# data[].attributes.body
future ethical dilemma for scientists/engineers

numerous ethical considerations surrounding AI but in ex machina, what if we do create AI is it ethical to simply turn it off? Is it muder? or just turning off a computer? Is it deleting a sentient being?

in the movie we see two sides, the creator who has no sympathy and has no problem resetting, and the tester who becomes sympathetic towards the AI "Ava". Both are technological professionals but one see ava as a piece of technology and the other a sentient being.

# data[].attributes.body
Redlining was the practice of concentrating minorities into certain low income areas and was banned in 1968. While banned, the system that this put in place still sees these areas  predominantly inhabited by minorities. These areas have little infrastructure built and thus are unfairly facing the most impact from global warming. With much higher temperatures and pollution in these areas, there are numerous health risks being placed upon those that live there.

I knew very little about the history of Globeville, especially the high levels of toxicity. I drive through the area pretty frequently since it is so close to Denver. Saw it as the start of the industrial side of the city and only pass through it on the highway. The hard part is that widening the highway would help traffic through the area tremendously, but not at the risk of those that live there. The alternatives they had stated about moving the highway where there is little population is much better. The area reminds of any large cities area that is close to industries and thus face larger levels of pollution.

The problems in these articles are definitely engineering problems and specifically ethical problems within engineering. The problems need to be solved but in the most ethical manner possible.

Scientist and engineers do play a role in environmental justice. Much of the issues in these areas come from the byproducts of industries and development  and thus it is part of the problem that technological professionals need to face. Mines graduates can help with these problems by approaching them with environmental justice in mind.

https://mediadrumworld.com/2018/08/20/30850/

This collection of photos shows "poverty lines" throughout the world where rich neighborhoods and poor neighborhoods share a street. On the rich side of the street, it is all green and beautiful, while on the poor it is all concrete with no sign of plants and is looks more rundown.

# data[].attributes.body
The Colorado river was portrayed in the first person so as to emphasize the river as an entity that stretches across the west. I was not surprised by this method in the video, or as a legal method. Thinking of the entire river as a single entity, it is much easier to consider ethical situations around the river than if viewed as just parts of the river.

Often take for granted lakes as being 'natural' when the majority of them are man made with dams. I don't know exactly where my drinking water comes from, and this could be seen as both and engineering success and failure. It a success in that I have water so readily available for use from all kinds of sources, but it is a failure in my ignorance to the exact locations that it comes from. Its hard to think ethically about water usage when I don't know exactly where it comes from.

If the river delta was in southern California instead of across a border, the delta conditions may have been slightly better. There is such high usage throughout that it would still be very dry. However, it is difficult to communicate environmental justice across a border, and the fact that the delta is international definitely contributed to it being dryer than if it was all within one country. Water rights are a tough subject and often the people at the end of a river get the short end, especially when the river crosses borders.

Both of the case studies show not only the importance of rivers/water in numerous ways, but the impact that human use/manipulation of has. Both are examples of how much water can change a landscape and population.

https://www.cpr.org/2020/10/16/record-drought-is-putting-farmers-and-ranchers-on-the-front-line-of-climate-change/

This article is about how dry Colorado has been and how low the rivers are, strongly impacting the farmers of the area.

# data[].attributes.body
Just Garbage:
African-Americans and minorities are exposed to disproportional levels of environmental hazards.

The defense against this say it is not a racial discrimination but an economic effect. The waste is stored in lower income/poverty areas which just happen to be heavily non-white.

Poor people bear the largest burden of environmental hazards even though they contribute minimally to it.

"When people of wealth...are themselves threatened disproportionately by toxic hazards. the culture will evolve quickly to find their production largely unnecessary."

Warren County:
PCB protests-dumping in landfill-negative environmental and health impacts
started the fire that swept the nation
An environmental movement that also had social justice with it

# data[].attributes.body
"Intended dual use" - where scientists develop secondary uses for a technology that are intended to do good or benefit.

Unintended dual use is a much more difficult ethical issue as the aim of the development is to benefit society.

how far is a scientist responsible for foreseen effects of their research, their prevention and effort to predict these

Jonas - internal dynamics and immense power of modern science requires increased awareness of societal and personal responsibility

Not to contribute to dual use and to prevent it

# data[].attributes.body
Some other examples of dual use are developments in areas such as drones, or nanotechnology, or even the internet. Each of these are developed with good in mind, but can also be used to devastating consequences. The internet makes our lives easier and connects us around the world. But it is also a hub for spreading of misinformation or opens up the possibility of hacking and viruses which can ruin people lives.

