Philosophy

Question 1 File sharing software ban sought in House
Moral Question should Congress pass legislation on the use of popular file sharing software by the Federal employees (Utilitarianism Theory).
    1st Option Government can enact legislation that will forbid the use of peer-to-peer software by Federal employees in the conduct of the duties, and enforce sanctions for such violations.
    The value of the use of an object, event or service is said to be good if the said object or act is done to the benefit of the greater good of the majority (Charles Kay 1997). Utilitarianism is based on the set of moral theories known as consequential. These theories are set on the goal of examining the value of an action in terms of the benefit that the particular act has given to the greater majority. Utilitarianism is the best known of the theories of consequentialism. In the utilitarianism theory, the morality of the act is defined on  the basis of the expected use or utility for the parties that will be affected by the action (Kay 1997).   
    In the preceding case, the House of Representatives proposed a ban on the use of file sharing software among the Federal bureaucracy. This happened after an information leak that allegedly emanated from employees in the House had posted on her computer at home that possessed the peer-to-peer technology (Paul Kane 2009). The details of the investigation of the Ethics Committee, involving the investigations into the affairs of at least a dozen lawmakers, which were leaked via the use of the file sharing software , has prompted the House to enforce the ban on this type of software (Richard Lardner 2009).
    The Secure Federal File Sharing Act would prohibit the members of the Federal bureaucracy and contractors of the Federal government from installing, downloading or using the type of software such as Limewire without first obtaining prior approval.  Also under the proposed measure, the White House must craft guidelines for Federal employees and Federal contractors on  work at home  status as to their actions on their personal computers. The particular software is popular among users who often engage in music trading, movies and other files done over the Internet. If the software does not have the correct configuration, the computer may be vulnerable to downloading from another computer seeking access to the files on the personal computer (Lardner 2009).
    What was leaked unto the Internet was a House paper outlining the conduct of the House Ethics Committee into the investigations regarding some one dozen of the lawmakers. A junior staff member of the House committee had saved the information on the hard drive of her computer at home. Even if the staff member did not know that the file itself was vulnerable and the computer did not have the proper configuration to safeguard the files, the staff member was subsequently terminated from the payroll of the committee.  The staff member had peer-to-peer software (Lardner 2009).
    The argument is that with the new prohibition being grafted into the American legal books, the ban would have more weight since the act would constitute a Federal offense (Lardner 2009). In the opinion of the bills main backer, New York Democrat Edolphus Towns, the threat of the file sharing scheme must be dealt as a threat to vital government documents and that voluntary regulation have not been adequate. This is his reason that the Act must be enforced (Kane 2009).  The opinion is that the Federal government must enact the legislation to avert future events such as the one mentioned above.
    For practicality, it is the right of the government to protect itself from any imminent or perceived threat to the smooth and unhindered operation of that state. But the costs will be staggering, since the government cannot post one Federal agent per PC to monitor the activities of all Americans and those across the globe. If the utilitarianism theory is to be fully applied, the greater good in this issue is not served, since the only beneficiaries would be the lawmakers who are or will be placed under investigation. The greater majority of Federal employees who use this software without any malicious intent will be removed of their rights to freely use this type of software. 
Question 2 Swiss no longer shielding biggest U.S. tax dodgers
Moral Question Should Swiss banks report on the account details of all US depositors to the US government
     Virtue ethics is focused on aiding other people develop good traits, such as kindness, humility and generosity (Austin Cline 2009). The traits that have  been developed in the person will allow that individual to make the proper decisions later on in life. As opposed to deontic or action based theories, it centralizes the need the learning skills that will stop the person from displaying negative character traits, such as greed and hatred.  These negative traits or vices, are what hinders the person from becoming good (Cline 2009).
    Moral theories address the issue of right and wrong behaviors. Virtue ethics ultimately changes the questions that we ask on the matter of ethics. Whereas the issue of deontic and consequential ethics delves into the issue of the right action, the field of virtue ethics is concerned with the right person making the decision. The former deals with the action to be taken in a specific situation the latter on the life of the person (Nafsika Athanassoulis 2004).
