Just Consequentialism According to Moor, (2001) the theory of just consequentialism imply that the ends, however good, “do not justify using unjust means”. Regardless the action, there is need to ascertain if unjust means will enhance the action of the user, the mobile agent and the host. Therefore, if it is not possible to achieve the envisaged end (the given task) without using unjust means, the requirement of just consequentialism is not satisfied. Disclosure Module This module applies the Brey’s disclosure cyber-ethical algorithm (Brey, 2005). In this module, the embedded features that are associated with mobile behaviours, will be extracted and identified.
The ironic paradox that there are choices in politics, yet at the same time Irwin does not have a choice when blackmailed, shows the unfairness of extortion, and demonstrates the fallacy, argumentum ad baculum: a threat that does not offer the audience options (Heinrichs 178). Furthermore, Jack attempts to downplay the unethicality of extortion by redefining blackmail as pressure because it “is a prettier word” (Warren 483). By rejecting the opponent’s definition, Jack avoids validating Irwin’s argument (Heinrichs 117). Due to its immorality, Willie’s decision to blackmail Irwin resulted in the corruption of justice, symbolized through Irwin, and ultimately lead to his suicide. Thus, Irwin’s death showed that the unfairness of blackmail overpowered Willie’s logic behind extortion, but in reality, both sides lost since Willie’s threat failed and Irwin’s newfound information led to his demise.
According to the Nizkor Project a person can substitute a claim intended to create a sense of pity for evidence found in an argument (Nizkor). This fallacy is known as an Appeal to Pity. The arguer appeals to an audiences feelings in a sympathetic way. This appeal is also known as “argumentum ad misericordiam, the sob story, or the Galileo argument.” (Logically Fallacious) An Appeal to Pity attempts to sway someone using emotions versus using actual evidence. This argument is based on a mistaken belief; because when we are in our emotional state our responses to certain situations are not necessarily the best guide to the truth.
He argues of a ‘reactionary narrative’ when it comes to social change, that is conservative in nature and opposes change. This can well be applied to changes proposed to organisations. There are three theses; the perversity thesis, which believes that any purposeful attempt to improve the organisation will only further worsen the condition sought to be changed; the futility thesis, that holds that any attempt at change is futile and will simply fail, and; the jeopardy thesis, that supposes that proposed changes jeopardises the “status-quo” and the benefits the existing system has. This chapter seeks to analyse two issues- one, whether the defence acquisition organisation in the army needs changes; two, does the army need an acquisition cadre or corps, specialist officers dedicated to acquisition appointments who would ultimately bring professionalism to acquisition.
They include unguided or unstructured which involves the health professionals relying on their intuition about the person under assessment. The health professional reviews case materials presented to him and use his experience to make a judgment without using any specific risk factors. This method is not reliable since the health professional can be biased. It is also inconsistent since different professionals can make a different judgment. Attempts should be made to improve the reliability of this method since the impact of incorrect assessments of a sex offender is significant (Andrews, Bonta, &Wormith, 2006).
Still, questions have to be asked on the ethicality of using quite punitive measures and restrictive institutions. Even increased recidivism has not deterred criminality. There is an increasing belief that punishment does not work in the expected economical and ethical efficiency. Because of the mounting belief that punishment does not work, there is an increased call for its abolishment and the establishment of a social alternative. Those opposed to utilitarianism proposes restitution for crime victims and therapies for criminals.
Individuals with neuroticism personality types are pre-occupied, reluctant and incompetent in taking initiatives that are why they avoid decision making and conflict management (McCrae & Costa, 1990). Another research supports this hypothesis, Avoidance in leadership, decision making and conflict management is considered inappropriate (Bass & Reggio,
Avoidance. Avoidance is widely referenced in behavioral literature as a maintaining factor of anxiety (citation). By avoiding the anxiety-provoking social situations I fail to learn that these situations are in fact safe, thereby disproving my fears (i.e. violation of expectation). In addition, avoiding those social situations (i.e.
Situationists believe that personality traits cannot be used to predict behavior because behavior is largely dependent upon the situation. Since there are limits to how well behavior can be predicted using personality traits, they believe situations are more useful in predicting behavior. Supporters of the situationist approach believe that
(JP 3-13.3 N.D., I) What OPSEC does during IO operations, is allow for MILDEC operations to allow false information to flow to the enemy that would hamper their ability to collect intelligence on true intentions on US efforts. (JP 3-13.3 N.D., I) Under the processes of OPSEC indications of potential vulnerability, Critical Information that could lead to enemy operations being effective as well as information that could lead to vulnerability through the release of information. (JP 3-13.3 N.D., I) This could be information that would be determined as unclassified but still important enough that would cause damage to an operation or physical security. (JP 3-13.3 N.D.,
The internet, government, and corporations are all out to get you, or at least that is what Bruce Schneier would like convince you of in his work titled “The Internet Is a Surveillance State”. Schneier identifies many reasons as to why a surveillance state is a negative, such as constant tracking, habit profiling, and lack of privacy both in public and in the comfort of your own home. What Schneier fails to address, however, is that a surveillance state isn’t always a negative, and quite possibly it is a necessary evil to prevent bad things from happening around the globe. As Whitney Cramer states in her essay titled “Giving up Our Privacy: Is it Worth It?”, Schneier “fails to acknowledge” that the “loss of privacy to protect the innocent