Ethics and Chemical Engineering

Dealing with hazardous nuclear wastes. 
Read the article and analyze the events on an ethical standpoint.

Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative

This assignment will incorporate a common practical tool in helping clinicians begin to ethically
analyze a case. Organizing the data in this way will help you apply the four principles of
principlism.
Based on the “Case Study: Healing and Autonomy” and other required topic study materials, you
will complete the “Applying the Four Principles: Case Study” document that includes the
following:
Part 1: Chart
This chart will formalize principlism and the four-boxes approach by organizing the data from the
case study according to the relevant principles of biomedical ethics: autonomy, beneficence,
nonmaleficence, and justice.
Part 2: Evaluation
This part includes questions, to be answered in a total of 500 words, that describe how
principalism would be applied according to the Christian worldview.
Remember to support your responses with the topic study materials.
APA style is not required, but solid academic writing is expected.

Biomedical Ethics in the Christian Narrative

This assignment will incorporate a common practical tool in helping clinicians begin to ethically
analyze a case. Organizing the data in this way will help you apply the four principles of
principlism.
Based on the “Case Study: Healing and Autonomy” and other required topic study materials, you
will complete the “Applying the Four Principles: Case Study” document that includes the
following:
Part 1: Chart
This chart will formalize principlism and the four-boxes approach by organizing the data from the
case study according to the relevant principles of biomedical ethics: autonomy, beneficence,
nonmaleficence, and justice.
Part 2: Evaluation
This part includes questions, to be answered in a total of 500 words, that describe how
principalism would be applied according to the Christian worldview.
Remember to support your responses with the topic study materials.
APA style is not required, but solid academic writing is expected.

Engineering Ethics

Engineering Ethics
Your final paper for this course will be an in-depth analysis of an accident or mistake related to your engineering field. You should imagine your reader to be someone who is not a member of this class, but who has some interest in engineering ethics.  And you should be trying to convince him or her that a serious but avoidable mistake occurred.
 
Your paper should have the same elements as all in-depth analyses from class and presentations:
 

  • Briefly give a synopsis of your example (This can be your introduction)
  • Identify all relevant people involved
  • Give all the important engineering facts of the case
  • Give all the important personal decision/managerial/cultural climate/political facts of the case
  • Chose one moral theory (Utilitarianism, Kantian Ethics, or Virtue Ethics) to assess the example in detail. Explain the theory a bit before applying it to your case.
  • Give two pieces of advice to your classmates for how to avoid this kind of mistake in the future (This can be your conclusion) I am conversant with this topic

The paper should be 4 pages, double-spaced, with one-inch margins. The entire paper should be in paragraph form (the only exception is for a possible utility calculation).
As for topics, you may choose whatever accident or mistake you want for your paper so long it has not been discussed in our classroom. That is, it cannot be something we discussed as a class (check the syllabus), and it cannot be the same topic from your in-class presentation or any of the other in-class presentations from your class (check the presentation groups).  You do not need to have your topic approved by me (although I can certainly give you feedback if you want it).
Punctuation and Grammar counts for 1/3 of a letter grade.  For each punctuation and/or grammatical mistake, I will put a small checkmark in the left-hand margin.  If there are three or more checkmarks on a single page, then you will get 1/3 of a letter grade off for grammar.  I’ll mark this explicitly on your paper by giving you the grade you earned, then saying “1/3 off for grammar,” and then showing you your newly calculated grade.  You will get a checkmark for the following mistakes, among others: misuse of commas, semicolons, colons; subject/verb disagreement; possessive mistakes; misuse of ‘there’, ‘their’, and ‘they’re’; misuse of ‘your’ and ‘you’re’; misuse of ‘its’ and ‘it’s’; spelling mistakes. 
Appropriate citation is required: If you look at a website for ideas, list the url at the end of your paper under “works referenced.”  If you paraphrase someone else’s ideas in your own words, put the url or the author’s name and article title at the end of the paragraph you’ve paraphrased.  If you cite something directly, be sure to put it in quotation marks, and put the author’s name and article title or the url at the end of the sentence.  Remember that your papers will be checked for originality at www.turnitin.com.
 
NOTE: You may wish to consult your fellow students, parents, or friends about your assignment.  I encourage you to do so.  However (and this is crucial), any help you get must be acknowledged.  If your mom reads your assignment over to check your grammar, include a footnote or endnote thanking her for this service.  If you discuss the general ideas you have with a friend, write “Thanks to Lisa Kudrow for a helpful discussion” or something of the sort.  If you borrow a specific idea from someone, put in a footnote saying “I got this idea from Mark Improvement” or whoever.  ALSO IMPORTANT: although I’m all in favor of talking about philosophy assignments with others, you are not permitted to actually write together, or to write up shared outlines, or to share written work with one another, or even to memorize a shared answer.  Be sensible here: don’t give a copy of your essay to someone else who “just wants to get an idea” for his own paper, since you will both count as cheating. The minimum likely penalty for cheating is E for the assignment, and possibly expulsion from the university. And that would be painful for both of us!