    In its attempt to ferret out tax evaders using Swiss banks as a refuge from the probing eyes of the United States Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the American tax agency has struck a deal with Swiss banking giant UBS and the Swiss government for the latter to provide information on the bank accounts of some Americans using the Swiss banking secrecy laws to hide their wealth. Under the agreement forged between the IRS and the Swiss government, Swiss banking authorities did not have to provide the details on an American account in their system if the limit does not reach 250,000 Swiss francs (248,200) or the income derived from the accounts amounted less than 100,000 Swiss francs (99, 280) (David Hilzenrath 2009).  
    Before the legal battle with UBS, the practice of the Swiss banking laws were to protect depositors whose only crime was failure to disclose assets and income tax returns. For the guarantee of secrecy to be out in threat, the element of fraud must be proven for the Swiss to lift the secrecy laws protecting the account. In short, the client had to commit fraud and other similar acts for the secrecy to be lifted. In the new agreement with the IRS, the Swiss broadened the acts of fraud to include the failure of the bank client to give a W-9 disclosure form in the period of three years, and this is still determinant on two conditions that have to be met by a particular account. The terms would be inclusive of the fact that the account did cross the 1 million Swiss franc (992,882) threshold, and the account gave the depositor more than 100,000 Swiss francs in income over three years (Hilzenrath  2009).
    As the campaign to get tax cheats, the IRS has so far gained a total of 7,500 people that admitted to cheating the government of their taxes and sent the money to UBS (Matthew Allen 2009). The tax amnesty that waged to weed out tax havens such as Switzerland will give the opportunity for tax cheats to pay a compromise sum equivalent to 5 to 20 percent of the money stashed away. This is lighter considering the penalty of having to pay a 50 levy on the amount of assets hidden and a possible prison sentence. The IRS has extended the amnesty for a month to help attorneys facilitate their clients concerns (Allen 2009).
    In the application of the theory of virtue ethics, the decision of the IRS to compel the Swiss banking authorities is discussed. The tax cheats were aided in the development traits such as honesty and responsibility by the act of the IRS to ferret them out. In acquiescing the theory with the earlier one discussed, it can also be said that the action of the IRS will benefit the greater majority since the payment of the taxes will help in the expenses of the government. Finally, the cost of having some people punished for evading taxes will help other people be more faithful in reporting their own taxes. 
Question 3 US, China may come to talks with emission reduction goals
Moral Question Are China and the United States obligated to commit long term emission reduction goals in GGH emissions
    We must care for our neighbors. That, in essence, is the gist of theory of care ethics. Care ethics not only notes down for consideration what should be done in caring for our neighbors, but concertizes them and thus uses them as the initial point for actions to be accomplished. As opposed to the pursuits of moral theories that emanate from general principles and guidelines for conduct, care ethics is about caring for the needs of the other person, thus making it unsuitable for a moral principle, either in general or in a political setting (Daniel Engster).
    Some authors have defined care ethics as a superior moral guideline than the cold theories of justice that is founded on rules and statutes. In the opinion of Stanford University Jacks Professor Emeriti for Child Education Nel Noddings (2004), the ethics of care is the anchor or bedrock for making decisions (Noddings 2004). Noddings (2004) asserts that the act of caring is a basic human activity, that every individual will want to be cared for. Her opinion on natural caring-that caring that does not need any external motivation for it to be done-can be considered as a moral disposition, that the caring that one will give will be done again in some future time by another person. If the person is cared for, it is not impossible to expect that that person will be caring to others (Mark Smith 2004).
    Noddings (2004) then puts forth her definition of ethical caring- that it a state of being related, being accepted, and received (Smith 2004). When we care for another, we are receptive to the person as they voice out their problems (Smith 2004). In her assessment, the ethics of caring is morally better than the other structured moral theories, as the theory is framed on the care of others needs (Engster). In being engrossed with the needs of the other, this is in contrast with other structured theoretical applications, as they tend to distance the person from the characteristics of the other person. One will act in this cold, calculated disposition when the person is sometimes tagged as lacking in some attribute and isor considered foreign (Engster).
