Ethics week 3 discussion

All posts should be thoughtful, respectful, and add substantive value to the discussion. One or two sentences is not a substantive response. All posts should be written using full sentences in paragraph form. The use of philosophical concepts is required to earn full points. Please provide both in-text citations and post-text references. Do not bother claiming that you did not provide in-text citations and post-text references because everything came from your head. You are required to include textual evidence for your claims.

Discussion Prompts

Select one of the three prompts below to respond to in your initial post this week. You are encouraged to respond to peers that explored prompts that you did not.

Prompt #1

Has there ever been a time when you (or someone you know) let your conscience be your guide only to end up committing an immoral act? In this case, did you find that you (or someone you know) listened more to your emotional side or rational side when making this decision? (USLO 3.2)

Prompt #2

A doctor is driving down a road late at night. She sees a car in the opposite lane swerve sharply off the road and it crashes. There are no other cars around. Her gut reaction as a physician is to stop to assist the victims. However, she quickly remembers there are no “Good Samaritan laws” on the books in that state to protect her from malpractice lawsuits. Her conscience tells her she is justified in driving on. How would Freud explain the behavior of her conscience in this scenario? Do you believe her conscience was correct? (USLO 3.3)

Prompt #3

Do you think that conscience is the best guide or indicator of moral truth? Share a time when you’ve interacted with someone who seemed to lack a sense of moral sense or conscience. What was your reaction to this person? How should we respond to people who seem to lack morals and hurt others? (USLO 3.1)