![[Solution] NRS420 Health Assessment [Full Course, All Assignments and Discussions]](https://gradedsolution.com/wp-content/uploads/edd/2024/03/cropped-Graded-Solution-Logo.jpeg){kind=logo}
[ANSWER]CAPS 4360A Moral Issues In Society Paper 4: Ruggiero Analysis
TASK DESCRIPTION
Moral Issues In Society
Should Euthanasia be legalized
Paper 4 must:
1. Be based on Paper 3. In Paper 4, analyze the proponents? and opponents? arguments you described in Paper 3 using Ruggiero Analysis (see next
reuirement). Do not introduce new arguments in Paper 4. No new scholarly sources are required for Paper 4.[Moral Issues]
2. Perform Ruggiero Analysis of proponents? views and arguments, including policy proposals, to identify inherent values, obligations, consequences, and assumptions. Spell out what each value and obligation means to proponents. For example, if proponents value family, what does family mean to them, generally speaking? Note how values, obligations, and so on are relatively weighted. For example, if proponents value both safety and freedom, but ultimately give more moral weight to safety, then point this out Moral Issues.
3. Perform Ruggiero Analysis of opponents? views and arguments, including policy proposals, to identify inherent values, obligations, consequences, and assumptions. Spell out what each value and obligation means to opponents. Note how values, obligations, and so on are relatively weighted.
4. Include thoughtful discussion. Avoid dry ?laundry lists? of values, obligations, consequences, and assumptions.
5. Include a Works Cited page in MLA format if any sources are cited.
6. Be 4-6 pages long, not including the ?Works Cited? page.
7. Adhere to ?Format for Written Assignments.? Note that Paper 4 does not require new scholarly sources. Note also that Paper 4 does not require an intro or conclusion and it is recommended that you not include them. Vincent Ruggiero’s Moral Decision-Making Model Vincent Ruggiero provides us with a strategy for making moral decisions. It is important to note at the outset that it is a strategy, not a normative theory. Ruggiero’s model does not give one a moral answer,? though it can be very helpful to a person in the process of making a moral judgment Moral Issues.
The strategy Ruggiero develops is based on respect for persons. Ruggiero states that ?Respect for persons is an important value in most ethical systems ? (73). Philosophers and theologians alike accept the value of respect for persons. Ruggiero quotes Errol E. Harris to show that respect for persons has three requirements:
First, that each and every person be regarded as worthy of sympathetic consideration, and should be so treated; secondly, that no person should be regarded by another as a mere possession, or used as a mere instrument, or treated as a mere obstacle, to another?s satisfaction; and thirdly, that persons are not and ought never to be treated in any undertaking as mere expendables. (Ruggiero 73) Moral Issues.
According to Ruggiero, three important criteria are closely associated with the standard of respect for individuals. ?These criteria [are] obligations, moral ideals, and consequences . . . (73). About obligations, he says?Every significant human action occurs, directly or indirectly, in a context of relationships with others. And relationships usually imply obligation; restrictions on our behavior, demands to do something or to
avoid doing it? (74).
Often obligations conflict, such as when an employer?s obligation to employees conflicts with an obligation to stockholders. In these cases, preference must be given to one obligation over another. When analyzing a values conflict, one needs to identify and define what the obligations are to the stakeholders in the dilemma (90-91) Moral Issues.
In Ruggiero?s terms, moral ideals are what we have been calling values. He states that values ?are notions of excellence, goals that bring greater harmony in one?s self and between self and others. . . .They are also specific concepts that assist us in achieving respect for persons in our moral judgments? (74). Ruggiero provides us with some examples of values, including ?fairness, tolerance, compassion, loyalty, forgiveness, justice, amity, and peace? (75). He adds that, when ?there is a conflict between ideals [values] or between an ideal and an obligation, we should choose the action that will achieve the greater good? (107) Moral Issues.
The third criterion that relates to the respect of persons is the notion of consequences. These ?are the beneficial or harmful effects that result from an action and affect people involved, including, of course, the person performing the action? (75). These consequences may be physical, emotional, intentional, or even unintentional, and with both long and short term effects (75).
Ruggiero reminds us that our analysis of consequences is a ?prediction of future events and not a certainty. . . . For this reason, we must be thorough in accounting for all possible consequences and willing to modify our earlier judgments as actual consequences become available. . . ?(118). When there are mixed consequences, the morally preferable action is the one that will produce the greater good, or in cases where no good can be achieved, the lesser harm? (115).
Danney Ursery points out that the three criteria Ruggiero highlights, obligations, moral ideals (values), and consequences, ?are common to almost all ethical systems? (Moral Reasoning 11). Ruggiero’s method of using these criteria, according to Ursery, ?would be a useful starting point when attempting to resolve a moral dilemma, since an action which does not pass scrutiny after the obligations, values, and effects are analyzed will be morally suspect. [ Moral Issues ] Moral Issues
In other words, any action that honors obligations, while respecting values and benefiting people, can be presumed to be moral? (Moral Reasoning 11). Ursery cautions us, though, by stating:
One should not assume, however, that each concern will be represented equally in each and every moral decision. Sometimes the issue may be largely a matter of obligations; other times, some value may predominate; still other times, consideration of effects may be the overriding concern Moral Issues.
These are just guidelines, but a moral individual without some form of a moral decision-making procedure is like a sailor without a compass; sooner or later he or she will get lost. (Moral Reasoning 11) It is important to note that the Ruggiero method alone does not offer a solution to a moral dilemma. Rather, its usefulness is in gaining a deeper understanding of the moral lay of the land in which the controversy as a whole is found.
If we are to make reasonable, responsible, justifiable decisions, it is essential that we truly understand the problem for which we are proposing a solution. Thus, while Ruggiero’s method leads us to identifying the values, obligations, and consequences involved on both sides of the issue, it does not instruct us on how to adjudicate between them.
It does not, in other words, tell us which values should be ranked the highest, or to which obligations we owe the greatest fealty. As such, it is only a beginning ? a part of the discovery process. In the end, Ruggiero?’ method requires us to carefully investigate all of the consequences for all who are affected, the good as well as the bad. A responsible moral agent has to think about who will be affected, and how. [Moral Issues] Moral Issues
[ANSWER PREVIEW]
On Demand: Order Customised Solution Starting from just USD 11 per page. Contact Our Support on Whatsapp Now!
