligence to the issue at hand. I love using Ms. Pierce in my examples because she challenged me to use her in each one so for this one let's use a positive hasty conclusion. Say Ms. Pierce just gave each a full 100% on all of our blogs just for posting it. She just went into reader saw the topic of Blog Assignment 9 and said 100 good to go, rather than reading through each one to make sure the questions were answered properly and fairly to each of the students. Not all of the examples have to be negative and I think she should take this theory into serious consideration.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ASSIGNMENT PART TWO

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Briefly answer the following "chapter opening" questions, in your own words, based on what you learned by studying chapter eight:

1. What do we do in situations where there is more than a single obligation? When you have to choose between more than one obligation logic tells you that you will weigh out all the options and pick which one is most fitting and important to you. Not sure if Karla wants examples but I think I can think of one for her. Take Ms. Pierce used to be a bartender so we will assume she likes beer (even though we know she does). So what if on a Thursday night she really wanted to go drink instead of having class and making money to pay rent or for the beers she is about to have? Well hopefully if she chooses to go have a drink she invites all the legal students she has to have class out there while doing both or that she chooses to keep her employment obligation to all of us. Let me know if that is innappropriate and I'll change it.

2. How can we reconcile conflicting obligations? There is no way to resolve conflicting obligatoins. No matter what you do you are going to be breaking an obligation to another party or person. You just have to weigh all the ideas and options out there and make the decision on what you feel is best for the situation at hand. Take Ms. Pierce again for example. Say I show up late everytime for class or just plain don't show for what ever reasons. I then go apply for a campus job and she seems to not hate me for a teacher so I use her as a reference. The people call and ask if I can make it on time and all that. She is now stuck will telling my could be future employer I am never on time to anything in my life or lie for me and say I am always punctual to everything I do knowing that I am not. She has conflicting obligations that could be bad for both us depending on the consequences.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ASSIGNMENT PART THREE

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. In a nutshell, what is the most important thing, for you, that you learned from this assignment? I learned that jumping to hasty conclusions is usually the best way to make a decision if you are pushed for time and have no other choice. No really it is the fact that when you are going to decisions on issues and situations it is the fact that you need to take into account every point of view and consequence and obligation because a lot of times you are going to affect just more than yourself with the choice.

2. How will you apply what you learned through this assignment to your everyday life? I will look more at what my actions do to affect the other people arround me rather than just myself.

3. What grade do you believe your efforts regarding this assignment deserve? Justify your answer. I think I should get full points. I answered each question fully and gave proper examples each time and take your challenge on and passed.