Ethical Decision Making Assignment Essay Example

Ethical Decision Making Assignment Essay Gurwinder Singh Professor Denniston Ethics of Engagement 11/15/10 We all end up at a point where we have to respond to an issue positively. That is possible when a good amount of experience to certain situations is attained. â€Å"The creed which accepts as the foundation of morals utility or the greatest happiness principle holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness† John Stuart Mill. This particular quote refers to the utilitarian approach which states that in all our actions we must always strive to produce the greatest possible balance of good or evil. The utilitarian approach deals with consequences. It tries both to increase the good done and to reduce the harm done. Immanuel Kant was an important component in modern philosophy. He combined together early modern rationalism and empiricism and continues to practice an important influence today in ethics. He disputes that the human understanding is the source of the general laws of nature that structure all our experience and that human reason gives itself the moral law, which is our basis for belief in God, freedom, and immortality. â€Å"Act in such a way that you always treat humanity whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never simply as a means but always at the same time as an end†- Immanuel Kant. In this particular quote Kant gives us a message to treat people with respect and never get them to believe something that doesnt exist. We will write a custom essay sample on Ethical Decision Making Assignment specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on Ethical Decision Making Assignment specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on Ethical Decision Making Assignment specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer Carol Gilligan maintains that the morality of males is different from that of females. Males view rules and principles as necessary to proceed in a practice (a game, an art, a science, the making and sustaining of a community). Females, on the other hand, give fundamental importance to the consistency of relationships with other people. Gilligan describes male morality as a morality of principles while female morality is a morality of care. My ethical decision was made in terms of John Stuart Mill and Immanuel Kant and Carol Gilligan. There was a time when I encountered a situation in college where I had to make an ethical decision. I was in the middle of studying for my psychology quiz until a colleague, from my psychology class, came up to me and asked me to devote some time for his psychology homework. I first thought of the effects it would have on me and my responsibilities. I had very little time and needed that time to understand the lesson along with some vocabularies for the quiz. I was half way through and didnt want to forget the previous words that I had memorised. It would have been a bad idea to go help him right away. It was during my first year of college and my family demanded outstanding grades. I personally enjoy helping others because it makes me feel happy, so I definitely didnt want to deny. The only option I had was to help him later. I responded and told him that I was in the middle of studying for the quiz and if he can come back in a little while, I would be able to help him. I finished my work and then helped him right after I was done. At the end it kept me from facing any negative consequences and my colleague had a better understanding of the material. I believe that my decision was correlated with Mills decision because I made use of the â€Å"utilitarian calculus† by weighing the positive and negative consequences of my decision. Weighing the consequences of each possible course of action that the greatest good will ultimately be achieved by telling him to come back in a while. Many people engage in this type of utilitarian calculus automatically when they are attentive about important decisions in life. Whenever we weigh the pros and cons of a particular action, we are fundamentally engaged in a type of utilitarian calculus. According to Mills a rule utilitarian would maintain that instead of each individual acting to bring about the greatest amount of good over evil, everyone should follow those rules that would be beneficial for all. Finishing up my work and then devoting some time to help him kept me from doing poor on my quiz. On the other hand Immanuel Kants principle of morality was involved with my decision. I always try to respond to a situation by putting myself in someone else’s shoes before making a critical decision. After my colleague requested me for some help I did not want to deny and cause him to fail. If I were to be in a similar situation I would also ask someone to help me for a better understanding. If someone denied the help I would feel unaccepted and think of that individual as being selfish. I wouldnt want someone to be having that kind of perspective towards me. I wanted to respect his need and kind request. My decision was also made in terms of Carol Gilligan. I weighed certain consequences that I would have to go through. I was also attentive towards my families demanding of good grades. I evaluated the priorities at stakes. I wanted to help him have a better understanding of the topic. I also evaluated the consequences he would have to go through. I thought of it as more of a â€Å"justice approach† because I would prevent him from not doing his homework or not doing well on the quiz. My approach to this specific dilemma was very similar to that of Gilligan, Kant, and Mill. It was similar in one way or the other. The reading was very beneficial because there were many situations that were dealt in terms of morality, pros and cons, and the justice approach. My decision included these qualities. I have now a better understanding in dealing with certain situations and how to proceed.

