is freedom necessary to be ethical?
1. is freedom necessary to be ethical?
Answer:
Freedom is an essential characteristic of ethics
Explanation:
because without it, meaningful moral choices are impossible. Even if one believes that there is no such thing as free will, it is absolutely essential to the well-being and stability of society that people are treated as if they have the freedom to make moral choices.
2. why freedom is important in ethics
Answer:
because it is our right to be free and to feel happy so we don't get to be depressed we need to be free
3. describe the responsibility , freedom and ethics
Answer:
Responsibility = Your role as an individual
Freedom = Your rights as an individual
ethics = Your values as an individual (Doing right and wrong)
4. it is a kind of freedom where there is no outside factors that suppress.A. physical freedomB. moral freedomC. psychological freedomD. human freedom
Answer:
b.moral freedom
Explanation:
because it refers in a manner that upholds human dignity and goodness
5. It serves as paths to freedom from half-truths and deceptions a. Metaphysics b. Cosmology c. Logic d. Ethics
Answer:
C.Logic
Explanation:
Logic and critical thinking serve as paths to freedom from half-truths and deceptions.
Answer:
Sana makatulong
pls Brainliest me ^∆^
6. 3. This is the freedom of choice. a. Moral freedom C. Psychological freedom b. Physical freedom d. Absolute freedom
Answer:
C.Psychological freedom
7. create a simple intrographic showing tips on how to demonstrate ethical communication in your future work as a high school secondary school. you have the freedom to choose any medium so as along as it is clear. be creative?
Ethical Communication in the Workplace
Honesty. Honesty should be the cornerstone of all your workplace communications. ...Transparency. When communicating in your workplace, transparency is key. ...Respect. Respect is essential to ethical workplace communication.Answer:
Hope this is okay!
Explanation:
8. 3. What ethical consideration of qualitative research is it when the researchermust respect the participants' autonomy, integrity, freedom and right of co-determination?a. Privacyb. Human Dignityc. Duty to informd. Proper Citation
Answer:
B.Human Dignity
Explanation:
Sabihin mo lanh sakin kung mali ako
9. explain why only human beings can be ethical demonstrating unlimited freedom or the absence of freedom.
Answer:
Human has a high brain capacity that the other animals or mamals and by that human can do thinking and decision making.
Freedom is a foundation of ethics because if we have a freedom we can do whatever we want to and no one is dictating us or tell us what to do so we doesn't feel pressured and rebellion doesn't occurs that lead us to become unethical person..
10. Explain how to ethically practice freedom of speech.
Answer:
Accepting the limits of our own knowledge means allowing others to speak their mind – even if we don't like what they've got to say. As Noam Chomsky said, “If you're in favour of freedom of speech, that means you're in favour of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise”.
11. Prove that freedom of the will exists by giving an example. Why is the freedom of the will of man a conerstone of Ethics?
Answer:
Within philosophy, will is important as one of the parts of the mind, along with reason and understanding. It is considered central to the field of ethics because of its role in enabling deliberate action.
Explanation:
With free will comes moral responsibility – our ownership of our good and bad deeds. That ownership indicates that if we make a choice that is good, we deserve the resulting rewards. ... In the case of a really bad choice, such as committing murder, we may have to accept severe punishment.
12. Why is freedom regarded as the foundation of ethics?
Answer:
it is on heaven with is free air and all of world
13. Directions: Read the sample Research Ethics below and answer the question that follows.In compliance with Research Ethics Protocol, the researchers have obtained informed consentfrom the survey respondents specifying their awareness of the purpose of the study, their agreement toparticipate as survey respondents, their freedom to disclose or not to disclose information, their freedomto stop their participation anytime if they do not feel comfortable, their right to be informed of theresults of the study, the benefits they will get if there will be any as a result of the study, and their rightto the confidentiality of information and anonymity of their identity. In the interview, no picturesshowing their faces are taken, nor does identifying features of their houses and location unless allowedby the participants.Question: Does the sample Research Ethics contain fundamental ethical principles? Why?
