more exam questions Flashcards
Please thoroughly analyze the following case study question: [1a) Kete aspires to be the best graduating student in his set because he thinks that, that will give him fulfilment. He also reason that if he is the best graduating student, he will get a well-paying job which would make him rich so that he can help his family and others better. To achieve his goal, Kete studeis at least 8 hours everyday regardless of what happens.When he cannot attend lectures, he asks the class ep to sign attendance for him, in exchange, he teaches her statistics. When he is tired, he takes energy drinks although hey give palpitations and raise his blood pressure. One day, a lecture reports that Kete fraudulently signed the attendance sheet, and he is susupended and for two weeks. He considers hos sanction an unjust punishment and wonders how PAU preach ethics and have unjust laws. He also reassures himself that he is an ethical person regardless of his offences. Afterall he is rational, has concern for others, effective and dedicated to his life plan.
In the light of the case study above:
i) Analyze Kete’e thinking, pointing out five errors in and justify your answers.
ii) Discuss human fulfillment in the light of the case above.
iii) Is there any relationoship between what is legal and what is ethical? Discuss the two, and logically justify your answer.
iv) Discuss one ethical theory Kete could apply in his situation and how that will help him practically.]. Based on your analysis, generate new case study questions for each of the attached notes. Ensure that the questions cover key concepts and provide detailed answers using the content from the notes. The questions and answers should be designed to thoroughly test understanding and prepare for exams. Make sure the explanations are comprehensive and easy to understand, reflecting the same depth and scope as the original notes.
(i) Five Errors in Kete’s Thinking and Justifications
Ends Justify the Means Fallacy
Kete believes that because his goal is noble (becoming the best student to help others), any method used to achieve it is justified. However, ethical actions are not determined solely by outcomes but also by the means used. Fraudulently signing attendance violates integrity, a fundamental ethical principle.
Moral Self-Deception
Kete reassures himself that he is an ethical person despite knowingly violating rules. This reflects cognitive dissonance, where he justifies his actions to align with his self-perception rather than objective moral principles.
Selective Ethical Justification
Kete picks ethical principles that suit him (rationality, concern for others, effectiveness, dedication) but ignores key principles like fairness and honesty. Ethical principles must be applied consistently.
Disregard for Consequential Harms
While he aims for personal and collective benefits, Kete ignores the immediate harm of his actions. Fraudulent attendance:
Devalues genuine attendance.
Encourages dishonesty among others.
Can compromise his integrity and credibility.
Misinterpretation of Justice
Kete sees his suspension as unjust, believing that ethics and institutional laws should favor personal motivations. However, justice is not about personal convenience but ensuring fairness and accountability.
(ii) Human Fulfillment in the Light of the Case
Human fulfillment is the realization of one’s potential in accordance with ethical principles. It consists of:
Personal Growth: Achieved through discipline and moral integrity, not shortcuts.
Moral Development: Fulfillment requires acting ethically, not just achieving external success.
Social Responsibility: Helping others must be done ethically; dishonesty contradicts genuine contribution.
Long-term vs. Short-term Gains: True fulfillment balances ambition with moral uprightness. Kete’s short-term dishonesty undermines long-term fulfillment.
Psychological Well-being: Integrity contributes to inner peace, whereas unethical behavior creates internal conflict.
(iii) Relationship Between What is Legal and What is Ethical
Legal and Ethical Overlap: Many ethical principles form the foundation of laws (e.g., honesty, fairness).
Differences:
Some legal acts are unethical (e.g., slavery was once legal but was never ethical).
Some ethical acts may not be legal (e.g., whistleblowing against an employer).
Justification in Kete’s Case: His action was both illegal (institutional violation) and unethical (dishonesty). His punishment is just because legality ensures accountability, aligning with ethical integrity.
(iv) Ethical Theory Kete Could Apply and Practical Application
Deontological Ethics (Kantian Ethics)
Principle: Actions must be morally justified in themselves, not based on outcomes.
Application:
Kete should act according to universalizable principles (e.g., if everyone cheated attendance, it would devalue integrity).
He should respect ethical duties, even when inconvenient.
Following categorical imperatives, he should be honest, maintaining academic integrity.
