Mind Map Assignment Lesson 8

Real-life example: In the television series, Young Sheldon, we watch a scene where Sheldon and his Meemaw play a game of cards. She shows him facial expressions, implying that she didn't have a good hand, bluffing her grandson. After this, Sheldon is upset, taking a more deontological stance as he believes lying is wrong, regardless of the outcome. Meanwhile, his Meemaw takes a more ultitarianism stance as she was focused on winning the game. (clip found here: https://youtu.be/U2GOxozU7Xw?si=g3lODdC7aniRpWjp )

In this scenario, Sheldon's Meemaw went against the Christian virtue of justice, which states to give each person their due and to act fairly. By bluffing Sheldon, she gave herself the upper hand, thus not acting fairly. She may have chose the action of bluffing to teach Sheldon about how some people are not always honest, as she did explain that you cannot always know what is in someone's heart. However, her actions could have also been driven by the desire to win the game.

Sheldon, in this clip shows knowledge of the "Samma-Kammanta" concept as this moral rule typically states the principle to not exploit yourself and others. Sheldon states his dislike towards his grandmother's self-exploitation to win the game.

If I was in this situation, like Sheldon, I would be upset. However, I would also take it as a learning experience. After Sheldon expresses his distress, his Meemaw tells him that not everyone is necessarily an honest person, and this is a valuable life lesson, as some people do not value morals as much as others. This can also be looked at as the value of Nibawaakawin (or wisdom) as the Meemaw is sharing her ideas, and I would have the opportunity to interpret these ideas. If I was the Meemaw, I may not have bluffed the way that she did, but I would have explained to Sheldon that his smile indicates that he is giving me the idea that he has a good hand, which can give me an upper hand. In other words, I would discuss it with him fairly, rather than bluffing him completely.

Real-life example: Your friend is being falsely accused of trespassing on a property. In order to help your friend, you must lie and say you were with your friend when the event supposedly occurred, or else your friend will face consequences for a crime they didn't commit. What do you do?

In this scenario, we see our friend getting falsely accused of a crime we know they did not commit. We can choose to lie for them, even if that is typically morally wrong, and help them not face consequences. Or, we tell the truth and our friend will face consequences for something they did not do. We can see in many of the moral systems that love and respect are very common concepts, specifically stated in the ten commandments, and the seven grandfather teachings. We also see in the ten commandments that protecting the rights of the weak is of utmost importance, so some may argue that given our friend is weak in this situation, lying for them to protect their innocence would be the more moral decision.

If I was in this situation, given my understanding of the moral systems and my personal virtues, I would lie for my friend. Not only would I do this because I disagree with my friend facing punishment for something they wouldn't do, but because i many of the moral systems (eg. the concept of Justice in the seven virtues of Christianity) it states the importance of fairness, and the concept of getting punished for false accusations, simply put, is not fair. However, despite lying being wrong and it goes against some values, I would argue that protecting the rights of my friend is more important.

Real life example: The debate on medically induced-suicide (should it be available? Or not?)

The topic of medically induced suicide has been in debate for some time now. Some argue that it can be helpful for those with severe mental illness, and allow for them to finally be free of their mental pain and suffering without taking their own life in another manner, thus making it permissible. Others may say this goes against the word of God, and that unless the person is terminally ill (eg. on their deathbed) that it is not an acceptable choice. In the ten commandments and the Quaran, it is stated that murder is unacceptable, and many will see this as going directly against these beliefs.

Everyone has a different stance on this matter, and since this is such a broad, abstract question there are many answers that stem from many different perspectives. Personally, I do not believe this should be something that is widely available to society. I believe God gave us a life to live, and that ending it prematurely is selfish in many ways. However, this being said, I do also somewhat agree with the concept of allowing this for patients who are terminally ill. Should the person be suffering and in immense pain, and other treatment options do not work, I do believe this can be an option, but that this is not something that should be offered to everyone, only severe cases. I do think that in some ways this can be morally incorrect, especially when it comes to people wanting to receive this treatment just for the sake of it, given how many moral beliefs are against ending lives prematurely, but I do also believe God does not want us to be in pain or to suffer, which is why in severe cases I believe this can be permissible.

Real-life example: The golden rule: Treat others how you wish to be treated.

The golden rule is something most people hear of at least once in their lives. The most common version of this rule that I typically hear is to treat others how I wish to be treated. However, just because this is a golden rule, and supposedly everyone agrees on it, what makes it right? Especially if nobody knows where this rule comes from.

This rule is a great description of a value that people follow supposedly just because everyone agrees on it. This rule, however, does make sense morally, as it once again shows the value of respect - a moral belief common in almost every moral system. However, this doesn't mean that everyone should follow this rule just because everyone else does, right?

I do have to say that I strongly agree with this rule. I heard it often growing up, and personally, I do value respect. However, in other cases I wouldn't always be so inclined to follow a rule simply because everyone else decides to, I like to follow them if I personally believe they are ethical.