    In the climate summit that will be attended by the leaders of the two most significant contributors of green house gases (GGH), United States President Barack Obama and Chinese President Hu Jintao will likely offer some proposals on their countries plans on cutting down on their green house gas emissions. But in the back of the joint declaration of the two leaders, the fact remains that the American side will only come up with a proposal only if the Chinese will present their proposals first (Juliet Ellperin and Steven Mufson 2009).  The hesitation of the United States to commit to short term goals for reduction of its emissions has been a major hindrance in the talks brokered by the United Nations. A majority of the nations in the developed world have publicly committed to their reduction of emissions by the year 2020. China and the United States, though both are significant contributors, have not complied with the resolution in the United Nations, thus the hindrance in the talks (Ellperin and Mufson, 2009).  
    Senior Obama officials have stated that any commitment of the United States to reduce emission standards would need the approval of the United States Congress. The climate bill as approved in the House of Representatives would include a 17 reduction in green house gas emissions by 2020, using 2005 figures as the benchmark. On the part of the Senate, the proposal was as high as 20 percent, but some senators have said they will pare down the number  (Ellperin and Mufson, 2009). The number represents a 5.5 drop from the 1990 numbers that many countries utilize as the base of the their calculations. The number is also a significant drop than what the American government committed to under then President Bill Clinton in the 1997 Kyoto Protocol talks (Ellperin and Michael Shear 2009).
    The passage of the goals as endorsed by he American administration is dependent on the enactment of local legislation, and the number is the political reality in the United States.  The Obama administration has come under severe scrutiny from many world leaders and from many in the United States to be at the forefront of the forging of a covenant on climate change.  But again as earlier mentioned, the offer of the United States on the goals for the reduction of GGH is concomitant that China and another producer of GGH, India, will also present their proposals on the table ahead of the Americans (Ellperin and Shear 2009).
    In short, the ethics of caring theory is based on the acknowledgement that we must care for others. The United States, though acting in the right avenue in the acceding to the call for reducing emissions of GGH, falls short of the criterion for the full compliance to the theory. In simple terms the theory calls for the fact that we should take steps in addressing the needs of others, not only recognizing that a need exists. Also, the action of the United States falls woefully short of Natural Caring, that their action must be prompted by the action of another.
Question 4 Wellness incentives could create health care loophole
Moral Question Should Obama or Congress create a system which no one can be denied coverage or charged higher premiums based on their health status
    The theory of distributive justice centers on the societys conduct on the allocation the few resources or products to people who have competing claims and needs (John Roemer, 1998). The Greek philosophers Plato and Aristotle discussed on the question, and the Hebrew Talmud outlines guidelines on the distribution of the wealth of a deceased mans creditors (Roemer 1998). Distributive justice can be construed as a group of guidelines that will expound on the need of justice when an event, whether good or bad, occurs (Andrew Reeve 2009). The universal requirement for distributive justice is suum cuique,  to each his or her due.  However, the adage does not accurately explain the basis for what is due to a person (Reeve, 2009).
     The traditional foundations in the determination of what is due a person can be traced to needs, desert, and entitlement. But in the interpretation of distributive justice, there are disputes that will arise. The initial dispute is that concerns the areas that the theory of distributive justice can be applied. The second will arise from the determination on whether a need, entitlement or desert is needed. And lastly, the determination of the appropriate response to the potential answers to suum cuique (Reeve, 2009).
    The current legislative action in the United States Congress on the outside will seek that Americans will pay less in terms of health care premiums if they stay in good shape (Hilzenrath, 2009). But in the fine print, it may mean that Americans with vices or obese or in an unhealthy state will have to shell out more than what they normally pay. The measure, being pushed by lawmakers  from both sides of the political mainstream, is based on a trend that is being practiced  by some corporations. If the employee passes the medical tests, then the company can afford that employee with a lower premium on their health benefits plan. If they fail, then the employee has to pay a heftier amount for health coverage (Hilzenrath, 2009).  