- Introduction to Ethics and Conflict Resolution
Case Study:
Ngozi, a student leader, believes that peace means avoiding conflict at all costs. She tolerates unethical behaviors among her team to maintain harmony. When conflicts arise, she suppresses them rather than addressing the root cause.
Questions:
What is the true nature of peace, and how does it relate to justice?
Why is ethical decision-making essential in conflict resolution?
Differentiate between normative, descriptive, and meta-ethics using this case.
Peace requires justice, not passive tolerance. True peace results from harmonious ethical interactions.
Ethical decisions ensure fairness, preventing deeper conflicts.
Descriptive ethics observes Ngozi’s behavior, normative ethics assesses its morality, and meta-ethics examines the meaning of ethical terms (e.g., what is “peace”?).
Case Study:
A community justifies child labor as part of its tradition. Critics argue it violates moral rights. The leaders insist that morality is relative to culture.
Questions:
What arguments support and challenge moral relativism?
Why does objectivism reject this cultural justification?
How do intention, moral object, and circumstance apply here?
Relativism supports cultural differences but struggles with universal justice.
Objectivism argues that some actions (e.g., child exploitation) are inherently wrong.
The moral object (exploitation) is bad, intention (economic survival) cannot justify it, and circumstance (poverty) does not change its immorality.
Case Study:
A hospital administrator must choose between funding cancer treatment or prenatal care due to limited resources.
Questions:
How would consequentialism justify a decision?
How would deontology assess this dilemma?
How does virtue ethics offer a balanced view?
Answer:
Consequentialism prioritizes greater good (e.g., treating more patients).
Deontology focuses on duty to both groups, rejecting harm.
Virtue ethics promotes compassion and wisdom, encouraging balanced solutions.
Case Study:
A journalist exaggerates crime statistics to gain public attention.
Questions:
Why is lying in communication unethical?
What are the consequences of misleading information?
How does truthfulness relate to solidarity?
Lying distorts reality, undermining trust.
Misleading news causes unnecessary panic.
Truthfulness strengthens communal bonds, fostering trust.
Case Study:
Ada wants a divorce due to incompatibility. Her parents insist that marriage is permanent.
Questions:
What ethical principles support marriage permanence?
What factors affect ethical marital decisions?
How does family ethics balance individual happiness and social responsibility?
Marriage requires commitment, not just emotions.
Children’s well-being, personal growth, and moral duty matter.
Families sustain societies, meaning personal choices should consider broader impacts.
Case Study:
Tunde views sex as casual recreation, arguing that consent makes any action moral.
Questions:
Why does sexual ethics require more than consent?
How do virtue ethics and natural law assess Tunde’s view?
What is the role of chastity in human dignity?
Sexuality involves emotional, social, and moral factors beyond consent.
Virtue ethics emphasizes self-control, and natural law upholds union and procreation.
Chastity fosters respect and personal freedom.
Case Study:
A company pays women less than men, arguing that it’s legally permissible.
Questions:
How does justice apply to this case?
Differentiate between legal and ethical fairness.
What is Rawls’ veil of ignorance, and how does it apply here?
Justice demands equal treatment.
Laws may allow injustice; ethics corrects it.
Rawls’ theory argues that fair rules should be set without bias.
1b) a hospital has 2 gravely ill persons, one is young, well-educated and on the path to professional success. The other is old and retired. if the reaources in the hospital are limited to attend to the two of them, explain the consequences approach compared to the Natural Law approach to deciding the reasource allocation.
What would you advice the hospital if they consider euthanasia as an option?
- Consequentialist Approach (Utilitarianism)
The consequentialist (utilitarian) approach focuses on maximizing overall good and making decisions based on the outcomes or consequences of an action. In this case, the hospital would likely allocate resources to the young, educated patient because:
The young patient has more years to live and contribute to society.
The economic and social benefits of saving the young patient are higher (e.g., professional success, productivity).
The old patient has already lived a long life and is no longer contributing actively to society.
Potential Issues with This Approach
It prioritizes utility over intrinsic human dignity.
It may lead to discrimination against the elderly and vulnerable.
It reduces human life to economic and social factors, rather than recognizing its inherent worth.
2. Natural Law Approach
The Natural Law theory, rooted in the belief that all human life has inherent dignity and value, would take a different stance:
Every human life is equal in moral worth, regardless of age or social status.
