A Variety of Ethical Topics
Week 2
Question: With reference to Heywood’s chapter “Human Nature, the Individual and Society”, consider ways that key political and philosophical ideas are informed by, or even depend on, core ideas or assumptions about human nature. Use examples from the chapter to support your answer. Which stand out to you most, and why?
The argument between Individualism and collectivism were what stood out for me most. The argument that on principle humans are naturally co-operative or competitive has taken such a stance in global politics. This principle of co-operation and competition has been linked to early Darwinism and how this impacts how instinctively we operate and, in my mind, how we are both intrinsically competitive and co-operative.
What I further found interesting was the debate of altruism and selfishness when it comes to evolutionary traits. Dawkin’s idea that individualism simmers down to the survival of the person, yet we use the collective (society) to flourish.
In the piece, individualism and collectivism is a binary opposition politically, and I find this extremely interesting. Collectivism and Individualism are opposites, and even in global conflicts it is often between the idea of capitalism (individualism) and socialism (collectivism).
This simple principle has caused much debate since the emergence of socialist’s parties in Germany in the 19th century which would spur Marxism and the following revolution in Russia leading to the formation of communist Russia. The formation of Russia and the epitome of capitalism in America has caused the most bloodshed in recent history, all stemming from the philosophical argument of collectivism and individualism.
Another fascinating person in the article is Durkheim who reinforces my ethical stance, he mentions that individualism leads to suicide, whilst collectivism results in happiness. This point interests me as I perceive my everyday world. I believe that possessions drive our society in Australia, your wealth and possessions dictate your success. The material possessions we have dictate our happiness, and consumption is a never-ending cycle. Therefore, I completely agree with Durkheim in his statement about happiness, although I’m not convinced that collectivism does lead to more happiness, it is a flaw in our capitalist society and our individualism in principle.
Week 3
Question: Make a statement about the role of uncertainty in critical and ethical thinking using this week’s readings to support your view. What creates uncertainty? What problems might it produce?
Uncertainty in agency can be related to various factors, I will elaborate on hospitals. Uncertainty develops when the nurses and doctors need to make the decision on patients’ welfare. If the patient is too unwell to make decisions themselves, it becomes the professionals’ ethical agency. To help mend this uncertainty, professionals, such as doctors can use the “reflection square” which was elaborated on in our reading “enhancing reflection” (2004, p.34). This critical reading and the reflection square can help doctors devise an ethical approach to the patient’s wellbeing.
One important moment of exercising my ethical agency was convincing my friend to not drive home drunk. In an inebriated state he was unable to make this decision for himself without risking his life and others. My decision making could have saved lives.
An example of extreme political agency is Hitlers rise to power. Hitler’s political power over Nazi Germany was issued as a response to the starvation post World War 1 Germany. To express his political regime, he used extremely unethical and atrocious approaches to solving Germanys problem. The consequences of his moral agency resulted in many atrocities. Hitlers ethical agencies and speeches also delivered one of his promises, that the welfare of his people would improve.
I’m sure this facet of the discussion will change for me over time as I learn more about the role of ethics in our society and as an individual. Every individual has their own ethical values, yet ethical agents express their views and make decisions. Therefore, you cannot be both, you can have your own opinions, yet to be an agent you must make decisions.
Week 4
Question: Compare what is said about pluralism in the Hinman reading and in entry 5.10 from the Toolkit. What difference do you notice, and what do you make of this difference? Explain which ‘treatment’ of pluralism you prefer and why that one is more appealing to you. Please support your view with examples and evidence from the Campbell et al chapter in Medical Ethics.
I’ll be explaining this question through a political stance. I believe in the vast area of circumstances; it is impossible to have a government which is both following absolutism and rationalism. The only circumstance in which this is intervened by strong politics, akin to absolutism is in times of severe war, where countries are under massive threat, which results in practices such as inscription.
As Hinman explains in the reading neither absolutism or relativism “tell the whole story about moral conflict” (Hinman, p.27), they are both very linear in concept, and for the most part very outdated. Whilst imperialism and colonialism were still in practice, the idea of rationalism was reasonable as it would allow cultures to mutually respect each other, whilst in initial contact.
As individualism in society developed, pluralism began to develop too. The rationalising over what is right and wrong, understanding the importance of culture yet realising that some conflicts need consequence (Hinman, 2023), philosophy became popular in Western politics.
Something I found very interesting about relativism is the idea of cultural acceptance, was Nike in the wrong for using child labour in China to produce their product? In rationalist principles, Nike were following what was considered culturally appropriate in China, yet incredibly insensitive in the western world. This relativist stance on culturally acceptable child labour, is what shifts me away from relativism as a philosophy.
Week 6
Task 1: Kallen suggests there are three areas into which human rights can be divided. Name each area, provide examples for each category, then comment on which category impacts your life most in comparison with the life of an African villager. In your answer, apply ideas about ‘standpoint’ (Toolkit pp. 237-239), privilege, and human rights.