Engineering Ethics

Engineering Ethics
Your final paper for this course will be an in-depth analysis of an accident or mistake related to your engineering field. You should imagine your reader to be someone who is not a member of this class, but who has some interest in engineering ethics.  And you should be trying to convince him or her that a serious but avoidable mistake occurred.
 
Your paper should have the same elements as all in-depth analyses from class and presentations:
 

  • Briefly give a synopsis of your example (This can be your introduction)
  • Identify all relevant people involved
  • Give all the important engineering facts of the case
  • Give all the important personal decision/managerial/cultural climate/political facts of the case
  • Chose one moral theory (Utilitarianism, Kantian Ethics, or Virtue Ethics) to assess the example in detail. Explain the theory a bit before applying it to your case.
  • Give two pieces of advice to your classmates for how to avoid this kind of mistake in the future (This can be your conclusion) I am conversant with this topic

The paper should be 4 pages, double-spaced, with one-inch margins. The entire paper should be in paragraph form (the only exception is for a possible utility calculation).
As for topics, you may choose whatever accident or mistake you want for your paper so long it has not been discussed in our classroom. That is, it cannot be something we discussed as a class (check the syllabus), and it cannot be the same topic from your in-class presentation or any of the other in-class presentations from your class (check the presentation groups).  You do not need to have your topic approved by me (although I can certainly give you feedback if you want it).
Punctuation and Grammar counts for 1/3 of a letter grade.  For each punctuation and/or grammatical mistake, I will put a small checkmark in the left-hand margin.  If there are three or more checkmarks on a single page, then you will get 1/3 of a letter grade off for grammar.  I’ll mark this explicitly on your paper by giving you the grade you earned, then saying “1/3 off for grammar,” and then showing you your newly calculated grade.  You will get a checkmark for the following mistakes, among others: misuse of commas, semicolons, colons; subject/verb disagreement; possessive mistakes; misuse of ‘there’, ‘their’, and ‘they’re’; misuse of ‘your’ and ‘you’re’; misuse of ‘its’ and ‘it’s’; spelling mistakes. 
Appropriate citation is required: If you look at a website for ideas, list the url at the end of your paper under “works referenced.”  If you paraphrase someone else’s ideas in your own words, put the url or the author’s name and article title at the end of the paragraph you’ve paraphrased.  If you cite something directly, be sure to put it in quotation marks, and put the author’s name and article title or the url at the end of the sentence.  Remember that your papers will be checked for originality at www.turnitin.com.
 
NOTE: You may wish to consult your fellow students, parents, or friends about your assignment.  I encourage you to do so.  However (and this is crucial), any help you get must be acknowledged.  If your mom reads your assignment over to check your grammar, include a footnote or endnote thanking her for this service.  If you discuss the general ideas you have with a friend, write “Thanks to Lisa Kudrow for a helpful discussion” or something of the sort.  If you borrow a specific idea from someone, put in a footnote saying “I got this idea from Mark Improvement” or whoever.  ALSO IMPORTANT: although I’m all in favor of talking about philosophy assignments with others, you are not permitted to actually write together, or to write up shared outlines, or to share written work with one another, or even to memorize a shared answer.  Be sensible here: don’t give a copy of your essay to someone else who “just wants to get an idea” for his own paper, since you will both count as cheating. The minimum likely penalty for cheating is E for the assignment, and possibly expulsion from the university. And that would be painful for both of us!

Ethical Theories (Brief Summary)

Write a brief summary of the following ethical theories (550 words each).

  • Utilitarianism
  • Kantianism
  • Virtue Ethics
  • Ethical relativism
  • Ethical Egoism
  • Natural law moral theory
  • Ethical relativism

Business Ethics Case

Read the business ethics case and discuss ethical issues (550 words).