Medical decisions should be made based on medical need, not societal value.
The hospital should use ethical principles of fairness (e.g., treating the most critical case first, or distributing resources equally).
Potential Issues with This Approach
It does not provide an easy way to decide in cases of extreme resource limitations.
It may prolong suffering for patients in terminal conditions.
Advice on Euthanasia
If the hospital considers euthanasia, the ethical implications must be carefully assessed:
Consequentialist Perspective on Euthanasia
If euthanasia reduces suffering, a utilitarian might justify it.
It could free up medical resources for others.
However, it could lead to a dangerous precedent, where societal value determines who lives and who dies.
Natural Law Perspective on Euthanasia
Natural Law strictly opposes euthanasia, as life is sacred and must not be intentionally ended.
It violates human dignity and could lead to a “slippery slope” where vulnerable groups (e.g., disabled, elderly) are pressured into euthanasia.
Final Advice to the Hospital
Reject euthanasia as an ethical option.
Base resource allocation on medical urgency, not social worth.
Explore alternative solutions, such as palliative care or external support for resource shortages.
“Our very survival as persons and as a species … rests upon the securing of individual lives from threats, aggressions, dangers and those srguments that would in any way trivialize the prime duty to protect the most vulnerable in our societies and communities”.
Based on the thesis above, DISCUSS :
i) The foundation of human dignity.
ii) Any Two fundamental ethical principles and how they apply in the thesis above
iii) arguents FOR and AGAINST abortion, while making rational proposals that could resolve the current tensions about the topic of abortions. In addition, how does abortion impact human dignity andhumanfreedom?
Discussion on the Thesis of Human Survival and Protection of the Vulnerable
(i) The Foundation of Human Dignity
Human dignity is based on the intrinsic worth of every human being, independent of external factors such as race, gender, intelligence, or social status. Its foundation is ontological, meaning that dignity is inherent in human nature, not granted by external conditions.
Key aspects of human dignity include:
Inalienability: Dignity cannot be taken away, even by laws or societal norms.
Equality: All humans are equal in dignity, regardless of status or circumstances.
Moral responsibility: Because humans possess reason and free will, they are responsible for acting ethically.
Protection of the vulnerable: A society’s moral standing is reflected in how it treats its weakest members (e.g., unborn children, the elderly, the disabled).
The thesis suggests that securing individual lives from threats (such as abortion, euthanasia, or neglect) is fundamental to both personal and societal survival. Any argument that downplays the duty to protect the vulnerable undermines the very basis of human dignity.
(ii) Two Fundamental Ethical Principles and Their Application to the Thesis
Principle of No Intentional Harm
This principle states that one should never deliberately harm another human being.
It directly applies to the thesis, as it underscores the moral duty to protect vulnerable individuals from threats like violence, oppression, or harmful policies.
Examples: Protecting the unborn from abortion, defending the elderly from euthanasia, and ensuring the security of marginalized groups.
Principle of Solidarity
Solidarity emphasizes commitment to the common good and the well-being of all human beings.
This principle applies to the thesis by reinforcing the idea that societies must prioritize the protection of their weakest members.
Examples: Implementing laws against abortion and human trafficking, supporting social programs for at-risk populations, and ensuring equal access to healthcare.
By applying these principles, we affirm that human dignity requires protecting all individuals, regardless of their stage in life or condition.
(iii) Arguments FOR and AGAINST Abortion
Arguments FOR Abortion
Women’s Right to Choose
Pro-choice advocates argue that a woman has autonomy over her body, including the right to terminate a pregnancy.
Cases of Rape or Incest
Some argue that forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy resulting from rape or incest causes further trauma.
Health Risks to the Mother
In cases where pregnancy endangers the mother’s life, abortion is seen as a necessary medical intervention.
Fetal Abnormalities
Severe congenital disorders may lead some to argue that abortion prevents lifelong suffering.
Arguments AGAINST Abortion
The Right to Life
The fetus is a human life with intrinsic dignity, and abortion is the deliberate killing of an innocent being.
Slippery Slope to Dehumanization
Legalizing abortion devalues human life, potentially leading to other moral erosions (e.g., euthanasia).
Psychological & Emotional Consequences
Studies suggest that many women suffer guilt, depression, and regret after abortion.
