Matching Items (1,385)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

156270-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
In this thesis, I discuss the philosophical problem of evil and, as a response, John Hick's soul making theodicy. First, I discuss the transformation of the problem. I examine how the problem has shifted from logical to evidential in recent history. Next, I offer a faithful rendition of Hick's position

In this thesis, I discuss the philosophical problem of evil and, as a response, John Hick's soul making theodicy. First, I discuss the transformation of the problem. I examine how the problem has shifted from logical to evidential in recent history. Next, I offer a faithful rendition of Hick's position - one which states the existence of evil does not provide evidence against the existence of God. After reconstructing his argument, I go on to exposes its logical faults. I present four main contentions to Hick's theodicy. First, I analyze the psychology of dehumanization to question whether we have any evidence that soul making is happening in response to the suffering in the world. Second, I argue that Hick's theodicy is self-defeating if accepted because it undermines the central point on which his argument depends. Third, I claim that Hick's theodicy is self-defeating given his eschatological views. Finally, I discuss how Hick's theodicy does not account for the animal suffering that widely exists in the world now, and that exists in our evolutionary history. My hope is to show that Hick's theodicy fails to solve the problem of evil. I claim that the amount of gratuitous suffering in the world does provide evidence against the existence of God.
ContributorsScarpa, Frank Vincent (Author) / Manninen, Bertha (Thesis advisor) / Kobes, Bernard W. (Committee member) / Pinillos, Angel (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
131495-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Criminal Justice is a complex subject matter, and not everyone agrees on the way a criminal justice system ought to function. But one feature that is common to virtually all forms of proposed justice systems is that a true justice system treats people ethically. The question, then, is how a

Criminal Justice is a complex subject matter, and not everyone agrees on the way a criminal justice system ought to function. But one feature that is common to virtually all forms of proposed justice systems is that a true justice system treats people ethically. The question, then, is how a justice system can achieve this. This investigation analyzed two ethical theories, Kantianism and Utilitarianism, to determine which one would be better suited for guiding a criminal justice system on how to treat the people involved ethically. This investigation focused on applying the two theories to the U.S. Criminal Justice System in particular.
Kantianism is a duty-based moral theory in which actions have an intrinsic moral worth. This means certain actions are morally right and other are morally wrong, regardless of the intended or realized consequences. The theory relies on the categorical imperative to judge the morality of certain actions. It states that an action is moral if its maxim can be willed universal law and if it avoids treating people as merely a means. In contrast, Utilitarianism is a consequentialist theory which focuses on the consequences of an action in judging moral worth. In Utilitarianism, the morally correct action is the one which will maximize utility; that is to say, the morally right action is the one which will produce the greatest amount of happiness and minimize the amount of pain for the greatest number of people.
After applying these two theories to moral dilemmas facing the U.S. Criminal Justice System, including the appropriate collection of DNA evidence, the use of police deception, and the use of criminal punishments such as solitary confinement or the death penalty, it was clear that Kantianism was the ethical theory best suited for guiding the system in treating people ethically. This is because Kantianism’s focus on the intrinsic moral worth of an action rather than its consequences leaves less room for ambiguity than does Utilitarianism.
ContributorsMorett, Xavier Laakea (Author) / Manninen, Bertha (Thesis director) / Kimberly, Kobojek (Committee member) / School of Criminology and Criminal Justice (Contributor) / School of Mathematical and Natural Sciences (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2020-05
133634-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Universal healthcare has become a regular feature of most developed nations around the world. This characteristic, however, does not extend to the United States, where some 28.2 million Americans remain uninsured or underinsured. In the past few years, the US has been on the precipice of major healthcare overhaul which

Universal healthcare has become a regular feature of most developed nations around the world. This characteristic, however, does not extend to the United States, where some 28.2 million Americans remain uninsured or underinsured. In the past few years, the US has been on the precipice of major healthcare overhaul which has brought the debate on government-sponsored coverage to the forefront of political discourse. This thesis explores what it may mean to establish affordable access to healthcare as a right for all Americans. In doing so, it utilizes rule-utilitarian principles to define and assess the moral obligation of the United States' federal and state governments to provide sufficient coverage to all qualifying individuals within the country. This paper focuses on evaluating the current healthcare system in the United States while concentrating particularly on how its fragmented approach limits its success and longevity. It then offers a cross-comparison with the universal healthcare systems of Canada, France, and Japan, nations that outperform the United States in most healthcare measures such as life expectancy, infant and under-5 mortality, medical costs per capita, and disease prevalence. The free-market criticisms of government-provided coverage and its alternative private-insurance-based approach to healthcare in the US are also deliberated. In light of these considerations, this thesis concludes with a commentary on what healthcare reform could look like for the nation as well as examines how a utilitarian appeal to rights likely makes the best case for adopting universal government-sponsored healthcare coverage in the United States.
ContributorsKhan, Sameera (Author) / Manninen, Bertha (Thesis director) / Marshall, Pamela (Committee member) / School of Mathematical and Natural Sciences (Contributor) / School of Humanities, Arts, and Cultural Studies (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2018-05
134607-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Through this thesis, I intend to explore what sociologist Arthur Frank means when he describes illness as "a dangerous opportunity" (Frank, 1991, p. 1). It is my objective to more fully understand the lived experience of illness and how narrative can aid in transforming illness from tragic to transcendent. In

