Paul Maverick B. Ward                                                                                      

 

Contemporary Moral Problems by James E. White (7^th Edition)

Library Reference: none

Amazon Link: http://www.amazon.com/Contemporary-Moral-Problems-James-White/dp/0495553204/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1233910528&sr=1-1

 

 

Learning Expectations:

 

I expect to learn more about rights and how to take it seriously for others to take it also in a way with respect. I also expect to learn how people can use their rights to let other people respect them or in some way.

 

Review:

 

            On the 10^th sub-chapter of the 1^st Chapter in the book Contemporary Moral Problems authored and written by James E. White, Ronald Dworkin, a university professor of Jurisprudence, Oxford University and professor of law in New York University, imparts that if people have a right to do something, then it is wrong to interfere with them. With this statement, there are lots of controversies or insights that can arise. One of which is that, if a person has the right to do anything he wants (Right of Freedom), then the man has the right to break the law.

Other people wouldn’t have the right to interfere with him because the right should be respected and obeyed. Another example is the freedom of speech of the citizens on a certain country or land. If these people have the right to say whatever they want, the government shouldn’t do anything to disperse these people. It just comes to an extent of which the actions of these people get bad for the government. Through these rights, the citizens will develop self-pride and would fight the government whenever or wherever they want. This in time can cause problems and difficulties for the government creating even more problems. When a problem arises from this situation, another right would come in place for the government.

            All in all, if people would take seriously the rights that they have, they are also taking seriously the laws that are implemented in the area they are living in. These two are connected and intertwined with each other making it very important and vital for a society to have.

 

Lessons Learned:

 

I have learned more information about rights and how people take it very seriously for total respect towards the area they are living in. With respect and taking the rights seriously, people also takes seriously the laws being implemented. On the other hand, people who doesn’t take other people’s right seriously simply means that the particular person doesn’t take the law seriously.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Integrative Questions:

1.  Who is Ronald Dworkin?
2.  What does he think about rights?
3.  What does respect has to do with rights?
4.  What does law has to do with seriousness?
5.  How does seriousness affect the way people live?

 

Review Questions:

1. What does Dworkin mean by right in the strong sense? What rights in this sense are protected by the U.S. Constitution?

-       He means that if a person has rights, that person has also the right to break the law.

-       The right of which as long as you don’t do anything bad to the other, you don’t have the right to remain silent.

 

2. Distinguish between legal and moral right. Give some example of legal rights that are not moral right, and moral right that are not legal rights.

-       Legal rights are rights that is protected with laws while moral right are those of which obliges a person to do for the balance of equality.

 

3. What are the two models of how a government might define the rights of its citizens? Which does Dworkin find more attractive?

-       Individual rights and Constitutional rights

-       Constitutional rights

 

4. According to Dworkin, what two important ideas are behind the institution or rights?

-       The rationalization of rights

 

Discussion Questions:

1. Does a person have a right to break the law? Why or why not?

-       Yes because every person has the right to freedom giving that person the right to do anything he pleases.

 

2. Are rights in the strong sense compatible with Mill’s utilitarianism?

-       Yes

 

3. Do you think that Kant would accept right in the strong sense or not?

-       No.