Answer:
Research ethics is closely related to the ethical principles of social responsibility. This research covers a wide context of working with people, so the researchers raised a task not only to gain confidence in the respondents’ eyes, to receive reliable data, but also to ensure the transparency of the science. This chapter discusses the theoretical and practical topics of research, after evaluation of which ethical principles of organization and conducting the research are presented. There is a detailed description of how and what ethical principles were followed on the different stages of the research
14. 48. What are the three kinds of freedom? a. Physical Freedom, Psychological Freedom, Moral Freedom b. Physical Freedom, Intellectual Freedom, Moral Freedom c. Physical Freedom, Psychological Freedom, Mental Freedom d. Physical Freedom, Mental Freedom, Moral Freedom
Answer:
Letter c
Explanation:
C daw, ccccccccccccccccccccc
15. In compliance with Research Ethics Protocol, the researchers have obtained informed consent from the survey respondents specifying their awareness of the purpose of the study, their agreement to participate as survey respondents, their freedom to disclose or not to disclose information, their freedom to stop their participation anytime if they do not feel comfortable, their right to be informed of the results of the study, the benefits they will get if there will be any as a result of the study, and their right to the confidentiality of information and anonymity of their identity. In the interview, no pictures showing their faces are taken, nor does identifying features of their houses and location unless allowed by the participants.Question: Does the sample Research Ethics contain fundamental ethical principles? Why?****paki answer mo agad kaylangan namin ngayon
plss help me how to answer this
16. freedom of speech is ethical in nature?
Answer:
BY THE ETHICS CENTRE 22 FEB 2017
Freedom of speech refers to people’s ability to say what they want without punishment.
Most people focus on punishment by the state but social disapproval or protest can also have a chilling effect on free speech. The consequences of some kinds of speech can make people feel less confident in speaking their mind at all.
Since most philosophers agree there is no such thing as absolute free speech, the debate largely focuses on why we should restrict what people say. Many will state, “I believe in free speech except…”. What comes after that? This is where the discussion on what the exceptions and boundaries to free speech are.
Even John Stuart Mill, who is so influential on this topic we need to discuss his ideas at length, thought free speech has limits. You would usually be free to say, “Immigrants are stealing our jobs”. If you say so in front of an angry mob of recently laid off workers who also happen to be outside an immigrant resource centre, you might cause violence. Mill believed you should face consequences for remarks like these.
This belief stems from Mill’s harm principle, which states we should be free to act unless we’re harming someone else. He thought the only speech we should forbid is the kind that causes direct harm to other people.
Mill’s support for free speech is related to his consequentialist views. He thought we should be governed by laws leading to the best long-term outcomes. By allowing people to voice their views, even those we find immoral, society gives itself the best chance of learning what’s “true”.
This happens in two ways. First, the majority who think something is immoral might be wrong. Second, if the majority are right, they’ll be more confident of their position if they’ve successfully argued for it. In either case, free speech will improve society.
If we silence dissenting views, it assumes we already have the right opinion. Mill said “all silencing of discussion is an assumption of infallibility”.
Accepting the limits of our own knowledge means allowing others to speak their mind – even if we don’t like what they’ve got to say.
As Noam Chomsky said, “If you’re in favour of freedom of speech, that means you’re in favour of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise”.
Free speech advocates tend to limit restrictions on speech to ‘direct’ harms like violence or defamation. Others think the harm principle is too narrow in definition. They believe some speech can be emotionally damaging, socially marginalising, and even descend into hate speech. They believe the speech that causes ‘indirect’ harms should also be restricted.
This leads people to claim citizens do not have the right to be offensive or insulting. Others disagree. Some don’t believe offence is socially or psychologically harmful. Furthermore, they suggest we cannot reasonably predict what kinds of speech will cause offence. Whether speech is acceptable or not becomes subjective. Some might find any view offensive if it disagrees with their own, which would see increasing calls for censorship.
In response, a range of theorists suggest offending is harmful and causes injury. They also say it has insidious effects on social cohesion because it places victims in a constant state of vulnerability.
In Australia, Race Commissioner Tim Soutphommasane is a strong proponent of this view. He believes certain kinds of speech “undermine the assurance of security to which every member of a good society is entitled”. Judith Butler goes further. She believes once you’ve been the victim of “injurious speech”, you lose control over your sense of place. You no longer know where you are welcome or when the next abuse will occur.
For these reasons, those who support only narrow limits to free speech are sometimes accused of prioritising speech above other goods like harmony and respect. As Soutphommasane says, “there is a heavy price to freedom that is imposed on victims”.