Alternative Solutions Exist
Adoption, financial aid, and better healthcare can provide mothers with options other than abortion.
Rational Proposals to Resolve Abortion Tensions
Improve Sexual Education and Contraceptive Access
Comprehensive sex education can prevent unintended pregnancies, reducing the demand for abortion.
Strengthen Adoption Systems
Encouraging ethical and efficient adoption processes can provide alternatives for mothers who cannot raise a child.
Expand Social and Financial Support for Pregnant Women
Maternity leave, free healthcare, and financial aid can help women choose life instead of abortion.
Clarify Ethical Guidelines for Medical Cases
In life-threatening pregnancies, medical intervention should prioritize saving both lives whenever possible.
Impact of Abortion on Human Dignity and Human Freedom
On Human Dignity
Abortion undermines the dignity of the unborn, treating life as disposable.
It creates a precedent for valuing people based on utility rather than inherent worth.
On Human Freedom
Freedom requires responsibility. True freedom is not the power to destroy life but the ability to make ethical choices.
Abortion may offer short-term relief but can lead to long-term emotional and psychological struggles.
Final Thought:
The debate on abortion must balance women’s rights with the intrinsic dignity of life. Ethical solutions should prioritize protection, education, and support, rather than choosing between competing rights.
“Although Nigeria is not officially at war with any foreign country, she is not at peace with herself either. there are pockets of crises at differently sections of the country, Boko Haram terrosim in the North-East, farmers-herders’ clashes, mostly, in the North central, kidnapping and wanton killigns by “unknown gunmen” in the South-east as well as acute poverty and hunger ravaging across the nation”
In the light of the above thesis:
i) critique the Nigerian situation, using any three fundamental ethical principles.
ii) discuss the Idea of a Just War, using either the Russian-Ukrainian War OR Israeli-palestinian war as a reference point
iii)Based on your knowledge of this course (peace, Conflict Resolutin and ethics).Explain how Ethics relates to War and Peace, and propose the most effective ways to build peace in Nigeria?
iv) In what aspects of our national life do you think distributive justice is lacking and what doyou propose as solution?
Analysis of the Nigerian Situation Using Ethical and Peace Studies Framework
(i) Critique of the Nigerian Situation Using Three Fundamental Ethical Principles
1. Principle of Solidarity
Solidarity emphasizes commitment to the common good and the well-being of all citizens.
Nigeria’s crises (terrorism, farmer-herder clashes, kidnappings, poverty) reflect a lack of national unity.
The government and elite have failed to ensure the security and welfare of all Nigerians.
Ethical critique: A nation where citizens feel abandoned fosters division, violence, and instability.
Solution: Strengthen national unity, inter-ethnic collaboration, and grassroots peace initiatives.
2. Principle of No Intentional Harm
This principle states that human life must not be intentionally harmed.
Boko Haram, kidnappers, and criminal groups violate this principle by targeting innocent civilians.
The government’s use of force (e.g., military crackdowns) often causes civilian casualties, violating human rights.
Solution: Security forces should use ethical, intelligence-driven, and non-violent conflict resolution strategies.
3. Principle of Distributive Justice
Distributive justice demands fair distribution of resources and opportunities.
Poverty and economic disparity fuel insecurity—young people join armed groups due to unemployment and hardship.
The North and rural communities lack access to education, healthcare, and economic opportunities.
Solution: Equitable development policies, job creation, and targeted economic interventions.
(ii) The Idea of a Just War (Using the Russian-Ukrainian or Israeli-Palestinian War as a Reference)
The Just War Theory states that war is only justifiable under strict moral and ethical conditions. It includes:
Just Cause: War must be fought for a legitimate reason (e.g., self-defense or preventing genocide).
Last Resort: All peaceful solutions must be exhausted before resorting to war.
Right Intention: War must seek peace, not personal gain.
Proportionality: The harm caused by war must not exceed the damage it prevents.
Non-Combatant Immunity: Civilians must never be targeted.
Case Study: Russian-Ukrainian War
Russia claims its invasion was to protect Russian-speaking Ukrainians and counter NATO expansion.
Ukraine argues that Russia’s actions are aggressive and unjustified.
