MANLANGIT Questions for the Third Exam

Manlangit
Manlangit
1. Recall the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment. Assuming/given a conscientious understanding and application of the Utilitarian perspective, how will you resolve the question of whether the the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment is justified? In other words, was the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment justified using Utilitarianism?

2. After careful considerations of the various ethical theories/views we discussed, what “personal moral system or code” can you come up with and which you can adopt? Be sure to talk about the values, precepts/ideas, and other elements that should comprise this “personal moral system or code”. Include your conception of freedom and accountability in this given moral system and your view of what it means to be a moral individual.

Utilitarianism is the ethical doctrine that moral worth of an action is determined by its contribution to overall utility. According to it, the moral of an act is based on its outcome meaning the good is whatever brings the greatest happiness to the greatest number of people.

In Act Utilitarianism, an act is good if it brings happiness or greater good to other people while in Rule Utilitarianism, a rule is ought to be obeyed if it is good for everybody.

In the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, the U.S. public health service studied the African-American people of Tuskegee which they say has syphilis, they did not tell the people what was their true purpose and instead they told the people that they are treating them of bad blood. They studied the effects of untreated syphilis without the consent of the participants.

Using the Utilitarian perspective we can say that the Tuskegee Syphilis Study is justifiable. Why? because through the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, improvements in the medical area have been made. The study brought knowledge to many people as to what will happen if syphilis is left untreated. If the workers of the U.S. public health service told the people in the Tuskegee that they would be subjects of the study of untreated syphilis there is a possibility that they will not cooperate, so it was decided that the real purpose be a secret from the subjects.

My personal moral code will be EXISTENTIALISM.

Existentialism is centered on the analysis of existence and the way humans find themselves existing in the world. The notion is that humans exist first and they spend their life changing their essence, nature or purpose. It is centered on finding self and the meaning of life through free will, choice and personal responsibility. the belief is that people are searching to find out who and what they are throughout life as they make choices based on their experiences and outlook. Existentialism is the search and journey for true self and true personal meaning in life.

I believe that people are finding their meaning in life. An example of this is the book "Purpose Driven Life", existentialist could be religious morals, in this book it teaches people on living with purpose. It says that we, must fulfill the purpose that GOD has for us, we should live aiming at the meaning of our existence. In its first chapter it asks "What on earth am I here for?" It makes the reader think about the reason why he/she is on earth. Then the book goes on in explaining how he/she could find his/her meaning and purpose in life. If people are not searching for their worth, meaning and purpose this book would not earn millions and would not sold million copies all over the world.

What is Freedom?
In existentialism it is often asked how can we be free if our bodies, our abilities and our environment are determined. existentialist argue that even though all these factors are determined, we are more than simply these things. Our real self lies beyond the reach of external determination in virtue of its absolute individuality.

I believe that our freedom id a freedom of creation. We can arrange the factors that makes us and our experiences. We are free to make them and ourselves whatever we will.

Being a moral individual for me means that you do not harm any one. your acts may be immoral to those who are indifferent with you but as long as you are not stepping on anyone you are considered to be a moral person. For example the issue about "live in couples" they are according to the church amoral because they live together without the blessing of the church but as I see it there is nothing wrong with live in couples as long as they are both single. In existentialism, it is said that we must not let our actions be determined by others. I believe we must listen to what our inner self says as long as it will not have a bad effect on other people.