Whether you think offences count as harms or not will help determine how free you think speech should be. Regardless of where we draw the line, there will still be room for people to say things that are obnoxious, undiplomatic or insensitive without formal punishment. Having a right to speak won’t mean you are always seen as saying the right thing.
This encourages us to include ideas from deontology and virtue ethics into our thinking. As well as asking what will lead to the best society or which kinds of speech will cause harm, consider different questions. What are our duties to others when it comes to the way we talk? How would a wise or virtuous person use speech?
Explanation:
sana makatulong
Answer:
Most people focus on punishment by the state but social disapproval or protest can also have a chilling effect on free speech. The consequences of some kinds of speech can make people feel less confident in speaking their mind at all.
Since most philosophers agree there is no such thing as absolute free speech, the debate largely focuses on why we should restrict what people say. Many will state, “I believe in free speech except…”. What comes after that? This is where the discussion on what the exceptions and boundaries to free speech are.
Even John Stuart Mill, who is so influential on this topic we need to discuss his ideas at length, thought free speech has limits. You would usually be free to say, “Immigrants are stealing our jobs”. If you say so in front of an angry mob of recently laid off workers who also happen to be outside an immigrant resource centre, you might cause violence. Mill believed you should face consequences for remarks like these.
This belief stems from Mill’s harm principle, which states we should be free to act unless we’re harming someone else. He thought the only speech we should forbid is the kind that causes direct harm to other people.
Mill’s support for free speech is related to his consequentialist views. He thought we should be governed by laws leading to the best long-term outcomes. By allowing people to voice their views, even those we find immoral, society gives itself the best chance of learning what’s “true”.
This happens in two ways. First, the majority who think something is immoral might be wrong. Second, if the majority are right, they’ll be more confident of their position if they’ve successfully argued for it. In either case, free speech will improve society.
If we silence dissenting views, it assumes we already have the right opinion. Mill said “all silencing of discussion is an assumption of infallibility”.
Accepting the limits of our own knowledge means allowing others to speak their mind – even if we don’t like what they’ve got to say.
As Noam Chomsky said, “If you’re in favour of freedom of speech, that means you’re in favour of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise”.
Free speech advocates tend to limit restrictions on speech to ‘direct’ harms like violence or defamation. Others think the harm principle is too narrow in definition. They believe some speech can be emotionally damaging, socially marginalising, and even descend into hate speech. They believe the speech that causes ‘indirect’ harms should also be restricted.
Explanation:
I hope it helps.
17. 3. This is the freedom of choice. a. Moral freedom C. Psychological freedom b. Physical freedom d. Absolute freedom
Answer:
c
Explanation:
make me brainliest plss dont judge me if my answer is wrong
Answer:
LETTER D. ABSOLUTE FREEDOM
Kung saan wala nang makapipigil sa iyong gusto o kalayaan mo na qng gawin ang iyong ni nanais.
18. 1. Explain why only human beings can be ethical. 2. Explain: Freedom is a foundation of ethics.
Answer:
1.human has a high brain capacity that the other animals or mamals and by that human can do thinking and decision making.
2.Freedom is a foundation of ethics because if we have a freedom we can do whatever we want to and no one is dictating us or tell us what to do so we doesn't feel pressured and rebellion doesn't occurs that lead us to become unethical person.
19. why only human beings can be ethical demonstrating unlimited freedom or the absence of freedom?
Only Human Beings Can Act Morally. Another reason for giving stronger preference to the interests of human beings is that only human beings can act morally. This is considered to be important because beings that can act morally are required to sacrifice their interests for the sake of others.
20. Prove thatthe willexistsbyanexample. Why Freedomfreedom ofOFgivingEthics?mancornerstoneof the willOF 야
Answer:
☺️☺️☺️☺️☺️
Explanation:
21. 3. Which of the following is not a legal form of freedom?a. Freedom of selfb. Freedom of expressionc. Freedom of informationd. Freedom of choice
Answer:
A.freedom expexpression
22. how would ethical freedom of expression translate to constructive criticism
Answer:
The ethical usage of the freedom of expression and right to press and free speech can be translated into criticism if the points made in a statement meant to criticize is put in a matter that is meant to pinpoint areas that need improvement.
Explanation:When someone expresses their opinion in a way that both compliments the author's work and criticizes points that may require or have alternative choices that make improvements to their work. Constructive criticism is also characterized by specificity and is constituted of suggestions that are easy to dispatch and use for the writing.