Halting nuclear weapons spread after the testing at Trinity or even the first drop, may have positively impacted the world in discouraging future improvements and developments. This may have lead to elimination of future conflicts such as the cold war, or the idea of mutual destruction and how it controls our world. However, this also brings out the fear that was discussed in the earlier article about why scientists avoid ethics, where the idea of "If I don't someone else will." If the US had stopped after Trinity, the possibility and potential had already been shown. Countries such as Russia may have then developed nuclear weapons and become much more powerful than even today. It would have needed to be a world wide halt on nuclear weapon development.
These bombs connect to the scientists ethics and dual use, in their reactions to after the bombs. During development the scientists were infatuated with the power at their disposal, what they can achieve with their minds. After, they saw what their work had done. They saw the potential of what physics can do, and not whether they should; that they can control the power of the stars and then see the impact that power can have on the earth and humanity.

What concerns me the most about nuclear power technology is the weaponization of it. The fact that the world would be set into ruin with the press of a button (simplified of course). But world peace really hangs on the balance of this mutual destruction around the world and in order to be a powerful country, one needs a stockpile of nuclear weapons. This is why North Korea wants to build up its nuclear arsenal. Nuclear weapons may never be set off for war purposes, but the fact that peace is based upon having them is a very dangerous game to play. And once one country uses one in a violent manner, the whole world will fall into chaos.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jul/28/worlds-largest-nuclear-fusion-project-under-assembly-in-france

With the talk of the beneficial use of nuclear energy in energy plants, I was surprised that there was no mention of fusion. This article talks about the development of fusion in France (it is being developed around the world). Currently all nuclear reactors use fission to produce energy, where an atom is split, and while beneficial, it is prone to disasters and produces radioactive waste which is very harmful. Fusion is a much better way to produce energy and is actually how stars produce there energy by fusing two atoms. Not only is it more efficient in terms of energy production, but the byproduct is not harmful. Fusion would take two hydrogen atoms and fuse them into a helium atom which produces large amounts of energy. The byproduct is just helium. However this process is also how current thermonuclear bombs work (or the H-bombs) and why they are even more destructive than atomic bombs.

# data[].attributes.body
The argument about the impact social media relates pretty heavily to my own life. While I am definitely not one that uses social media in terms of posting, as I don't post to any social media very often, I am still on it daily. Whether that be for sportscenter updates, friend updates, or other uses. I definitley see the impact of this data tracking. What is in my recomended feeds or ads is heavily based on products i use or purchase, things that I look up on the internet, etc. This, along with the spread of false information can be quite frightening.

A system that detects and classifies faces can be useful in a number of ways. From security purposes, to population analyzation, to things such as a self driving car. The drawback for these systems is the bias that its imbedded in the code. All of the code has a bias, generally from the 'teaching' of these codes which rely upon data sets. These data sets can be unintentionally bias. Giving up my image/data has a lot of benefits to these programs, to teach them in a the most overarching way, however, also giving up that data causes concern. Concern in that what exactly that data is used for, and how much of it is collected. I don't like the idea of an algorithm knowing more about myself than I may even realize. Buolamwini's research shows exactly how these biases form and potentially how we can adjust them.

I am not sure what needs to be added to this list, but the one that I agree with the most is that economic models skew technology. While all the items on the list are true, this fact has a huge impact. Technology from these companies in not really produced to help humanity. It is produced to increase profits the most, by any means necessary.

The examples of bias throughout science history, amplifies the idea of systemic biases. Often these algorithms are not programmed exactly for something, the are written to learn how to do something, and these are where the biases are input. The data to teach these programs come from our own history or data collection, which is very much so full of bias. The technology then inherently learns these biases, and thus create injustice. And as society continues to rely more and more on technology, these biases will only continue to become amplified. Tech/science can take a step back, and look at the way these programs are written and the data they use to teach them to ensure justice.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/microsoft-shuts-down-ai-chatbot-after-it-turned-into-racist-nazi/

This article is about the chat bot that google produced as an experiment. This bot was an algorithm to chat with users on social media. In order to teach the algorithm, it learned from the users it interacted with and data on the internet. Well very quickly, people joked with the bot and taught it to be racist/align with nazi ideals. The bot did not have the judgement to realize these are bad and did what it was supposed to do, learn. This shows how the data that is used to teach these technologies easily creates bias

# data[].attributes.body
Originally seemed good intentions

Social media makes money by monetizing our attention.

We have become the 'Trees'
How can we keep the users attention

Processing power has increased so much more than anything  else

Human minds have not evolved

Cathy O'Neill - algorithms are opinions imbedded in code - optimized to some definition of success.

Tristan Harris -

False information spreads 6x faster than true news

Platforms for radicalization - conspiracy theories - kyrie irving

Addiction - dopamine use

Everyone sees things differently online

Increased polarization today

Depression/suicide/hospitilization up in this generation, especially alarming in pre-teen girls

No regulation on data services, like there is in others

Industry is stuck in buisness model of make as much money as possible.