Ethical critique: The war violates proportionality (mass civilian deaths) and non-combatant immunity (bombing of hospitals, homes).
Case Study: Israeli-Palestinian Conflict
Israel argues that its military actions are in self-defense against Hamas attacks.
Palestinians argue that Israel’s actions violate human rights and amount to oppression.
Ethical critique: Civilian casualties on both sides show failures in proportionality and non-combatant immunity.
(iii) How Ethics Relates to War and Peace + Ways to Build Peace in Nigeria
Ethics in War and Peace
War and violence violate ethical principles when they cause unnecessary suffering.
Ethics guides conflict resolution, promoting justice, dialogue, and human dignity.
Ways to Build Peace in Nigeria
Conflict Resolution Strategies
Dialogue between warring parties (e.g., local leaders and extremist groups).
Truth and reconciliation commissions for historical injustices.
Security Sector Reforms
Professionalize the military and police to avoid human rights abuses.
Use intelligence-based operations rather than indiscriminate force.
Economic and Social Development
Tackle poverty and unemployment to reduce crime and radicalization.
Invest in education and vocational training.
Ethical Leadership and Governance
Ensure fair elections and anti-corruption measures.
Decentralize governance to empower local communities.
(iv) Areas Where Distributive Justice is Lacking in Nigeria & Proposed Solutions
1. Unequal Economic Opportunities
Issue: The wealth gap between the rich and poor continues to widen.
Solution: Progressive taxation, social welfare programs, and financial inclusion policies.
2. Poor Access to Healthcare
Issue: Rural areas lack adequate hospitals and medical personnel.
Solution: Expand primary healthcare and subsidize medical services.
3. Regional Educational Imbalance
Issue: The North has higher illiteracy rates than the South.
Solution: Targeted investment in education and scholarships for disadvantaged groups.
4. Ethnic and Religious Marginalization
Issue: Certain ethnic groups feel politically excluded.
Solution: Ensure fair representation in government and national decision-making.
Final Thought
For Nigeria to achieve true peace, it must address injustice, inequality, and structural violence. A combination of ethical governance, fair resource distribution, and non-violent conflict resolution is necessary for national stability.
(a) After reading news feeds about wars in Europe, your friend asks if the ethics is related to peace and wars and asks you how to access for justice during war situations. Based on your understanding of the course, respond with a detailed essay.
(b) (i) Is there any relationship between ethical behaviour and religion? Explain your answer.
(ii) explain the limits of the right to private property.
1(a) Ethics, Peace, and Justice in War Situations
Ethics plays a central role in shaping our understanding of peace and war, as it provides moral guidelines for evaluating conflicts, justice, and human dignity. War, by its very nature, involves violence, destruction, and human suffering, but ethical principles aim to ensure that even in times of war, justice and humanity are preserved.
The Relationship Between Ethics, War, and Peace
Ethics seeks to promote peace by encouraging justice, fairness, and respect for human dignity. At the same time, when conflicts arise, ethics guides wartime conduct, ensuring that war is not used as an instrument of oppression, exploitation, or indiscriminate violence.
There are two key ethical perspectives regarding war and peace:
Just War Theory – Developed by thinkers like St. Augustine and Thomas Aquinas, this theory outlines the moral conditions under which war can be justified. These include:
Just Cause: War should be fought only for a defensive or morally justified reason (e.g., protecting civilians from genocide).
Right Intention: War should aim for peace and justice, not conquest or revenge.
Proportionality: The harm caused by war should not outweigh the good achieved.
Non-Combatant Immunity: Civilians must be protected from direct attacks.
Pacifism – Pacifists argue that war is never justified and that conflicts should be resolved through dialogue, diplomacy, and non-violence. This aligns with the ethical principle of no intentional harm, emphasizing that peace should be pursued through cooperation and negotiation.
Accessing Justice During War Situations
During war, justice is often compromised due to the breakdown of law and order. However, there are mechanisms in place to ensure accountability:
International Humanitarian Law (IHL) – This includes the Geneva Conventions, which protect civilians, prisoners of war, and medical personnel.
War Crimes Tribunals – Courts like the International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecute war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity.
Human Rights Organizations – Groups such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch document and expose war crimes.