Task 2: Explain the early relationship between human rights and state power. How have Western understandings of human rights changed since World War II? Use the terms ‘collective’ (or ‘community’) and ‘individual’ in your response. How do such ideas relate to human rights in first and third world countries?
Task 3: Using your critical thinking skills, explain the role of values and facts in a current human rights issue of your choice. Show an awareness of privilege, power, and culture in your response. Note: As well as the Week 6 materials, you may find it helpful to revisit Week 3.
Task 1
The three intrinsic “principles of human rights – freedom, equality and dignity” (Kallen, 2004, pg.14) are included in the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights formed in 1948 as a base line for human rights.
The first principle is freedom which allows one to determine their own life and society, free from enslavement including practicing of religion and moving within countries, within the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, asylum seeking to evade war struck regions is a right. Second is equality ensures equality within law, where policies shouldn’t be discriminatory and everyone has a fair tribunal, enforcing fair judgement and punishment. Third is dignity as a principle ensures value and respect amongst all people, this includes the LGBTQ+ community and respect amongst culture.
These three principles are considered inalienable, regardless of country or state, these apply as a human right which is applicable to every person globally, in comparison to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 which is seen as a guiding non enforced principle.
Within the ‘Ethics Toolkit’ it states that the “rich only see from the top of a skyscraper, whilst the poor witness the streets and the skyscraper where they work” ((Baggini, J 2007, pg. 238). This quote demonstrates that I will never understand how it is to be an impoverished African villager. What strikes me the most as a difference between myself and an African in say Congo Republic, is the mass genocides between political factions, impacting the safety of all citizens of the region. The mass violence on a common occurrence is something I can’t even personally fathom being a privileged Australian.
Week 7
Question: Using any of the vocabulary from Week 1 through to Week 4, and any of the ideas from Week 6 and 7, together with the reading by Abbott, say whether you agree or disagree with using primates for experimental research, and explain why you hold this position.
I believe the argument of using primates for scientific research is complicated. I stand up for non-human rights, yet I can understand the complexity of scientific research and the necessity for primates as our closest relatives. Abbot explains in his article on primate research, the extreme lengths research companies are willing to go through to continue primate research as many European countries implement restrictions (Abbot, 2014). The urgency to continue research on primates was so important to these companies that they transferred to China to escape the European clinical restrictions.
This dilemma results in an argument between non-human rights and the progression of medicine. Although the aspect of scientific research leaves me on the fence, in Peter Singer’s “A Vegetarian Philosophy” (2000) he shares how cruel humanity can be towards animals with no ethical agency, and how we need to be the ethical agents for those who cannot. Singer’s explanation of farmed animals for McDonalds produce sickens me, so naturally the idea of caged primates for scientific research also leaves me uneasy.
Ultimately my stance is conflicted, I understand the benefits of primate research, yet the mistreatment of animals and the deaths that occur due to these studies is sickening. It’s also very interesting to see how we pick and choose the value of different lives, the ideology of speciesism mentioned in the “Ethics Toolkit” (2007, pg.196-199) fits the perfect description as, we often consider ourselves superior to primates, so it is easy to kill primates to progress in medicine.
Weeks 8/9
Learning Task 1: Are you a person who makes conscious ethical choices about consumption? How important, or marginal, would you say the idea of ethical consumption is to your sense of personal integrity, and why? Do knowledge, understanding, and expectations of corporate integrity inform your consumer choices? If so, which of the meanings of “integrity” described in PP1 and by Brown (2005) resonate most with you in making those choices?
Learning Task 2: In the production, trade, and consumption of goods and services, who has moral/ethical agency and responsibility? Using a real or hypothetical example, consider what entities are involved, and the degrees of agency and responsibility each has to think and act ethically, morally, and with integrity. Do some entities have more agency, and bear more responsibility, than others? Why/why not?
Brown states one of the five principles is consistency (Brown, 2005, p.4), consistency is my most important factor of integrity. I always try to have minimal wastage of food in my household whilst also actively trying to purchase ethical products. Purchasing ethical products can be quite as even fair-trade companies are being scrutinised. I try to use recyclable products and avoid littering. Although I try to purchase fair trade products, sometimes I must go for cheaper options as I can sometimes not afford to purchase the ethical products. One of my non negotiables are purchasing free range eggs rather than battery caged, I find the conditions in the caged eggs facilities absolutely appalling. My practice of ethical consumption is important to my personal integrity, and as Brown states, the consistency of ethical decisions is what defines a person, or corporations’ integrity (Brown, 2005, p.4).
For many corporations the highest profit margin is a necessity. This results in sweat shops, the change from sweatshops in China to the Philippines is a perfect example of corporations abusing cheaper labour. Corporations argue that they are supplying jobs to people who would otherwise be starving. Yet the pay, work hours and abuse of their workers is clearly unethical in practice. Examples of companies using sweatshops are Nike, Gap, and Apple, although there’s plenty more. As weeks 8 and 9 PowerPoint demonstrates, the collapse of the factory in Bangladesh is an example of poor working conditions.