# data[].attributes.body
"id drill in a cemetery if there was oil"

This shows just the power of money, the promise of large amount of money does not matter the cost

This is highly alarming, and shows the grip the oil industry has on our society. Not only that industries are ruthless in there goal of profit, but the politicians are as well because they are backed by these companies.

L&P:
"Perhaps, then, the most consistent form of Rothbardian libertarianism is a kind of very, very deep ecology. This is not, of course, the conclusion that Rothbard himself drew. And it is not the conclusion that most libertarians who follow in Rothbard’s footsteps have drawn.."

Here, Rothbard's conclusion about aggression can be taken to the extreme, but how he puts it make it not so extreme.

Though the author may have taken Rothbard's writing a bit to the extreme, I don't think he did. It is interesting how some make conclusions so much so that it can be taken so far. This may be a lack of full communication of the idea, or simply ignorance of the writer to what they themselves are saying.

# data[].attributes.body
My time management has stayed consistent throughout the semester. While it might not be great on the surface since I tend to do a lot of work on or the day before things are due. This is because of the number of classes I have and the mass amount of work I have to do for each class. As well I work when I can, and I go to the gym about 6 times a week. Those would be the things that distract me from school other than free time I have of maybe 1-2 hours a day where I watch netflix/sports (especially football on Sundays) or Im out playing golf on the weekends.

# data[].attributes.body
Importance of public lands/environmental justice for all vs the use of the land for economic gains.

A lot of mines/drilling areas are just left by the companies after they are done with it to be cleaned by tax payers.

Senator: "Id drill in a cemetery if there was oil in it."

James Watt: religious reasons. That it was our duty to use the land. Thought all conservationists were pagan.
Lead to Sagebrush rebellion saying they will use the land - easily manipulated - paid for by the companies that extract the resources.

Carribou tribe in Alaska- Huge wildlife area that the indiginous people depend upon could have oil. Artic National Wildlife Refuge

Don Young - radical rep of Alaska pushing to  drill here. Say it would be small portion of land but it would not. Simply say the exact area that would be drilled into but dont talk about the pipelines.

Foreign dependence on energy led to energy production at home - more drilling. (9/11)

Ranchers are able to rent federal public lands for very cheap to graze on. Movement of these lands to states would result in the sale of these lands to private industries with lots of money and would erase smaller scale/private ranchers. These ranchers care for the land, while these industries would not.

Libertarianism and Pollution
True libertarianism fully rejects the concept of aggression. From something like theft to very simple things like shining a flashlight in someone's eye.
Murray Rothbard said that pollution itself is an act of aggression by putting toxins into the air that can go into the lungs of another and onto their land.
But where does that stop, does driving my car count as an act of aggression?

Most liberationists have middle approach where aggression can be justified under conditions

But who has the right to say someones enjoyment is being infringed upon other than the owner

Rothbardian libertarianism would be a very very deep ecology.

# data[].attributes.body
In the fields of Genetic Engineering, Nanotechnology, and Robotics, will benefit society in numerous ways. Improvements in these areas can improve and prolong human life, increase production of industries, and ease human life ideally by making things simpler.

There are a number of problems that also arise with the development of these fields. A key one is if robotics start replace human jobs. This could cripple the economy and leave many unemployed. This is not just a problem for jobs such as manufacturing and fast foods, but extends to all levels. If we have AI that can solve any problem, why would we need engineers? Or robots that can perfectly execute surgeries and diagnose patients, why would we need doctors? Beyond these issues, there is also the possibility of the technology out growing humanity. This is often the topic of many sci-fi movies and seems fictional, but could be a very real problem, and that's why it is such a popular subject. We could be the creators of our own destruction.

I am more optimistic about the future, however this is on the basis that society can change. If we are to continue our technological advancement as we are, but society  does not change with it, then it will be our undoing. There are glimpses of this change and embrace of positivity for the future, but there are also numerous examples of conflict arising and refusal to change. I am optimistic about the future but it is not a strong one.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3973198/?ref_=ttls_li_tt

The above is the IMBD summary and review of an episode popular tv show Black Mirror. While any episode of this show is a prime example of technological advancement and the "horrors" that accompany them, this is one of the more popular.

# data[].attributes.body
Deontology and consequentialism both consider treating everyone equally, both different in exactly what that means, but equally for everyone.

I would cover for my father as this is an issue that can be discussed internally, between just the two of us. As well, the relationship I have with my father is more important than 'justice' and thus can be solved without the authorities.