Through this thesis, I intend to explore what sociologist Arthur Frank means when he describes illness as "a dangerous opportunity" (Frank, 1991, p. 1). It is my objective to more fully understand the lived experience of illness and how narrative can aid in transforming illness from tragic to transcendent. In doing so, it is first necessary to understand how illness differs from disease and how the medicalization of human health has displaced narrative from medical practice. Since illness is best understood as a lived experience, I will discuss how narrative is an exemplary means of communicating these experiences and restoring identity that is threatened by illness. Lastly, I will address how narrative might be more effectively utilized in the context of medicine, in respect to both patients and physicians. In this work, I propose that the opportunities posed by illness might be seized by actively exploring it by means of narrative expression. It is my hope that this thesis might contribute to extending the notion that narrative is a means of attributing greater meaning to illness and constructing a more complete, compassionate approach to medicine.
Created2017-05
133455-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
This research explores how to best communicate positive body images to women. This project was intended to improve a blog I created my freshmen year in college called You're Not A Potato where I used original illustrations to tell a narrative about body image issues. The thesis begins with an

This research explores how to best communicate positive body images to women. This project was intended to improve a blog I created my freshmen year in college called You're Not A Potato where I used original illustrations to tell a narrative about body image issues. The thesis begins with an historical overview of body image issues and finds that women have been dealing with high levels of body dissatisfaction since the Victorian era. The thesis then recaps the role of traditional media as well as contemporary social media and the role they play in imposing rigid beauty ideals on women's bodies. After an analysis of social media culture, it becomes evident women still communicate about their bodies in a negative manner, not only towards themselves, but towards others. To address this issue, I define the Body Positive movement and explore how public figures are using social media to implement Body Positivity. To conclude this project, I utilize my new-found knowledge in body positive communication by impacting my university campus community. I started a "You're Not a Potato" Campaign for Body Pride week with the help of the ASU Wellness Team and designed and facilitated several engaging programs that reflected the values of the Body Positive movement to our students. Through this research, I discovered how our appearance-based culture has stolen self-confidence from young women today, but by the end of this project, I explain how we can attempt to rebuild our culture by effectively communicating self-love and body acceptance in our online and physical communities.
ContributorsMouton, Brianna Anais (Author) / Gruber, Diane (Thesis director) / Taylor, Jameien (Committee member) / Manninen, Bertha (Committee member) / School of Social and Behavioral Sciences (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2018-05
134248-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
The purpose of this thesis project is to analyze the legalization of physician-assisted suicide (PAS) as an option for the terminally ill in the United States from a rule-utilitarian perspective. The moral theory of utilitarianism is a consequentialist theory that judges the moral permissibility of an action or rule based

The purpose of this thesis project is to analyze the legalization of physician-assisted suicide (PAS) as an option for the terminally ill in the United States from a rule-utilitarian perspective. The moral theory of utilitarianism is a consequentialist theory that judges the moral permissibility of an action or rule based on the best possible outcomes. Rule-utilitarianism conforms an action to an articulated moral rule that leads to the greatest good whereas act-utilitarianism only considers the best possible consequences on a case-by-case basis. Since legalization of PAS is a policy that requires passage of laws, rule-utilitarianism is more appropriate compared to act-utilitarianism. Euthanasia is a controversial topic worldwide that dates as far back as the 5th century BC with the Greeks and Romans. Comparing the euthanasia then and now, the nations are slowly but surely reconsidering the policies regarding PAS. There are both benefits and harms that the paper addresses. The possible benefits include the prevention of elongation of suffering, both physically and psychologically, respect for the patient autonomy, the right to die with dignity, and the decriminalization of the innocents. The potential harms include undermining the integrity of the medical profession and the aim of medicine, violation of the Hippocratic Oath, targeting of the vulnerable population, unmotivating the efforts to develop and improve better palliative and hospice care, and the slippery slope argument, which implies that the legalization of PAS would eventually set the precedence to legalizing voluntary active euthanasia and nonvoluntary euthanasia. Overall, the moral calculus that the paper provides comes to the conclusion that the benefits outweigh the harms.
ContributorsYang, Jae Hyeok (Author) / Manninen, Bertha (Thesis director) / Brian, Jennifer (Committee member) / School of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences (Contributor) / School of Molecular Sciences (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2017-05