In summary, ethics and justice are inseparable from war and peace. While ethics seeks to prevent war, it also provides moral guidelines for wartime conduct and mechanisms for ensuring justice and accountability when conflicts occur.
1(b) (i) Relationship Between Ethical Behavior and Religion
Ethical behavior and religion are deeply interconnected, as most religions provide moral guidelines that shape human conduct. However, while religion influences ethics, ethical principles can also exist independently of religious beliefs.
How Religion Influences Ethics
Moral Foundations – Many religious traditions establish moral laws (e.g., the Ten Commandments in Christianity, Islamic Sharia law, Hindu Dharma) that define right and wrong.
Sanctions and Rewards – Religion often teaches that ethical behavior is rewarded, while unethical actions lead to punishment (e.g., heaven/hell, karma).
Community Standards – Religious institutions promote virtues such as honesty, kindness, and charity, which influence social ethics.
Ethical Behavior Without Religion
Some argue that ethical behavior is not dependent on religion, as rational thinking, human empathy, and social cooperation also guide morality. Secular ethics, based on human rights, justice, and fairness, ensures that morality is universal, regardless of religious beliefs.
Conclusion
While religion and ethics are interconnected, ethics can exist independently through philosophy, rationality, and legal systems. However, religious teachings have historically played a significant role in shaping moral values across civilizations.
1(b) (ii) Limits of the Right to Private Property
The right to private property is an essential human right, but it is not absolute. Ethical, legal, and social limitations exist to ensure that private property does not harm the common good.
- The Principle of the Universal Destination of Goods
According to natural law ethics, the earth’s resources belong to all humans.
While private ownership is allowed, it must serve the well-being of society.
Example: If a person hoards large amounts of land or water resources while others suffer, the government may redistribute or regulate access. - Legal and Social Regulations
Zoning and Environmental Laws: Governments can restrict land use to prevent environmental damage.
Eminent Domain: The state can take private property for public projects (e.g., building roads, hospitals), provided the owner is compensated.
Taxation: Private property owners must pay taxes to support social services. - Ethical and Moral Limits
Property Cannot Be Used for Harm: Private ownership does not justify exploitation (e.g., using land for illegal activities).
Responsibility to the Community: Those with wealth and property have a moral duty to help the less fortunate through charity and fair wages.
Conclusion
Private property is a fundamental right, but it must be balanced with social responsibility. Ethical ownership means using wealth to benefit society, ensuring that resources are fairly distributed and not hoarded at the expense of others.
Final Thought
These discussions highlight the complex relationship between ethics, religion, justice, and human rights. Whether in war, morality, or property ownership, ethical principles ensure that human dignity and the common good are upheld.
One of your friends, levus, just graduated from PAU and was given a job at new university in Ghanna to teach digital technology.He is excited to be heading the unit as well even though it is his first job. He is determined to do well and has the encouragment of the university managament to ensure that the course is a success as it will bring more visibility to the school. His students are excellent with many of the practical courses but have major challenges with the compulsory theorectical courses that are not directly related to digital technology. He is concerned that if the majority fail their theorectical courses, they will not graduate at the right time which will negatively impact the school, his career, and his students futures. He gives them the question papers two weeks ahead of the time without the knowledge of the university and persuades them to keep it a secret since it is for the benefit of all.
2(a) Identfy and critique the ethical theory that Levus uses as the basis for his actions
(b) What ethical theory would you propose to Levus as an alternative and how can that be practically applied in the scenario above?
(c) What do yu think is the likely idea Levus has about human fulfillment? Give a brief critique of his view.
(d) discuss two ethical principles that Levus needs to know in orer to make to make a better decision and explain why those are the most relevant to hos ethical issues.
Ethical Analysis of Levus’ Decision
Levus, a newly employed lecturer, is faced with an ethical dilemma. His students struggle with theoretical courses, and to prevent failure, he illegally provides them with exam questions ahead of time. Although his actions may appear to have good intentions, they involve dishonesty and academic misconduct, raising serious ethical concerns.
(2a) Identifying and Critiquing the Ethical Theory Behind Levus’ Actions
Ethical Theory: Consequentialism (Utilitarianism)
Levus’ decision aligns with consequentialism, specifically utilitarian ethics, which states that an action is morally right if it maximizes overall happiness and minimizes harm.