Confucian ethics differs from the above ideologies as it takes into account ones personal relationship with the circumstances. How these personal ties extends to others (strangers) changes.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3928682/My-son-not-monster-Mother-South-Carolina-serial-killer-accused-murdering-seven-people-woman-chained-metal-container-says-s-misunderstood.html

The above article is about Todd Kohlhepp's (a serial killer), mother who tries to defend him by saying he is merely misunderstood. While yes he clearly has metal issues, this shows the power that family can have on someone's view of the situation. Most people would see him as a monster, but for family it can totally alter their perception of the situation. While this is an extreme example, it does show the importance of relationship in ethical situations.

# data[].attributes.body
Attorney - licened in CO
Georgetown University law JD
masters degree in education
LLM - masters in law - environmental and natural resources law.
Research: tension between wind turbines and birds getting killed by. And Uranium mining
Professor at CSM for 14 years
international and environmental law

# data[].attributes.body
Payne Institute for Public Policy at CSM
Dr. Griff Thompson Director, Office of Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency, U.S. State Department,
October 15, 2020 1-2pm
presentation
Energy Transfer: Political, Social, and economic implications

In a period of significant energy transition - high carbon to low carbon energy economies. Leads to redistribution of power, politically socially and economically (winners and losers).

We have a thinking that innovation only in terms of technology, however these technologies work and are progressing. However the institutions don't work, institutional and policy innovation are needed.

Energy Transition:
Decarbonization
Decentralization-nations are finding it increasingly difficult to produce energy needs for population.  Cities and states are critical to innovation. How do we change the markets
Digitalization
Democratization - a promise and potential in move away from centralized system will bring with it a growing possibility of participation of communities. ie solar communities

Are we experiencing an energy transition or a socio-political transformation (not answered for probably next 10 years). Can we use the energy transition crisis as an opportunity to reflect on society.
Estimate that peak fossil fuel demand is about right now and will start to decrease as renewable use grows.

Dramatic cost reduction in renewables and lithium battery packs.

Storage of renewables is the weak point (what happens when sun doesnt shine and wind doesnt blow). But we are seeing decrease in cost of storage.

EV vs ICE vehicles cost difference use to be in batteries, now they are about equal.

Asia pacific region majority of investments going forward.

Energy transition will likely create new trade patterns and relationships. Reduce geopolitical importance of oil and gas as levers of foreign policy. Reduce oil and gas driven conflict (hopefully) but will shift to renewables supply(manufacturing for example). Create significant cybersecurity vulnerabilities with digitalization.

What happens to countries who rely on fossil fuel exports when the need for FF drop (Russia, Saudi Arabia, etc.)

Energy is the subtext in all foreign policy.
Need behavioral changes, institution adoption.

US-Israel clean energy finance task force: How do we bring experts from both sides through in depth technical exchanges. Israel wants clean energy.

Langdon Winner quote

Should be power centralized or dispersed?
What is the best size for units of social organization?

Do we use this historic opportunity to address social, economic, and political issues (nationally and locally)
Backdoor to peace/global cooperation?
We are forever looking for a technological fix to something more deep seeded than that.
Easier to generate new tech then to change the human condition.
We dont change unless there is traumatic event. Climate change is a traumatic event.

Nexus diplomacy - energy is back door resolution to conflict. As energy has some pretext in a majority of conflicts. Think about energy more than atoms and particles.

Dwight Eisenhower quote: make the problem bigger.

# data[].attributes.body
Land of Cockaigne - mythical place, easily accessible food, people were free to indulge themselves, everyone was equal (equally lazy). It is the precise opposite of the daily lives of the people who created it.

Biological Old Regime - Vast majority of human existence. Extremely precarious nature of food supply. Subsistence agriculture. The movement from one harvest to another. Constant labor to produce needs of survival. Extreme inequality, thus equating to extreme violence over resources.

Anthropocene - expansion of resource capture. Taken control of earth and its resources. Domesticated plants and animals. Modern society.

Human control is likely to be a lasting feature as technology continues to improve. However, our control is not as strong as some may believe. Nature will always be a powerful force, regardless of the technology we posses. And, as we can see with global warming, the ignorance of our control can ultimately be our downfall from nature.

Hetch Hetchy - Valley in north CA, mid 1800s pristine environment, protected in 19th century. Dam built in 1920s cause San Fran needed the water

Conservationism - movement that advocates the careful management of resources with human use and enjoyment as the highest priority.

Eco-modernism - advocates through science and engineering can use control over environment for positive ends. Should end in an unnatural world, where we control nature.

Forest Death -  opposition to ecomodernism.

Preservationism - Preserve nature in its pristine statue as it has intrinsic value. Lead to wilderness act.

Island Effect - Biological phenomenon. Island ecosystems tend to have smaller and more vulnerable species. Wildernesses have become like the islands as they are surrounded by humanity.

