Explanation of Personal Ethics Paper

Order Number	636738393092
Type of Project	ESSAY
Writer Level	PHD VERIFIED
Format	APA
Academic Sources	10
Page Count	3-12 PAGES

Instructions/Descriptions

Explanation of Personal Ethics Paper

[Order Now]

Required Resources Read/review the following resources for this activity:

Textbook: Review all chapters
Lesson
Minimum of 1 scholarly source

Optional Resources The following resources may be useful but are not required for this activity:

Link (website): Ring of Gyges (Links to an external site.) (for those who wish to read the whole story)

Dilemma One of the great examples of ethics and morals in all of literature comes from Plato who wrote about the Ring of Gyges in The Republic, Book II, starting at paragraph 359a.

The story goes that Gyges was a shepherd in the service of the King. In a most unusual circumstance he came upon a dead man, removed the man’s ring, and discovered that it made him invisible. He conspired to take the periodic report of the shepherds to the King – once there he seduced the Queen and eventually took control of the Kingdom by conspiring with the Queen. Plato continues the story:

Suppose now that there were two such magic rings, and the just put on one of them and the unjust the other; no man can be imagined to be of such an iron nature that he would stand fast in justice. No man would keep his hands off what was not his own when he could safely take what he liked out of the market, or go into houses and lie with any one at his pleasure, or kill or release from prison whom he would, and in all respects be like a God among men.

Then the actions of the just would be as the actions of the unjust; they would both come at last to the same point. And this we may truly affirm to be a great proof that a man is just, not willingly or because he thinks that justice is any good to him individually, but of necessity, for wherever any one thinks that he can safely be unjust, there he is unjust.

For all men believe in their hearts that injustice is far more profitable to the individual than justice, and he who argues as I have been supposing, will say that they are right.

Initial Post Instructions For this discussion, address the following:

Create a personal ethical philosophy and explain from which philosophies you created it and why the contents are important and meaningful for you. List its precepts.
Take your personal ethical philosophy statement and use it to work through the famous case of the Ring of Gyges. This story raises the question of what sanctions prevent people from just taking any liberties they are inclined to take. The whole subject of ethics, seen in large scale, is that of accepting and living under moral standards.
What would you do if you had that second ring?
What else within this course helps in responding to this fictitious situation or in explaining it?

Follow-Up Post Instructions Respond to at least two peers or one peer and the instructor. Are they holding true to their own personal ethical philosophies in their resolutions of the dilemma? Further the dialogue by providing more information and clarification.

Writing Requirements

Minimum of 3 posts (1 initial & 2 follow-up)
Minimum of 2 sources cited (assigned readings/online lessons and an outside source)
APA format for in-text citations and list of references

Week 8 Discussion: Personal Ethics Statement

1010 unread replies.1010 replies.

Required Resources Read/review the following resources for this activity:

Textbook: Review all chapters
Lesson
Minimum of 1 scholarly source

Optional Resources The following resources may be useful but are not required for this activity:

Link (website): Ring of Gyges (Links to an external site.) (for those who wish to read the whole story)

Dilemma One of the great examples of ethics and morals in all of literature comes from Plato who wrote about the Ring of Gyges in The Republic, Book II, starting at paragraph 359a.

The story goes that Gyges was a shepherd in the service of the King. In a most unusual circumstance he came upon a dead man, removed the man’s ring, and discovered that it made him invisible. He conspired to take the periodic report of the shepherds to the King – once there he seduced the Queen and eventually took control of the Kingdom by conspiring with the Queen. Plato continues the story:

Suppose now that there were two such magic rings, and the just put on one of them and the unjust the other; no man can be imagined to be of such an iron nature that he would stand fast in justice.

No man would keep his hands off what was not his own when he could safely take what he liked out of the market, or go into houses and lie with any one at his pleasure, or kill or release from prison whom he would, and in all respects be like a God among men.

Then the actions of the just would be as the actions of the unjust; they would both come at last to the same point. And this we may truly affirm to be a great proof that a man is just, not willingly or because he thinks that justice is any good to him individually, but of necessity, for wherever any one thinks that he can safely be unjust, there he is unjust.

For all men believe in their hearts that injustice is far more profitable to the individual than justice, and he who argues as I have been supposing, will say that they are right.

Initial Post Instructions For this discussion, address the following:

Create a personal ethical philosophy and explain from which philosophies you created it and why the contents are important and meaningful for you. List its precepts.
Take your personal ethical philosophy statement and use it to work through the famous case of the Ring of Gyges. This story raises the question of what sanctions prevent people from just taking any liberties they are inclined to take. The whole subject of ethics, seen in large scale, is that of accepting and living under moral standards.
What would you do if you had that second ring?
What else within this course helps in responding to this fictitious situation or in explaining it?

Follow-Up Post Instructions Respond to at least two peers or one peer and the instructor. Are they holding true to their own personal ethical philosophies in their resolutions of the dilemma? Further the dialogue by providing more information and clarification.

Writing Requirements

Minimum of 3 posts (1 initial & 2 follow-up)
Minimum of 2 sources cited (assigned readings/online lessons and an outside source)
APA format for in-text citations and list of references

Explanation of Personal Ethics Paper

RUBRIC

Excellent Quality

95-100%

Introduction

45-41 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Literature Support

91-84 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Methodology

58-53 points

With titles for each slide as well as bulleted sections to group relevant information as required, the content is well-organized. Excellent use of typeface, color, images, effects, and so on to improve readability and presenting content. The minimum length criterion of 10 slides/pages is reached.

Average Score

50-85%

40-38 points

More depth/information is required for the context and importance, otherwise the study detail will be unclear. There is no search history information supplied.

83-76 points

There is a review of important theoretical literature, however there is limited integration of research into problem-related ideas. The review is just partly focused and arranged. There is research that both supports and opposes. A summary of the material given is provided. The conclusion may or may not include a biblical integration.

52-49 points

The content is somewhat ordered, but there is no discernible organization. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on may sometimes distract from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.

Poor Quality

0-45%

37-1 points

The context and/or importance are lacking. There is no search history information supplied.

75-1 points

There has been an examination of relevant theoretical literature, but still no research concerning problem-related concepts has been synthesized. The review is just somewhat focused and organized. The provided overview of content does not include any supporting or opposing research. The conclusion has no scriptural references.

48-1 points

There is no logical or apparent organizational structure. There is no discernible logical sequence. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on often detracts from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.