Mahdist War and the Siege of Khartoum

Mahdist War and the Siege of Khartoum Siege of Khartoum - Conflict Dates: The Siege of Khartoum lasted from March 13, 1884 to January 26, 1885, and took place during the Mahdist War (1881-1899). Armies Commanders British Egyptians Major General Charles Gordon7,000 men, 9 gunboats Mahdists Muhammad Ahmadapprox. 50,000 men Siege of Khartoum - Background: In the wake of 1882 Anglo-Egyptian War, British troops remained in Egypt to protect British interests. Though occupying the country, they allowed the Khedive to continue overseeing domestic affairs. This included dealing with the Mahdist Revolt which had commenced in Sudan. Though technically under Egyptian rule, large parts of Sudan had fallen to Mahdist forces led by Muhammad Ahmad. Considering himself the Mahdi (the redeemer of Islam), Ahmad defeated Egyptian forces at El Obeid in November 1883 and overran Kordofan and Darfur. This defeat and the deteriorating situation led to Sudan being discussed in Parliament. Assessing the problem and wishing to avoid the cost of intervention, Prime Minister William Gladstone and his cabinet were unwilling to commit forces to the conflict. As a result, their representative in Cairo, Sir Evelyn Baring, directed the Khedive to order the garrisons in Sudan to evacuate back into Egypt. To oversee this operation, London requested that Major General Charles Chinese Gordon be placed in command. A veteran officer and former governor-general of Sudan, Gordon was familiar with the region and its peoples. Leaving in early 1884, he was also tasked with reporting on the best means for extracting the Egyptians from the conflict. Arriving in Cairo, he was re-appointed Governor-General of Sudan with full executive powers. Sailing up the Nile, he arrived at Khartoum on February 18. Directing his limited forces against the advancing Mahdists, Gordon began evacuating women and children north to Egypt. Siege of Khartoum - Gordon Digs In: Though London desired to abandon Sudan, Gordon firmly believed the Mahdists needed to be defeated or they could overrun Egypt. Citing a lack of boats and transport, he ignored his orders to evacuate and began organizing a defense of Khartoum. In an effort to win over the citys residents, he improved the justice system and remitted taxes. Recognizing that Khartoums economy rested on the slave trade, he re-legalized slavery despite the fact that he had originally abolished it during his earlier term as governor-general. While unpopular at home, this move increased Gordons support in the city. As he moved forward, he began requesting reinforcements to defend the city. An initial request for a regiment of Turkish troops was denied as was a later call for a force of Indian Muslims. Increasingly agitated by Gladstones lack of support, Gordon began sending a series of angry telegrams to London. These soon became public and led to a vote of no confidence against Gladstones government. Though he survived, Gladstone steadfastly refused to become committed to a war in Sudan. Left on his own, Gordon began enhancing Khartoums defenses. Protected to the north and west by the White and Blue Niles, he saw that fortifications and trenches were constructed to the south and east. Facing the desert, these were supported by land mines and wire barriers. To defend the rivers, Gordon retrofitted several steamers into gunboats which were protected by metal plates. Attempting an offensive near Halfaya on March 16, Gordons troops faltered and took 200 casualties. In the wake of the setback, he concluded that he should remain on the defensive. Siege of Khartoum - The Siege Begins: Later that month, Mahdist forces began to near Khartoum and skirmishing commenced. With Mahdist forces closing in, Gordon telegraphed London on April 19 that he had provisions for five months. He also requested two to three thousand Turkish troops as his men were increasingly unreliable. Gordon believed that with such a force, he could drive off the enemy. As the month ended, the tribes to the north elected to join with the Mahdi and cut off Gordons lines of communication to Egypt. While runners were able to make the journey, the Nile and telegraph were severed. As enemy forces surrounded the city, Gordon attempted to convince the Mahdi to make peace but with no success. Siege of Khartoum - Fall of Khartoum: Holding the city, Gordon was able to somewhat replenish his supplies by raiding with his gunboats. In London, his plight was played up in the press and eventually, Queen Victoria directed Gladstone to send aid to the beleaguered garrison. Acquiescing in July 1884, Gladstone ordered General Sir Garnet Wolseley to form an expedition for the relief of Khartoum. Despite this, it took a substantial amount of time to organize the needed men and supplies. As the fall progressed, Gordons position became increasingly tenuous as supplies dwindled and many of his more capable officers were killed. Shortening his line, he constructed a new wall inside the city and tower from which to observe the enemy. Though communications remained spotty, Gordon did receive word that a relief expedition was en route. Despite this news, Gordon greatly feared for the city. A letter that arrived in Cairo on December 14 informed a friend, Farewell. You will never hear from me again. I fear that there will be treachery in the garrison, and all will be over by Christmas. Two days later, Gordon was forced to destroy his outpost across the White Nile at Omdurman. Made aware of Gordons concerns, Wolseley began pressing south. Defeating the Mahdists at Abu Klea on January 17, 1885, the men met the enemy again two days later. With the relief force approaching, the Mahdi began planning to storm Khartoum. Possessing around 50,000 men, he ordered one column to wade across the White Nile to attack the citys walls while another assaulted the Massalamieh Gate. Moving forward on the night of January 25-26, both columns quickly overwhelmed the exhausted defenders. Swarming through the city, the Mahdists massacred the garrison and around 4,000 of Khartoums residents. Though the Mahdi had expressly ordered that Gordon be taken alive, he was struck down in the fighting. Accounts of his death vary with some reports stating he was killed at the governors palace, while others claim he was shot in the street while trying to escape to the Austrian consulate. In either case, Gordons body was decapitated and taken to the Mahdi on a pike. Siege of Khartoum - Aftermath: In the fighting at Khartoum, Gordons entire 7,000-man garrison was killed. Mahdist casualties are not known. Driving south, Wolseleys relief force reached Khartoum two days after the citys fall. With no reason to remain, he ordered his men to return to Egypt, leaving Sudan to the Mahdi. It remained under Mahdist control until 1898 when Major General Herbert Kitchener defeated them at the Battle of Omdurman. Though a search was made for Gordons remains after Khartoum was retaken, they were never found. Acclaimed by the public, Gordons death was blamed on Gladstone who delayed forming a relief expedition. The resulting outcry led his government to fall in March 1885 and he was formally rebuked by Queen Victoria. Sources: BBC. General Charles Gordon. Fordham University.  Islamic History Sourcebook: Death of General Gordon at Khartoum. Sandrock, John.  Windows to the Past: Siege of Khartoum.