Half Earth - the idea that half of the world needs to be wilderness areas in order to truly preserve nature.

I like the idea of preservationism more, however it is definitely a much more challenging goal, especially in the half earth idea. It would not only call for a change in human development, but it would also call for us to give up a large part of our lives. Such as I enjoy camping and skiing and this would call to give up a large portion of these activities. However this appears to be the true way to preserve nature.

The best means for conserving nature for all human communities seems to be conservationism as it serves to conserve nature for human purposes. However conserving nature for human communities and for its own intrinsic values seem to be contradicting stances.

# data[].attributes.body
Went over each group members research topics and what they have currently researched. Got good feedback on current research and what to expand on /include for my own research and to help the other group members.

# data[].attributes.body
PART 1 ONLY
I would describe justice as fairness similarly to that of John Rawls. Justice/fairness is about opportunity equality. It is just to ensure that all people have an equal opportunity to things. Life is unfair and not everyone is born into the same circumstances as others and what is just is to try to counter-act that unfairness of the luck of life in terms of what opportunity everyone has to something, not that everyone has the same thing, but simply that they have an opportunity to it.

Honestly, our society seems to be very unjust. While yes there are lots of systems in place that are just, the majority of it seems to be unjust. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer, racism is very much alive,  and other forms of social injustice are running rampant. All of this leads to unfair opportunities for different parties.

Justice looks like equal opportunity and injustice looks like a dismissal of someone's opportunity because of the life they were born into.

'veil of ignorance' - create laws/rules as if you (lawmaker) could be anyone in the situation. Think of the impact on every (as many as possible) background.

'Nozik fairness' - equal treatment of all people regardless of situation they come from.

https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/fight-against-gay-marriage-still-alive-well-u-s-advocates-n1242272

this news article from NBC is talking about how Monday 9/5 two of the supreme court justices wanted to reevaluate the federal legalization of gay marriage. This is a prime example of an injustice. These people would be denied an opportunity, not only to be legally married but also the legal implications that come with that such as joint taxes, simply because of who they are. While I am using Rawl's theory of justice here about opportunity, but I think Nozik would also agree this is unjust as it is not treating everyone the same.

# data[].attributes.body
Right of nature object to sue for own protection (Ecuador)

Kristi Luke - "The land is not real estate'- mauri - New Zealand

Share land with "" and conservation group, land owns itself

Santa monica - 'nature has a right to thrive' - difficult to develop in - how do you enforce?

Think of nature as a subject not an object - Natalia Greene

# data[].attributes.body
Went over research for P2 and got peer addition to the research. Went well, got a good idea of how to find stakeholders for my own research as well as others.

# data[].attributes.body
How someone can understand the views that someone does, for example in climate science, by looking at it from their point of view. While easier said than done, all sides need to be seen by all parties to engage in deliberation instead of debate. We need to work as one to overcome obstacles together not debate about who is right.

To address the scenario of eating the dog in the most effective way, the stance that eating dogs is immoral needs to be ignored. For our culture this is seen as morally wrong, in others, it is not. This moral stance aside, the actions are still not moral. Because this dog was someone else's and just because it is dead does not give you the right to take it. Perhaps that family would have liked to bury the dog and have their last goodbyes. What this boils down to is that dog was not made to be eaten. Such as cows or other animals that are raised to be consumed (this is a whole other moral argument in itself and not applicable here). This dog was not there's to take.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2016/03/11/could-the-lhc-make-an-earth-killing-black-hole/#75e1e1802ed5

The above article is an example of speaking out against misrepresented science. The author is Ethan Sigel, who has a PHd is astrophysics, and disproves the fears that a black hole could be created in the Large Hadron Collider. It has been said that it could potentially create microscopic black holes, and Siegel discusses what that means and how it does not mean that a black hole will appear and swallow the earth.

# data[].attributes.body
These two texts compliment each other highly on the interconnectedness of land to nature, sometimes over looked as part of nature. Both discuss the rapidness of change that humanity is causing and how the speed of it does not allow nature to adapt to it, something nature is good at, however this is generally a long process. Leopold states that humanity's conservation of nature is centered around monetary value as opposed to the intrinsic value it should have, Carson pulls on specific instances of how quickly humanity is impacting the land: chemicals, invasive species, etc.

# data[].attributes.body
A good majority of real world problems are adaptive as opposed to technical. Even problems that seem to have technical answers, design of a part, can actually become adaptive; part of real world solutions is not just solving a problem but solving it in a way that is cost efficient, maybe aesthetically appealing, or other factors while also solving the technical problem. Addressing adaptive problems requires compromise, out of the box thinking, and argumentative reasoning as one may need to defend why their solution checks all the boxes. To be an engineer the ability to solve technical problems is expected, the good engineers can solve adaptive challenges.

