Vices and Virtues: Ethical Dilemmas of a Fading Man Essay

The main plot in the play “A Man For All Seasons” by Robert Bolt is corruption, more specifically political corruption. While the play focuses heavily on the social demise, and moral strength of the character Thomas More. It also covers the inverse process with other characters, such as; Richard Rich, Thomas Cromwell, and the king of England Henry VIII. In the play Thomas More stands as a beacon of selfhood and virtue, while the other three men used manipulation and disloyalty, to gain wealth and power, no matter what the consequences may be.

1. What were the costs and benefits to stakeholders of the actions taken by Massey Energy and its managers?

The life of a person may be measured in years, moments, and the number of laughs or cries but what if one were to measure a life on good deeds or on that person’s virtues? The theory and idea of ethics and virtue as conceptualized by the Greek philosopher Aristotle in Nicomachean Ethics and as it is expressed in the pages of The Fundamentals of Ethics by Russ Shafer-Landau is a complex and dubious notion. It is one that is easily related to characters in Khaled Hosseini’s The Kite Runner.

In the play A Man For All Seasons by Robert Bolt the audience learns about the extraordinary life of Sir Thomas More. Sir Thomas is faced with a moral dilemma that will determine the outcome of his life. More, chancellor of England , and a strong Christian believer is forced to choose between his close friend, King Henry VIII, and the supreme lord his God. More is a man of moral integrity because he refuses to submit to external pressures to sign the oath condoning the Act of Supremacy. He follows his heart and soul in doing what he believes to be right no matter what the consequence.

The Terrible Old Man is a short story written in 1920 by H.P. Lovecraft, who was a famous author of sciene fiction, fantasy and last but not least horrer. I will, by analysing the characters, the setting and the ending, try to interpret and find the main theme of this story.

This judgment, as to whether or not he should be deemed a war criminal, must stem from modern institutions such as the Red Cross, as well as, other bodies that have dictated the protocols of war.2 Though it is easy to either glorify or chastise a historical figure from our past, a more difficult task that we must look towards, is to truly understand whether or not General Sherman’s actions shall be deemed inhumane in terms of modern societal norms and accepted agreements.

His dignity was trampled when the Japanese mistreated him and his health has deteriorated to the point whereby he nearly died at the age of 21 while working for the Japanese (Venables 2007, p. 42). These were mentioned in order to gain the sympathy from the readers through the cruelty and heartless characteristics of the Japanese. At the same time, a psychological barrier made of anger was formed towards the Japanese so that Australian would stand on his side and disapprove of the agreement.

Japanese soldiers are widely remembered as being cruel and indifferent to the fate of Allied prisoners of war. Cruelty could take different forms, from extreme violence and torture to minor acts of physical punishment, humiliation and neglect. Some prisoners were made to hold a heavy stone above their heads for many hours. Others might be forced into small cells with little food or water.

During the American Revolution many people were left in uncircumstantial situations. When you are at your lowest peak, you tend to do things you may regret. Imagine if every man was in a similar situation such as James Yates in “An Account of a Murder Committed by Mr. J--- Y---, Upon His Family, in December, A.D. 1781” and William Beadle in “A crime more atrocious and horrible than any other”. They had a choice and knew clearly what the punishment was for their crimes.Why did they do the things they did? Individuals do things they may not want to because another force is making them, it is their proclaimed duty, or their pride is interfering in their judgement.

The Man Who Was Almost a Man, tells the story of a young seventeen year old teenager, named Dave Saunders, who finds himself struggling with the need to be taken seriously as an adult, while still being seen by his community, as merely a boy. Published in 1961 and written by Richard Wright, this short story focuses on the common struggle of young African American men in the South trying to find their identity outside of the box that the United States society put them in at the time. Dave felt that in order to prove that he was a man; in order to receive the respect he thought he deserved from Black and White Americans alike, he needed to purchase a gun. This, of course, proved to be of more harm than good, as Dave found himself incapable of using the gun correctly, and what resulted was the death of his employer’s mule. Dave then, after creating a nonsensical lie that does not convince anyone, decides to skip town in order to avoid the responsibility of taking up for his actions. When taking into consideration the story line and its relativity to the South during the 1920s, when the story is set, it’s clear to see that Dave Saunders’ story is more than what it seems to be on the surface. Dave Saunders’ story is a reflection of common coming-of-age struggles, and even more than that, the common African American struggle of trying to find power when everything surrounding you, and society as a whole, is telling you that you’re powerless; a struggle that is still very

From the beginning of their evolution, human beings have been searching for the meaning of happiness. While many may see this to be an inconsequential question, others have devoted entire lives to the search for happiness. One such person who devoted a great deal of thought to the question of man's happiness was the famous ancient Greek philosopher, Aristotle. In his book The Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle discussed the meaning of happiness and what it meant to live a good life. He asserted that the devise which has been invented to create what is good for man is called "politics;" and it "uses the rest of the sciences"¦so that this end must be the good for man." (Aristotle, I, ii) Aristotle also identified four general means by which people live their lives in order to gain happiness, but stated that only one was a means by which a person could actually attain it. According to Aristotle, it was not political power, wealth, or worldly pleasures by which a person could achieve real happiness, it was living a contemplative life.

Morals, values and ethics define who we are and what we believe. Culture, religion, and many other things affect our beliefs. One uses various types off ethics when surrounded by different groups. Knowing between right and wrong is a good foundation to practicing good ethics and morals. These things make morals, ethics, and values important in society.

Mortality is a good thing or is immorality a bad thing? Most of us do not realize that part of one of our issues of living a good life is doing the right thing. Aristotle talks about that each and one of us has their own lives to live and we make our own decisions. Mortality is more flexible and changing. What is right today can be wrong tomorrow and what was wrong yesterday can be right today. It is unavoidable that people will go against laws of society from time to time. Some people will steal goods from stores, rob banks for money, and take it up a level to commit something as evil and wrongful as a murder.

In the 1957 film classic The Bridge on the River Kwai, Lieutenant Colonel Nicholson accepts torture through isolation rather than allow his officers or himself to be used as prisoner of war (POW) laborers along with his men (Spiegel & Lane, 1957). His refusal to compromise their Geneva Convention protections in the face of Japanese pressure presents us with an interesting ethical question: to what end does a leader continue to cling to his/her rights as a POW? By closer examination of the duty of a POW and the role of leaders in captivity, it can be argued that LTC Nicholson did not act in the best interest of his men.

Michael H., a 68-year-old man, was admitted for exploratory surgery of his abdomen. He is frail, and his attending physician describes him as “emotionally labile.” Marcy R. is a social worker at BFL General Hospital, who is assigned to the unit that Michael H has been admitted. After Michael’s surgery, Marcy R. was approached by Michael H.’s daughter, Ellen B. in which Ellen has told Marcy that her father’s physician had just informed her that the lab report from the exploratory surgery shows that her father has terminal cancer. Ellen said that she and the family are in shock and they have decided that they not want the hospital staff to tell her father about the terminal nature of his cancer once he recovers from anesthesia. In this essay, I will discuss the ethical dilemma of “to tell Michael or not to tell him he has terminal cancer. He has the right to confidentiality by not withholding information from him when he has been diagnosed with terminal cancer, informed consent, and self-determination.