Thursday, September 15, 2011
Post-Blog
The Constitution and Dudley&Stevens case both reflect the important ethical belief of whether or not it is more important to focus on the greater good or individual rights of society. We believe that both cases show that society is more focused on the greater good over the individual rights. The Constitution was made for the benefit of everyone but was not able focus more on specific problems of the individual. The ratification made in the constitution represent the concerns of the rights of the people as individuals in the community. The Dudley & Stevens case showed that the greater good prevailing over the individual rights. The two sailors that thought up the idea to kill the young man and eat him for survival; only because they felt it was either all of them die or they kill the young man to survive. The individual rights was less important then the greater good in that circumstance.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Tuesday, September 20, 2011Here are the answers from team half-time to questions posed by the pre-game team.....
ReplyDeleteHow do we know when an action is worth of punishment?
Some of us felt that it all depends on the action. Some of us are believers of the infamous an "eye for an eye", but in most cases remorse is only felt because of the fact that punishment is upon them. As a whole, everyone should feel some sort of responsibility given the circumstances. For example, if you witnessed a woman's purse get stolen and you have a real chance to stop the thief, then one should take that chance. In psychology, there is a term Diffusion of Responsibility where the more people there are,the less people feel inclined to take action because they think that someone else will do it. This often creates the problem that if everyone views it in that sense, no one will anything about it. I f you can prevent something bad, you should observe the risks and if you are confident in your ability to succeed, then you should do something about.
Does the sacrifice of one's own happiness ever create a better environment for the many?
This question could be answered with heavy double standards. Some people say that it is unjust to place a price upon the head of another but yet no one has complained that we caught Osama Bin Laden. You can view this question in two ways as a civilian or a survivalist. As a civilian, the act of murder is one of the ultimate crimes. The taking of one's life is something that can not be given back in an court room when all is said and done. As a survivalist, we survive because we value our life over the life of others standing in our way. If you don't put a price on your own life in the game of survival, then you're as good as dead.
What happens if our "duty to our fellow man" proves to be more than we are capable of delivering? Is a situation ever helpless?
Guilt is a result of the fact that even when you get away with something bad, you have to remember it after. People feel guilty even though they could get away with it because deep down they are good people.
No situation is ever really helpless, but you might think that it is because you aren't able to think due to situations that are beyond your control.
Referring back to discussion we had yesterday, about we as people making sacrifices for the greater good...
Some of us believe that we as humans make sacrifices everyday for the greater good. This could be anything from picking up someone's pencil, letting a car turn or paying for someone's coffee in the drive-thru. These sacrifices though they might be minuscule to some are contagious and make the world a better place.
Finally.... To all those who were down with the "No More Yellow Campaign" here are some questions...
What is the greater good? What if everyone does not agree with the greater good? Are some pleasures worth more to a certain group of people? Is it ever easy or hard to truly please the greatest number?