Reference no: EM131164060

Ethics Discussion Assignment.

Introduction: As a writing class, you are being exposed to a variety of writing styles. This writing styles could be called "Academic Listserv discourse". Academics conduct discussions like this all the time. I now invite you to do the same.

Directions: For this assignment, respond to each of the three ethics cases (A B and C). For each case,

1) Create a thread that is at least 250 words long addressing the issue.

2) Comment on 2 of your peers' threads (approximately 40 words each) that addresses

what you agree with and what you disagree with.

Overall, I expect you to write 1000 words at least. Rather than write all of that initially, the objective is to get into a dialogue with others. Thus, you should make a comment, someone may respond to it, you may respond back to the response, etc. This is not a real time event so it does not matter when you write. But I would like you to have completed this assignment by the deadline listed in the syllabus. Here is a 2 minute video I made that explains why this is a discussion and not a paper.

Evaluation: I will grade you on your participation. Did you read someone else's comments? Did you respond to them? Was it a thoughtful response? Did you attack the person in a rude or unprofessional manner (i.e., NET-etiquette is required!)?

NOTE: This hyperlink is linked to the first of three discussion topics on ethics. You have to go into one of the discussions on the Discussion

Board to find the other two discussion topics. Feel free to comment on one or all three of them.

NOTE: The following cases were found on: the AAA Ethics Cases Web site:

https://www.aaanet.org/committees/ethics/ch3.htm

These are the cases

Ethics Case A: The Case of the Missing Artifact

For his own aesthetic purposes, Marcus Randolph had collected Pueblo Indian arts and crafts for many years before becoming an anthropologist. Randolph's fieldwork sites for ten years were located in Latin America. However, as a result of personal contacts, he was asked to conduct a brief ethnohistorical study in one of the Rio Grande pueblos. As his study progressed, he learned that an important item had been missing for about 20 years from the collection of paraphernalia used by one of the religious leaders in the community. According to this individual, ceremonies had never been complete since the item had disappeared. Crop failures and other community problems were partially attributed to this loss.

After obtaining a full description from the religious leader and checking this against information about the item with colleagues in local museums and universities, Randolph realized that there was a good chance that the item in question was at least similar to, if not identical to, one he had purchased 15 years previously from a trading post.

Randolph's Dilemma: Should he offer the item in his possession to the religious leader? Should he even show the item to the religious leader? Or, should he simply make a note regarding the missing religious piece and not disclose his personal possession to anyone in the community?

DISCUSSION BOARD INSTRUCTIONS:

1) Create a thread that is at least 250 words long addressing the following issues.

2) Comment on 2 of your peers' threads (approximately 40 words each) that addresses what you agree with and what you disagree with.

Case B: Hiding a Suspect

George Teller had been conducting research on an American Indian reservation for two years. During that time he developed strong, close relationships with many of the people who lived on the reservation. One morning while sitting at the breakfast table with the family he was staying with, the conversation became centered on an event that had occurred one week before. This is what was recounted.

Six men and five women were gathered in one of the men's homes having a party. As the night wore on and the effects of wine and beer drinking began to be felt by the people at the party, one of the men--Ted--went into a bedroom. He returned wearing a holster which contained an ivory-handled pistol. He began showing everyone his "quick draw" and, while doing so, one of the other men--Mike--began teasing him. Ted responded to this teasing by putting the pistol against Mike's forehead. The stories that went around the next day expressed confusion over how the gun happened to go off and whether or not Mike was shot right then, or whether or not Ted had the gun when Mike was shot. Anyway, after the shooting everyone left Mike's home except his girlfriend, who called the police. After taking Mike's body to the mortuary, the police arrested Ted. Ted was released the next morning after a hearing where the tribal judge charged him with involuntary manslaughter and placed him on two years' probation. Now, at breakfast, people talked of a rumor going about the reservation that the ex-husband of Mike's girlfriend--Joe--had arrived at the party angry and "feeling high." Joe got into an argument with Mike and his ex-wife and wound up shooting Mike with Ted's gun. The tribal police were questioning everyone about this possibility, particularly since Joe seemed to be the center of a lot of recent violent activities on the reservation.

Teller asked his hosts if they thought Joe had killed Mike: the answer was yes and that nobody had seen Joe for several days--"he's hiding out, as usual, now that the FBI is looking for him."

Later that same day, Joe showed up at the house and asked Teller to take him to a distant town so he could catch a bus "for California." Joe said he was going back to his job for a while to earn money, and that he would be coming back to the reservation in a couple of months.

Teller looked at his hosts for help in deciding what to do. They looked away, leaving the decision up to him.

Teller's Dilemma: Should he or should he not take Joe to the bus station? In either case, if questioned by the Tribal Police, should he tell them he had seen Joe?

DISCUSSION BOARD INSTRUCTIONS:

1) Create a thread that is at least 250 words long addressing the following issues.

2) Comment on 2 of your peers' threads (approximately 40 words each) that addresses what you agree with and what you disagree with.

Case C: "Hot" Gifts

Rose Stone moved into an urban ghetto in order to study strategies for survival used by low-income residents. During the first six months of research, Stone was gradually integrated into the community through invitations (which she accepted) to attend dances, parties, church functions, and family outings, and by "hanging out" at local service facilities (laundromats, health centers, recreation centers, and so on). She was able to discern that there were two important survival tactics used by the community residents which she could not engage in: the first was a system of reciprocity in the exchange of goods and services (neither of which she felt she had to offer), and the second was outright theft of easily pawned or sold goods (clothing, jewelry, radios, TVs, and so on).

One night, a friend from the community stopped by "for a cup of coffee" and conversation. After they had been talking for about two hours, Stone's friend told her that she had some things she wanted to give her. The friend went out to her car and returned with a box of clothing (Stone's size) and a record player. Stone was a bit overwhelmed by the generosity of the gift and protested her right to accept such costly items. Her friend laughed and said, "Don't you worry, it's not out of my pocket," but then she became more serious and said, "Either you are one of us or you aren't one of us. You can't have it both ways. "

Stone's Dilemma: Suspecting that the items she was being offered were probably "hot" (e.g., stolen), she was afraid that if she wore the clothes in public, or had the record player in her apartment, she would be arrested for "accepting stolen goods." At the same time, she knew that "hot" items were often given to close friends when it was observed that they could use them. Still, this implied that there would be reciprocal giving (not necessarily in kind) at a later date. So, should she accept or refuse the proffered gifts?

DISCUSSION BOARD INSTRUCTIONS:

1) Create a thread that is at least 250 words long addressing the following issues.

2) Comment on 2 of your peers' threads (approximately 40 words each) that addresses what you agree with and what you disagree with.