In the last man example, I would not nuke it. Never know what the potential future for the earth could look like: maybe a new intelligent species evolves. The people that agree with me are those that morally see it wrong to obliterate all life on earth, it is not ok for one person to destroy the world. Those that say it is ok see it as who cares that life on earth is destroyed, it is more humane to end one's suffering than the lives of less intelligent beings. Or maybe they think its a fresh start for the planet, maybe life finds a way to survive.

I fall slightly more on the non-anthropocentric side of the scale, but there needs to be a balance. Both national forests and wilderness areas are important. yes there should be some untouched areas where people don't live.

humans fit more in the "eco" of everything. Nature is more powerful than some may believe and the health of our species relies upon the health of the system as a whole. I can see the judeo-christian side having somewhat of a point in that we may have a special duty to nature not that it is ours. We are able to ponder these questions about nature and our relationship with it while other species just intrinsically benefit nature (bees pollinating for example)

I do plan on having children and while my obligation to them will outweigh that of other children, I believe that all people have an obligation to humanity as a species. And part of that obligation is to consider future generations as that is how the species progresses. People do have a right to experience nature but how far the right extends is difficult.

Cost benefit analysis can be used to address lots of things in economics; what products and services are popular etc. It can be not be the correct tool when it comes to issues of things higher than simply products. Issues of fairness within in environment questions is, it fair to nature for it to be used by humans and to what extent? Every species uses nature in a way but at what extent is the use justified? This plays into the anthropocentric and non views as both see the justification of this use to different extents.

Looking back, my decision to have children does not change. However it is part of my obligation to humanity to teach them to use less resources, to reduce waste, and to consider the impact of their use on the entire world.

https://wilderness-society.org/why-is-wilderness-important/

The above article presents a number of reasons as to why its important to have wilderness areas

# data[].attributes.body
Define:
1. Moral Relativism
Morality is a personal preference; people have different values and who's to say one is better than another.
2 .Utilitarianism
Happiness has moral utility; moral situations should be approached as what creates the most happiness for the most number of people. Equally weighing all people's happiness including our own.
3. Deontology
Ethical action does not come from weighing outcomes, but always act ethically as one has an obligation to do so.
4. Virtue Ethics
Here it is not whether an action is right or wrong, but what type of person acts ethically and what compels them to do so.
5 Liberalism
A political philosophy that crosses party lines, where it is the governments duty to create a just society and protect all people's liberties.

Part 2:
Sandel states that money can buy a lot of things. Its harder to find things money cant buy. Examples of things that money can buy, that may be surprising, are jail cell upgrades in Santa Barbra, and the light color of the London Eye (Coca Cola made it red).

Sandel's first example of what money can't buy is friendship.

The difference between a market economy and a market society is that a market economy is a tool to promote healthy competition and a strong economy , while a market society is where everything (or most everything) becomes for sale in society.

Part 3
The objections to the selling of kidneys are: inequalities both for the seller that is taken advantage of because they need the money and buyers that may not be able to afford the kidney they need. In an equal society objections are that "is nothing sacred" where the market society extends to even the human body and companies taking advantage and cutting corners in transplants (not compatible persons etc.)

One could argue that all of the philosophies in Ch 2 are in play here. For example, Utilitarianism in creating the most happiness for the most people. Both parties may be satisfied with the out come: the buyer for being able to acquire the replacement kidney as well as the seller for the money they received. However, is the seller really happy? Or did they do it just because they felt they had no other option. Or with Moral Relativism, some people may see this a morally ethical while others see it as morally unethical as can be seen in his class where some people felt it was right and some felt it was wrong. This problem can be discussed from a number of point of views.

Part 4
I resonated most with both sides of justice is fairness. Justice needs to level out the playing field for those that are less fortunate in giving them essential life needs: food, shelter, and pursuit of ones goals. Everyone needs a level playing field with regards to these facets of life; opportunity needs to be a level playing field. However, beyond these basic needs the playing field is not level. Hard work should be rewarded. Like the example in the video of Wilt Chamberlain does deserve more money. Ill use baseball for my own example. Mike Trout , one of the greatest players of this generation and arguably of all time, is the highest paid player in baseball. This is something he deserves as his success widely affects the success of his team. He does deserve to be paid more than one of the less impactful players, because of his hard work and because he got lucky in life. However, his skill can not impeded upon the Opportunity of other players of his time making it to the big leagues. Thus opportunity needs to be a justice is fairness philosophy.

-Would just like to say that I really enjoyed Sandel's lecture and watched more of it.-

https://www.therichest.com/rich-list/10-body-parts-you-can-legally-sell-for-big-bucks/

With the talk of selling kidneys, it is interesting to see what parts of the body you can sell. The above article covers 10 body parts you actually can sell legally. They range from blood, to bone marrow, to hair, all things that regenerate naturally and thus don't really have an effect on the donator.