Brown states the five features of ethical practice and integrity, the other non-negotiable rule Brown states is integrity in nature (Brown, 2005). Countless oil spills in developing countries such as Nigeria have impacted the natural resources and the local peoples. The treatment of nature will indicate our future, and it also destroys lives when the environment is abused. Nature and consistency are both intrinsic to one another and impact my personal consumption significantly. I try not to purchase products which have been produced at the detriment of nature.
Learning Task 2
Moral and ethical agency is complicated in many corporate entities. Corporations themselves have the responsibility of the environment and the local community. As shown in PowerPoint one of week 8 companies such as Shell can dictate a community and influence poor environmental decisions. Shell is accountable for an oil spill in Nigeria which occurred in 2011, resulting in 40,000 barrels of crude oil being spilt into the ocean. This incident alone devastated the communities and this incident with Shell is not an isolated instance, there have been many other events of natural devastation. Another devastation we face from multi-billion-dollar corporations is loss of natural habitat and deforestation.
Corporations are often the ethical agents in the production of products. In a capitalist and consumer society, many corporations ignore the means for an outcome. This can include Nike, Gap and Apple using sweat shops for cheap labour, for the outcome of profit. These are unethical practices which can result in abuse of employees and risking their safety, such as the factory collapse in Bangladesh in 2011. Whilst these companies are abusing labour, there are may philanthropists who are creating agency for these abused individuals. People such as Bono, Angelina Jolie and Madonna have created non-for-profit organisations which aid impoverished peoples.
The examples of abusive corporation’s and philanthropists demonstrate as an example that many people do not have any agency and are simply ethical subjects in many situations. The abuse of cheap labour in third world countries demonstrates a lack of agency of vast regions, whilst philanthropists are attempting to give these people a voice about what is detrimental to their country and communities, alongside the natural resources which have been a source of food and produce. The other form of ethical agency which is intended to help the abused ethical subjects are organisations such as fair-trade, which tries to give adequate wages instead of abusing labour and the workers. As consumers we have the decisions of which products we purchase, whether we purchase products which advocate and abuse peoples, or products which try to achieve equality and whether we support companies which are destroying our ecosystems, or companies which consider our environment.
Reference List
Bishop, Matthew and Michael Green 2008. Philanthro-capitalism, how the rich can save the world. New York: Bloomsbury Press.
Brown, Marvin T. 2005. Corporate Integrity. New York: Cambridge University Press.
The Make It Collective 2020, “8 Simple Steps to Being a More Ethical Consumer”.
New Internationalist 2006, “How to be an ethical consumer”, no. 395, pp. 20-21.
Brown, Marvin T. 2005. Corporate Integrity. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Davis, S., & Cheeke, P., 1998. Do domestic animals have minds and the ability to think? A provisional sample of opinions on the question. Journal of Animal Science, 76 (8), pp. 2072-2079.
Baggini, J. and Fosl, P.S. (2007) The Ethics Toolkit: A Compendium of Ethical Concepts and Methods. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub.
Singer, Peter (2000) Writings on an ethical life. HarperCollins publishers, New York pp. 66-72
Abbott, Alison. “The changing face of primate research: a hard-won political victory for primate research is at risk of unravelling in pockets of Europe.” Nature, vol. 505, no. 7486, 6 Feb. 2014, pp. 24+. Gale Academic OneFile Select, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A362168419/EAIM?u=griffith&sid=bookmark-EAIM&xid=f4a526a0. Accessed 1 Jan. 2024.
Ake, C 1998, ‘The African context of human rights’, in May, L, Collins-Chobanian, S & Wong, K (ed.), Applied ethics: A multicultural approach, Prentice Hall, pp. 83-89.
Baggini, J & Fosl, PS 2023, The ethics toolkit: a compendium of ethical concepts and methods, 2nd edn, Wiley Blackwell.
Haule, RR 2006, ‘Some reflections on the foundation of human rights — Are human rights an alternative to moral values?’ Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law, vol. 10, pp. 367-395.
Kallen, E 2004, Social inequality and social injustice: A human rights perspective, Palgrave Macmillan.
Marian Verkerk, Hilde Lindemann, Els Maeckelberghe, Enne Feenstra, Rudolph Hartoungh, & Menno de Bree. (2004). Enhancing Reflection: An Interpersonal Exercise in Ethics Education. The Hastings Center Report, 34(6), 31–38. https://doi.org/10.2307/3528175
Hinman, L.M 2013, Understanding the diversity of moral beliefs: Relativism, Absolutism, and Pluralism, Ethics: A pluralistic approach to moral theory, Wadsworth Pub Co, ed. 5, pp. 24-5