Why Levus’ Actions Fit Utilitarianism:
He prioritizes outcomes over ethical principles – The goal is to help students pass, not to uphold academic integrity.
He believes the “greater good” justifies the action – Success benefits the students, university, and his career.
He assumes that dishonesty is acceptable if it leads to a positive result – The students will graduate on time, enhancing the university’s reputation.
Critique of Consequentialism in This Case:
Violates Academic Integrity: Ethical education values honesty, critical thinking, and hard work. Cheating destroys these principles.
Short-Term Gain, Long-Term Harm: Students will graduate unprepared, damaging their future careers.
Erosion of Trust: If discovered, Levus and the university will lose credibility, leading to career and reputational damage.
Moral Slippery Slope: If small ethical violations are justified by “greater good” arguments, larger ethical compromises become acceptable over time.
✅ Conclusion: Levus’ reasoning is flawed because ethics should not be based solely on outcomes. Honest means matter as much as good ends.
(2b) Alternative Ethical Theory for Levus and Practical Application
Proposed Ethical Theory: Deontological Ethics (Kantian Ethics)
Instead of consequentialism, Levus should adopt deontological ethics, which focuses on moral duties and rules rather than consequences. Kantian ethics argues that actions must be judged based on universal moral principles, regardless of outcomes.
How Deontological Ethics Applies to Levus’ Case
Honesty and Integrity Matter: Levus must follow academic policies, even if they make achieving success harder.
No Deception for Personal or Institutional Gain: The university should succeed ethically, not through misconduct.
Education Should Promote True Learning: The goal is not just to pass exams but to master knowledge and critical thinking.
✅ Practical Application for Levus
Alternative Teaching Methods: Instead of cheating, Levus can introduce extra tutorials, group discussions, and interactive learning to help students understand theory.
Request Curriculum Adjustments: If theoretical courses are not relevant, he can propose modifications to better integrate them with digital technology.
Support Students Ethically: Encourage academic mentoring, peer coaching, and time management skills.
✅ Conclusion: Instead of compromising ethics, Levus can find innovative ways to help students succeed without dishonesty.
(2c) Levus’ Likely View on Human Fulfillment and Critique
Levus’ Idea of Human Fulfillment
Levus likely sees human fulfillment in terms of career success, reputation, and societal validation. His actions suggest he believes:
Success justifies any means necessary (e.g., cheating is acceptable if it leads to academic achievement).
External achievements define fulfillment (i.e., students passing exams and the university gaining prestige).
Critique of Levus’ View
Human fulfillment is more than external success – True fulfillment comes from moral integrity, ethical excellence, and authentic knowledge.
Cheating undermines real growth – Students who pass dishonestly do not gain real intellectual competence, making them weaker professionals.
Integrity sustains long-term fulfillment – A strong moral character ensures lasting success, whereas unethical shortcuts often backfire.
✅ Conclusion: Fulfillment is not just about external achievement but about developing virtues like honesty, resilience, and ethical responsibility.
(2d) Two Ethical Principles Levus Needs to Know & Why They Are Relevant
1. Principle of Fairness
Fairness ensures that every student is evaluated honestly based on their merit.
Levus’ actions create an unfair advantage – Students receiving leaked questions gain an unethical head start over others.
Solution: Ensure fairness by helping students improve through ethical means, such as extra coaching.
2. Principle of No Intentional Harm
Giving students exam questions undermines their intellectual growth.
If discovered, Levus risks damaging his career, the university’s credibility, and students’ future job prospects.
Solution: Instead of harming students through academic dishonesty, Levus should strengthen their learning with ethical support systems.
✅ Conclusion: Ethical decision-making requires fairness and responsibility. Levus needs to realize that true success must be built on integrity, not deception.
Final Thought
Levus faces a real challenge, but the right choice is clear: Ethical leadership, fairness, and honest education will benefit both the students and his career in the long run. By using deontological ethics, he can build a strong, morally sound digital technology unit that truly empowers students.
Explain and discuss the principles of fairness
The Principles of Fairness: Explanation and Discussion
Fairness is a fundamental ethical principle that ensures justice, equality, and impartiality in human interactions. It is essential in various aspects of life, including law, education, business, governance, and social relationships.
