Learning Activity #1 - Knowing Your Own Values and Ethical Orientation

Using the articles in this week's reading, especially the following:

"What Are Your Values"

"Identifying Your Values"

"Living Your Values" (Part 1)

Do the work and reflection needed to come up with a list of 10 to 12 top values.  Prioritize them.  When you're done, post your list, together with a discussion (in essay form) of what was hardest/easiest for you in this exercise, anything that surprised you, and anything that you have reconsidered, or intend to reconsider.  

(If for some reason you prefer to email me your list privately, you may do so.  If you do email me your list, please still talk about the process of compiling/prioritizing the list and your discoveries along the way in the usual discussion forum.)

Looking at your prioritized values, can you determine the connection between those values and your usual ethical stance?  This will require you to consider whether your ethical approach tends to be Utilitarian (consequentialist and teleological), Aristotelian (Virtue Ethics - a slightly different type of teleological approach), Kantian (Deontological - duty, based on the Categorical Imperative), or some other approach.  What ethical approach do you tend to take, and how is that demonstrated (or is it demonstrated?) by your list of prioritized values?

Referring to your list of prioritized values, determine which values would be most likely to cause you to have an ethical difficulty in business.  Focus on just one, and detail how that value could give rise (or perhaps already has given rise) to an ethical dilemma in your work.  How would you resolve any conflict?  As ever, tell me how and why.

Learning Activity #2 - "Whistleblowing"

What values come into conflict in a typical "whistle-blowing" case?  Explain your answer and use at least 2 of the ethical theories to analyze the case and reach a reasoned ethical judgment as to which value ought to be given precedence in the whistle-blower conflict.  Make sure we know and can follow your ethical reasoning; defend your conclusion.