23. what do you think is the best type of freedom? freedom from, freedom to, freedom to be and why?
1 Introducing the concept of freedom
What are the limits of individual freedom in a civilised society? Should we tolerate unlimited freedom of speech, no matter how offensive the views expressed? Can the state ever be justified in interfering with what consenting adults choose to do in private? When, if ever, is coercion acceptable? Are all laws obstacles to freedom, or are they the very condition of achieving it? Should we sometimes force people to be free, or is that a contradiction in terms? These are serious questions. They're not merely abstract puzzles for philosophers to ponder in comfortable armchairs. They are the sorts of issues that people are prepared to die for.
Even if you choose to ignore them, the way other people answer these questions will impinge on your life. Philosophers at least since Plato's time have put forward answers to them. Here we'll be examining the arguments some of them have used. However, this won't just be a survey of some interesting thoughts on the subject. The point is to engage with the arguments: to examine their structure and content to see if they really support their conclusions. You needn't agree with these conclusions. As long as you think critically about the concept of freedom and are capable of arguing your case rather than simply stating your prejudices, you will be reading in the spirit in which they are intended.
To live in a society requires all kinds of co-operation. Usually this means curbing some of our more selfish desires in order to accommodate other people's interests. That is an element of the human situation. Given that our desires often conflict, it would be impossible for us to live in a society which imposed no limits whatsoever on what we do. It would be absurd to argue that we should all have complete licence to do whatever takes our fancy no matter who is affected by our actions. I shouldn't be allowed to walk into your house and help myself to your stereo and television. Hardly anyone would argue that I should be free to steal your possessions simply because I want them; but deciding where to set the limits on individual freedom in less extreme cases is no easy task.
2 The word ‘freedom’
The word ‘freedom’ can have powerful emotive force, that is, the power to arouse strong emotions. Its connotations are almost exclusively positive. If you describe a group as ‘freedom fighters’ this suggests that you approve of the cause for which they are fighting; call them ‘terrorists’ and you make clear your disapproval.
hope it helps pls brainliest
24. 1. This is freedom from physical restraint. a. Moral freedom c. Psychological freedom b. Physical freedom d. Absolute freedom
Explanation:
I think it's b.physical freedom
25. Do you think social media freedom of expression matter ethical issues?
Answer:
pa brainliest po
Explanation:
I hope it's help
please follow for more answers
thank you
26. describe the responsibility , freedom and ethics using five sentences
Answer:
Responsibility the state or fact af having a duty to deal with something or having control over someone.
Freedom the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants without hindrance or restraint.
Ethics seeks to resolve questions of human morality by defining concepts such as good and evil, right and wrong, virtue and ice, justice and crime.
27. There are ethical considerations that come with the exercise of freedom because
Answer:
The present paper is an exercise in self-awareness and self-realization ... So there is inclusive alternation between freedom and determinism.
Explanation:
28. what do you think is the best type of freedom? freedom from, freedom to, freedom to be
Answer:
Freedom of speech and expression, everywhere in the world.
Freedom of speech and expression, everywhere in the world.Freedom of every person to worship God in his own way, everywhere in the world.
Freedom of speech and expression, everywhere in the world.Freedom of every person to worship God in his own way, everywhere in the world.Freedom from want, which, translated into world terms, means economic understanding that will secure to every nation a healthy peacetime life for its inhabitants; everywhere in the world.
Freedom of speech and expression, everywhere in the world.Freedom of every person to worship God in his own way, everywhere in the world.Freedom from want, which, translated into world terms, means economic understanding that will secure to every nation a healthy peacetime life for its inhabitants; everywhere in the world.Freedom from fear, which, translated into world terms, means a worldwide reduction of armaments to such a point and in such a thorough fashion that no nation will be in a position to commit an act of physical aggression against any neighbour; anywhere in the world.
Explanation:
STAY SAFE GOD BLESS
29. why should we consider responsibility and ethics in the exercise of freedom?
Explanation:
With freedom comes responsibility – to accept the consequences of our choices, and to respect and protect each others' freedom. Not everyone will respect that responsibility voluntarily. Freedom without mutual responsibility is the law of the jungle.
30. Freedom Freedom Freedom
Answer:
Freedom
Freedom
Freedom
