i need help replying to classmates discussions:

topic one: Moral philosophies, ethics and the law.

Notes:

In response to your peers: Find posts from classmates who came to a different decision and offer your support or argue against them. Be respectful in your counterarguments. Consider how the moral philosophy you argued for or against might impact decision-making if applied on a larger scale, and consider how people from different cultures or with different life experiences may come to a different conclusion. You are required to comment on at least three other students’ posts. Use the RISE model for providing feedback, constructing responses that foster discussion and reflection. See Supplemental Sources for a link describing the RISE model.

http://www.risemodel.com

1.

The Trolley Problem has to be the most widley used introduction for ethics discussions since it has been conceived. Different moral philosophies may tell you different ways to come to the conclusion of what you should do. Consequentialism, the idea that an action is right is based on the consequences, may persuade you to flip the switch and save the 5 and kill the 1. This solution may sound good, but falls to most arguments about the trolley problem. Who is the 1 person? Are they the future inventor of the cure for cancer, or maybe one of the 5 people is a serial killer. These problems exist in Utilitarianism as well, which states the right decision is the one that produces the most good for the most people. 5v1, it’s simple. But then we come across the same problems of not knowing the backgrounds or later outcomes. Deontology is the idea the what is right is based on rules, don’t steal, kill, lie, that sort of stuff. Think 10 commandments or government laws. The problem with Deontology is that it leaves no room for the grey area in life. Don’t Lie, the little white lie you tell your kids to get them to eat vegetables or the lie you say to your spouse that the shirt looks nice or dinner tastes good is now morally wrong. Deontolgy would tell you not to flip the switch because killing is wrong. You aren’t causing the train to kill those 5 people, but you would cause it to kill that 1 person. So you can do nothing but watch it happen.

Moral relativism is the idea that no one set of morals is the correct one and different people view problems in different ways. The question stated above asks to talk about the potential danger in saying nothing is absolutely right or wrong. The dangers can be seen with simple discussions on rules in different cultures, countries, and religions. You may disagree with polyamourous relationships, but your neighbor doesn’t. That’s a simple one though, everybody is consenting adults, who cares how they want to live. To make it harder think of past or even current cultures and religions that promote child brides. I thinks its safe to say that most people you and I may know would say its wrong to force a child to marry somebody at a young age. The other person’s religion may say that its perfectly fine. That’s the danger in moral relativism.

2.

I believe that by pulling the switch I will definitely save 5 lives, but what about the other life. Well I think if the 5 workers I saved and myself got the attention of the 1 person on the opposite track he can possibly be saved. It did not say that the trolley was on a cliff , so he may have a chance to jump off an be safe. But on the otherhand, if the person does not hear us, they may end up dead.

The ethical decision would be to flip the switch and safe more lives than one. The moral of it all is and please do not judge me on this, would be to turn my head and mind my business, out of sight out of mind. The law of it would be if I had saved either person or persons, the other or others would have died. I am a mother, and I have a family of 7..they need me. I am neither going to jail nor saving anyone.

The answer I provided is neither right or wrong. There was not enough details into how I can save anyone and also is was considered deontological, because the action itself is right or wrong and is based under certain rules and principles, when it should be based on the consequences of the action.

3.

n the well-known philosophical thought experiment known as the “trolley problem,” five workers are in danger of dying because a trolley is heading towards them. What should be done? The five workers can only be saved by relocating the trolley to another track while just one worker is working. This topic would be approached in numerous ways according to diverse moral theories. Utilitarianism, for instance, argues that the ethically correct action is the one that results in everyone being as happy as possible.

Since doing so will result in fewer fatalities and increased happiness, diverting the trolley to the track with a single worker would be ethically correct. On the other hand, responsibility-based ethics might argue that, regardless of the outcomes, we have a moral duty to respect everyone’s rights. When viewed from this angle, diverting the trolley would be regarded as an infringement on the legal rights of the lone worker on the other track. Virtue ethics would emphasize the importance of developing virtue-based character traits, such as bravery and kindness. A moral person would undoubtedly feel compelled to take steps to lessen harm, although this decision may change depending on the circumstances and the individual. It is important to know that, in this case, moral, ethical, and legal criteria can not all line up. Legally, if they cause the death of one worker, even if they reroute the trolley and save the lives of five additional workers, they could still be charged with killing someone. This could lead to conflicts between moral or ethical commitments and legal obligations.

Moral relativism, which contends that moral norms are relative to the individual or culture, could be detrimental. If one argues that there is no absolute good or wrong, one could defend any course of action, regardless of the outcome. Moral relativism, which is detrimental and undermines moral and just standards, might be promoted. As a result, the trolley problem presents complex moral and ethical issues that highlight the differences between various moral philosophies. The topic can be handled from a variety of philosophical angles. However, deciding how to proceed is essential to consider any potential consequences and ethical and legal constraints.

Topic two: risk management

1.

In my own words through knowledge obtained through our unit one source (cited below) every organization (business) should absolutely utilize the ERM model (Enterprise Risk Management) adversities are inevitable because the world is ever evolving. Risk management is important because of legal, financial, reputational, morale, and any discrepancy along the way.

For example, imagine a scenario in which an organization operates a commercial construction site. retail store. An inspection failed pushing the deadline of the project further out. Let’s say… per code windows for student housing should be 24×24, however, the windows that failed inspection are 22×22. Hypothetically, the student housing complex is four stories with 400 units. (This can add an extreme loss.) customer slips and falls in the store due to a wet floor, resulting in injuries. This incident could lead to a legal claim for compensation by the injured customer.

Without risk management, we would not be proactive, but rather reactive, and responding to problems all the time. This creates stress and declines health and employee morale. Without projections and instruction (without the seven concepts of risk management) the consequences would be unpredictable. (Consequences can be gains or losses.)

In conclusion, implementing the strategies of ERM is critical to navigating unknown waters. A robust risk management analysis can help mitigate and prevent misfortune by being proactive.

2.

I believe risk management is an effective concept that should be used in all major decisions or operations in every capacity. For organizations or companies, enterprise risk management is the methods of identifying and managing risks that likely will arise and adversely effect their operations or end goal.

One example of simple risk management would be my process and desire to take classes at Post while I have a full time job and family. Although it is highly beneficial to attain higher education, I must identify all risks associated with becoming a student and how it might effect other areas of my life. As mentioned in the video this is a productive concept, as it will allow me to properly plan and put measures into place to avoid the consequences of these risks. I will establish a schedule, budget and routine to avoid the risk of losing time to accomplish other goals or operations ( work/family) as I attend college.

A communications or IT company must identify risk of inclement weather causing loss of power and its services, construction companies must identify safety risks to its employees and establish safety measures. Organizations will operate more efficiently and smoothly in the long run if they have an effective risk management process in place and mitigate inevitable threats to their respective operations.