# data[].attributes.body
This column is for collating homework assignments that were not collected for a grade.

# data[].attributes.body
This column is for documenting the writing and critical thinking process over the semester.

There are two types of posts to make here:

1. Required workshop reflections: after every small group workshop, report and reflect on the workshop process. Describe what happened – activities done, skills practiced, and results of the workshop. Also reflect on how the workshop session went: successes or satisfactions, challenges or frustrations, things learned & questions raised. This should be done in the last few minutes of the workshop time or right after the workshop ends.

2. Connection posts: Use this column as a kind of "writer's notebook," a the place to collect ideas, thoughts, and materials for possible use in later writing assignments, especially for the research paper and the final portfolio. At least once a week ( after one or both recitation sessions), a post should be added that reflects on and attempts to connect the course materials and activities to other ideas and resources.

# data[].attributes.body
This column is for posting responses to prompts or exercises given during recitation. No homework assignments should be posted here; time will be given in recitation to add responses to this column.

# data[].attributes.body
Title your response with the title of the lecture. And then each time that you respond to a lecture on your own Padlet, be sure to include the following:

1. At least two sentences responding to one or more of the prompts given in the lecture materials. You may write more if you wish, but aim for at least 30 words of thoughtful, critical response to the prompts.

2. Two facts (or definitions) from the Lecture restated in your own words. If you are quoting something directly, indicate this with quotation marks AND THEN rephrase it in your own words.

3. A link to clearly related outside media, with an explanation of what in the linked-to material relates to the lecture (and how it relates). You should include a comment that introduces and summarizes the thing being linked before you explain your thoughts on how it connects to the lecture. (If you prefer, you can create a separate tile for this part).

# data[].attributes.body
family - FV
friends -FV
eating healthy(ish) -FV
good food-MV
going to gym - CV
golf (w/friends or grandpa)-CV
skiing-MV
motorcycle-MV
video games-MV/IV
dog-CV
school-CV
baseball (watching now, used to play)-CV
going to steamboat to see my dad-CV
softball with friends-IV
helping little brother with boat-CV
youtube-IV
music-MV
guitar-MV
traveling -CV
golf clubs -MV
car-MV
electronics-MV
fantasy football-IV
watching sports (baseball,golf,football,etc)-IV
netflix-IV

This processed showed me that a lot of my values revolve around doing things with people I care about. Things like playing golf or even fantasy football are more about spending time/interacting with my family and friends than it is about the activity itself. The things that I value that are more private are often ways to relax/unwind. However they can sometimes become distracting and interfere with some of the Core Values such as watching netflix can interfere with getting school work done, leading to stress. However a healthy balance is needed.

# data[].attributes.body
The philosophy that resonated most with me was Virtue Ethics. Primarily due to it takes into account of why and discusses the idea of “nature vs nurture.” The idea that our actions have a number of reasons and allows people to change their morality. Morality is not a straight forward math. Sometimes there is no clear cut answer, our own personal story will direct us to do what we believe to be right and will justify our actions. This belief in what is right can change based on the outcomes.

Deontological and Consequentialist ethics both have strong point but they reason as if all people see the world similarly. The morals of one person may conflict with that of another even though both believe they are in the right. From Deontological ethics, the “act as if you would Will it into universal law” is a great way to make moral decisions. However people’s view on what they wish the worlds “universal law” can change and the why behind that is not clear.

# data[].attributes.body
My personal relationship with nature is primarily two things: adventure and peacefulness. Being in the mountains or on a river/lake or in some sand dunes offers a chance for excitement and thrill. Whether that be skiing, swimming, fishing, or anything else I can find. Or it can be of peacefulness, a way to get away from it all and relax ( whether with people or on my own) and appreciate my surroundings for its beauty.

The best way I could show both was a trip I took to Sand Dunes national park with some friends where during the day we were hiking the dunes or riding down them on boards. In the evening the stars were gorgeous, unaffected by light pollution.

# data[].attributes.body
Nice spot to sit, enjoy the river, and dip in the water. Is the rock formation of this little inlet natural or man made to fit in with the river? My guess would be man made.

# data[].attributes.body
There are many ways to see this point of a river, a “hole” or “rapid.” One can look and see the beauty of the water flowing over the rocks, the power of the water that carved out the rocks, or as fun. I look and see a spot that I could jump in and enjoy the current or go over it a tube.