- Meaning of Fairness
Fairness means:
Treating people equitably, without bias or favoritism.
Giving individuals what they deserve based on merit, need, or contribution.
Applying rules and principles consistently to all members of a society.
✅ Example: In a classroom, fairness means grading students based on their performance, not on favoritism or personal relationships.
- Key Aspects of Fairness
i. Procedural Fairness (Due Process)
This focuses on fair procedures in decision-making.
It ensures that everyone has an equal opportunity to present their case.
Example: A student accused of cheating should have the right to explain their side before being punished.
ii. Distributive Fairness (Equity & Justice)
Concerns the fair distribution of resources, opportunities, and burdens in society.
Example: A country with high poverty levels should provide more resources to underprivileged communities to ensure equal opportunities.
iii. Fairness in Punishment (Retributive Justice)
Ensures that punishments fit the crime and are applied equally.
Example: If two employees commit the same violation, they should receive the same disciplinary action, regardless of their status in the company.
iv. Fairness in Relationships (Reciprocity & Honesty)
Encourages mutual respect, honesty, and equal treatment in personal and professional relationships.
Example: Employers should pay fair wages to workers based on their contributions. - Ethical Theories Supporting Fairness
Kantian Ethics (Deontology): Fairness is a duty and must be applied universally.
Utilitarianism: Fairness maximizes overall happiness when people feel treated justly.
Rawls’ Theory of Justice: Proposes the “veil of ignorance”—fair rules must be created without knowing one’s social position, ensuring justice for all. - The Importance of Fairness in Society
✅ Builds Trust – People feel respected and valued when they are treated fairly.
✅ Promotes Social Harmony – Reduces conflict and resentment in workplaces, schools, and communities.
✅ Ensures Justice – Helps prevent discrimination and ensures equal access to opportunities.
✅ Encourages Ethical Leadership – Leaders who practice fairness set positive examples for others. - Challenges to Fairness
❌ Bias and Favoritism – Personal preferences can lead to unfair treatment.
❌ Inequality of Resources – Some people start with advantages, making fairness difficult.
❌ Conflicts Between Fairness and Efficiency – Example: In a hiring process, giving equal chances to all applicants may slow decision-making. - How to Apply Fairness in Decision-Making
1️⃣ Use objective criteria – Base decisions on facts and principles, not emotions or personal interests.
2️⃣ Ensure transparency – Clearly communicate rules and expectations.
3️⃣ Apply rules consistently – Treat all people equally under similar conditions.
4️⃣ Listen to all sides – Consider different perspectives before making judgments.
5️⃣ Be flexible when necessary – In some cases, fairness requires adjustments based on needs (e.g., supporting disadvantaged groups).
Final Thought
Fairness is key to justice, equality, and ethical leadership. A fair society protects the rights of individuals, distributes opportunities equitably, and ensures that decisions are made impartially.
Scenario: Alice is a successful lawyer but feels unfulfilled. She has wealth and power but lacks deep relationships and often experiences anxiety. She wonders why she feels empty despite achieving everything she aimed for.
Questions:
What is the difference between extrinsic and intrinsic goods in human fulfillment?
Why does Alice feel unfulfilled despite her success?
What steps can she take to achieve deeper fulfillment?
Extrinsic goods (money, power, status) do not guarantee happiness
.
Intrinsic goods (e.g., relationships, self-awareness) are essential for lasting fulfillment.
Alice should prioritize meaningful relationships, personal growth, and well-being.
Scenario: A company pays women less than men for the same job. The law does not prohibit this, but some employees feel it is unethical.
Questions:
Is this action legal, ethical, or both? Explain.
How does distributive justice apply to this case?
What ethical arguments can be made against this practice?
It may be legal but is ethically wrong because it violates fairness.
Distributive justice requires that rewards be based on merit, not discrimination.
Ethical arguments: Equal work should receive equal pay.
Scenario: David’s company dumps waste into a river to cut costs, arguing that it helps the company grow and employ more people.
Questions:
Which ethical theory justifies David’s decision? Why?
Which ethical theory would criticize it? Why?
What ethical decision should David make instead?
Utilitarianism may justify it by focusing on economic benefits.
Deontology would criticize it as harming the environment is universally wrong.
David should adopt an ethical waste management strategy.