Business Ethics (JBS & Company ) solved

THE MEATPACKING FACTORY
James Windham was the manager of JBS & Company, a meatpacking factory whose 500
employees included over 100 Muslim workers. The majority of these workers had emigrated
from Somalia. Windham was pleased with their hard work and commitment to jobs that were
less than glamorous, and he considered them essential employees.
When he had hired the Muslim workers, Windham had agreed to allow them to have their
breaks at sunset so that they could properly observe the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. While
such an exception was an irregularity, Windham believed it was an appropriate response to the
religious needs of such a large percentage of his employee base.
Since the start of Ramadan, the Muslim workers’ break time had become more of an
issue than he had expected. Because of the constant shift of both sunrise and sunset, Windham
was faced with the logistical problem of planning the factory workday. In fact, while he viewed
the decision to allow the breaks at varying times as an effort to be flexible, he found the new
schedule to be just the opposite. During other months of the year, worker breaks were often
adjusted based on daily tasks, and if a job that had been started early in the morning looked as
though it would encroach upon the usual break time, employees had no problem simply moving
the break back. Now, with the Muslim workers needing to take breaks at very precise times,
focus and momentum were often lost, resulting in a loss of productivity.
Windham was not the only one who noticed the effects of the Muslim workers’ new
schedule. Most of the factory’s other employees were locals whose families had lived there for a
number of generations. While cultural differences between the workers had never been a
problem at the factory, the changing break times were causing tension. Many workers
complained that the changing break times were erratic and a distraction to their own ability to
work. Some expressed outright anger at the company’s deference to the Muslim workers and
claimed that it demonstrated favoritism. The decision to allow for the prayer breaks was the first
of its kind, and many of the non-Muslim workers believed the company management had been
manipulated by part of its employee base. Such sentiments had also been echoed in the town,
where some people had said that Somali immigrants should adapt to the American way of life.
Because of the productivity issues, the other employees’ complaints, and concerns about
the credibility of his management, Windham began to consider reneging on his agreement with
the Muslim workers. While they were a sizable group, these employees still remained a minority
at the factory and could cause serious problems in production and the workplace culture if they
chose to protest a perceived slight. Windham was not sure, however, that doing so would be the
right move. Since the Muslim workers had begun in the spring, the factory’s overall productivity
had gone up measurably. The Muslim workers were often the most willing to work long hours,
coming in early or working late if asked, and there was no question that their contribution to the
factory was significant. Also, Windham’s initial decision had been based on his belief that, as a
manager, he should consider his employees’ religious needs. He was not convinced that the
Muslim workers’ request was out of line. Having developed a friendly relationship with many of
them, he did not doubt that the workers’ break request was a genuine effort to practice their faith,
and he did not believe that the drop in productivity was deliberate.
Windham’s dilemma was compounded by the press surrounding other meatpacking
factories around the state, where some managers who faced the same issue had already taken
action. In some cases, bathrooms had been closed and water fountains had been taped, with
guards informing employees who took a break that they would be fired. Many Muslim workers
had lost their jobs, and one Muslim spokesperson had described the firings as un-American.
In thinking about the situation, Windham had to consider a number of factors. He had
decided to accommodate the religious needs of a very strong portion of his employee base, but
he was dismayed by the decision’s negative impact on his factory’s typically high productivity.
He also believed that he should be receptive to the concerns of the factory’s non-Muslim
workers, along with those of the community at large. In making a decision, he hoped to find both
an alternative to the drastic action taken by other managers and a way to avoid attracting the
same controversy surrounding other meatpacking plants.
Assignment Questions

  1. What is the most important issue. How should Windham think about this issue and what are his choices?
  2. What are the boundaries around what is allowable and not allowable in expression of spirituality/religion. How do we know when these boundaries are crossed?
  3. What right does an organization have to interject spiritual or religious overtones into a conversation or issue and conversely, what rights do stakeholders have to express their own spirituality or beliefs?
  4. What is at stake for Windham as a manager.  How will his employees and other stakeholders view him as a leader if he accommodates/does not accommodate his Muslim workers?
  5. How important is work performance and preventing unnecessary disruptions to this decision. How if at all is this issue any different from a worker who asks to take a break to smoke, to take medicine, to check on a chronically ill child?
  6. How is discussing religion or spirituality different than a firm talking about its mission and values?

Paper Guidance

  • Most questions are two or three part questions.
  • Answer each question fully.
  • For each question place a # representing your answer.
  • Do not write the question out on your paper and waste valuable space.
  • This case should be written to answer each question completely rather than written as a narrative.
  • Your responses should be at least two pages long and not more that three pages.

Business Ethics Questions & Answers

Business Ethics Questions & Answers
Answer the following five questions:
1. What are some of the most common forms of unethical behavior in our workforce today? How
could leadership in organizations help to minimize this ethical misconduct? Explain and support
your positions with relevant course content and outside sources.
2. As our businesses have developed over the last 100 plus years, have our modern day
businesses evolved to be more ethical today? What are some of the factors that helped you
come to your conclusion? Take a position and support your thoughts.
3. Would you describe the financial meltdown in our 2007-2008 financial markets as a failure of
“people” or of our “capital market processes”? Why? Support your thoughts with ethical theory
and examples. Use our library for added research if needed.
4. Tell me about why diversity and discrimination are two important ethical factors that leaders
should focus on while attempting to manage their workforce? Provide one example of how
mismanaging these issues have had an impact on an organization. How would you explain the
importance of these to your employees?
5. Are corporate outreach and company sponsored volunteer programs a good idea for
organizations to implement? Why? From an ethical leadership perspective, why would you
choose OR not choose to implement these programs? Use course theory and specific examples

Leadership Ethics (Questions & Answers)

Read the case and answer the following questions about leadership ethics (200 words per question)

  • Question 1.As a company, would you describe PPI as having an identifiable philosophy of moral values? How do its policies contribute to this philosophy?
  • Question.2.Which ethical perspective best describes PPI’s approach to safety issues? Would you say PPI takes a utilitarian-, duty-, or virtue-based approach?
  • Question.3.Regarding safety issues, how does management see its responsibilities toward its employees? How do the attorneys see their responsibilities toward PPI?
  • Question. 4.Why does it appear that the ethics of PPI and its attorneys are in conflict?