# data[].attributes.body
Responsibility
Honesty
Strong work ethic
Open-minded
Ethical
Versatile
Creative
Never stop learning
Fast thinking
Communication skills

# data[].attributes.body
1) I would not change the report and include tank 2. Regardless of the "promotion" it is ethically irresponsible to put lives at risk for the sake of saving a few dollars. Now someone else will do it, however I am responsible to report this tank. Beyond this promotional loss this situation would make me question the company I am working for and any company that agrees in hiding the second tank. As well, lets say that I do change the report, and the mall gets built, and someone dies. The investigation will hold the client responsible, who in turn will blame my firm. Then those people who would "help" me get up the ladder would quickly turn and blame me to save themselves.

2) This is a tough area. Scientists and engineers are responsible for the technology they produce, especially the primary use of the product. However its impossible to know all the ways their advancement can be misused and abused. Like the engineers of Zyklon b, they produced it to benefit mankind and even put in safety measure. There is no way they could have foreseen their product being used in such a horrifying way. This is not something that can be blamed on them. This is of course if they do not support the negative use of their product. In the long term they are responsible for the proper use of their product and inhibiting false use.

3)The documents clearly state that the o-ring problem could result in the loss of life, advise to not fly, and rough time line of solutions. However the language can be quite technical and may not have made sense to certain individuals and may have seemed like less of an issue than it was.

4)In any design there are a number of factors that go into its effectiveness. The majority of the designs have safety factors-a minimum design need to withhold under extreme conditions, generally about 1.7-2 where it can withstand around 1.7x the extreme conditions it can undergo. Of course generally the higher the safety factor, the more expensive it is. No design is without risks, however it is the engineers job to minimize risks. If people listen to them is a different story as is the case with the Challenger Space Shuttle.

# data[].attributes.body
The moral sphere chart's structure, while it does show how one level encompasses another, doesn't really enforce it. Essentially, it still allows to think inward ethically. For example, an individual can make an ethical decision up to only the level of the sphere they want regardless of its impact on the larger spheres. They could create a product/system that benefits only the inner-circles while causing harm to the outer-circles. The chart does show how inwardly this decision truly is explicitly.

The trolley problem is a classic example of ethical decisions. While many people say to save 5 at the expense of 1 life, it is not that clear. While yes I agree the needs of the many over the few, who am I to say that one life is more valuable over another's? This dilemma is made even harder if you have some form of a relationship with the person you are sacrificing (whether that be on the extra track or on the bridge) as you are now emotionally invested in the dilemma on top of ethically. So many people change the answer when you have to push the person as opposed to pulling the lever even though the outcomes are the same. This is because when pushing someone, you a directly causing the outcome of the loss of someones life, where when pulling the lever all you are really doing is changing the track and thus having an indirect causation of the outcome.
This relates to moral spheres as it shows how outwardly one is thinking. By saving the many, you are thinking about the higher levels and by saving the few, you are thinking about the more inner levels. However, is either bad? Is it worth the sacrifice of one for the many? While in many cases this is easily the case, but when it comes to this small of a scale it becomes tough. The loss of one life to save say millions is an easy yes but the loss of one to save only five is tough. One could argue that the workers on the track know the danger of their job and should be more aware of their surroundings, why should I sacrifice an innocent bystander?

The moral machine shows well the ethical decisions facing self-driving cars. While they are in fact generally much safer, if situations such as the ones presented occur, how should the car respond? While the decisions we were given gave back stories to the individuals, in real time this will not be the case. I feel that the car should prioritize the many over the few and those abiding the law. Human life should be valued over animals, and young children over the elderly. While these are tough, this generally how a person driving the car would react. People would swerve to save a child if it meant killing a cat. The biggest problem here and why there is such a large moral dilemma facing the self-driving car is there is no one to blame the outcome on. If a person driving a car swerves to save someone and kills another, they would be faced with the charges. But if its a self-driving car, who do you blame? The people in the car? Well they weren't in control. The manufacturer? They programmed the car to cause the least amount of loss of life (hopefully, or at least tried to make it the most ethical). And are you supposed to sacrifice the driver for someone else?

# data[].attributes.body
1. I felt that Jenny Price does a great job of showing how one can 'feel' nature even when in a large city such as L.A. These ways can often be overlooked. I felt some were stronger ways than others like "as resources." While yes one can see nature in the resources and should, they are often so highly processed or interwoven into the industrial parts of society that's its not as strong of a connection to nature as her ways of "as wild" or "source of human meaning." in these ways I see a stronger connection to nature.

2. For her "Wild things" definition, she describes it as probably the most basic way of seeing nature; the untouched, uninhibited nature.
She defines and describes the river that runs through L.A. to give the reader a picture.

3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epPHYZrGPqs
This is an ad for Planet Earth 2's episode that follows the large monkey population in the city of Jodhpur, India. The full episode is really interesting look at the adaptation of the monkeys to living in a large city, stealing food and racing across rooftops as if they were in a jungle. Great episode to watch