    Though the measure has gained the support of some organizations, such as the American Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers, the measure has also come under fire from other groups, such as the American Heart Association, the American Cancer Society and the American Diabetes Association. Among the major points of criticism is that employers can utilize a type of  carrot and stick  system with their employees, using the rewards to give employees a lower rate and punishing the flunkers with a higher rate. The goal of the programs is to end discriminatory practices in the existing system. But it seems that the new proposals will engender a new type of discrimination (Hilzenrath, 2009).
    The issue at hand is sorely deficient in terms of complying with the norms of the distributive justice theory. To create an act that will address one sector to the aggravation of another is not distributing justice it is just rewarding one sector and punishing another. People with health issues must be given the same avenue for health care as the other, an equal opportunity to enjoy the same benefits, regardless of status. Justice must then insure that the allocation of resources be done with fairness and parity, rather than on rewards and retribution.


Question  5 Saudis wont flog female journalist
Moral Question Should have King Abdullah dropped the flogging sentence against a female journalist who had been convicted as part of a crackdown on a controversial Lebanese television network
    The theory of moral rights is the anchor in the formulation of the arguments for the rights of clients (Jackie Crisp, Patricia Ann Potter, Catherine Taylor, Anne Griffin Perry, 2005). A moral right can be construed as a special interest that an individual may possess that must be protected and defended for reasons of morality. The claims to moral rights can be taken in the context of others to respect the claim that has been put forth.  It may range from the context of natural law, as that the laws are the product of nature and is applicable to all, to humanity, that all individuals have inherent human rights just by the fact that they are members of the human race (Crisp, Potter, Taylor, Perry, 2005).
    In the case, the King did not violate the theory in waiving the sentence against 22 year-old journalist Rozana al-Yami after being convicted for working in an illegal network (Abeer Allam, 2009). Rozana, in her appeal to the King, recognized the gravity of her act, not only affecting herself, but her family and tribe as well. In the opinion, it was stated that the King is fast to move on cases where the reputation of Saudi Arabias human rights record is at stake. This to the consternation of the countrys conservative religious authorities (Allam, 2009). 
    In this context, the claim is that all human beings, by virtue of their humanity, is entitled to the provision of human rights. The case of flogging for merely working in an unlicensed network can be compared to working for a company that defrauded millions of people of their money, but not actually committing the act itself. That act will endanger the human rights record of any country. In waiving the punishment of the newshen, the King exercised the greatest latitude in granting the dropping of the sentence and save the dignity of the person, which is another inherent human right.

 Emotions like every other aspect of the human behavior are or great influence to the learning process among all human beings. Various experts, more so psychologists have at one time or another conducted researches directed at unveiling the relationship between emotions and the capacity to learn. Almost all of these studies have found out that indeed emotions do play a vital role in influencing the capacity of an individual to learn depending on their nature and ones response to emotional changes. Emotions are generally the feelings that determine how people respond to the changes within them and in their life. Studies have identified about four major types of emotions broadly experienced among individuals and these include joy, fear, sadness and anger (Lawson). Experts have noted that sometimes there are variations of these emotions but these are often integrated for reliability purposes, for instance happiness, amusement, delight and contentment are linked to enjoyment.  They are a reflection of the experience one has had or is having in their real life situations and these will either represent joy or sorrow and they arise from memories and responses to immediate events in life. Well, the level of emotional influence to the learning process is varied among different personalities. 
Both emotions and learning occur in the mind and hence their interaction can affect the ability of an individual to learn. Emotions are interpreted and directed by the limbic system of the brain while learning takes place in the brains Cortex region. The Cortex is associated with the memory which works hand in hand with the limbic system. This provides a basis for the study of emotional influence on the learning process. Emotions have been regarded by psychologists as the on-off system that dictates learning capacity in that when its on there is a high potential to learn and when off, this potential is inhibited. The limbic system determines the emotional tone of the interpreted sensory information being relayed to the cortex for processing and this causes a feeling of excitement. This then directs behavioral response towards goals and purpose, and also motivates people to act thus enhancing learning. It has been noted that the brains response to sensory information is determined by memories and response to an event. Thus, if memories and the brains interpretation towards the current emotional status have been more positive, then it means that learning will be even more effective. Incase of the opposite, learning is deterred (Sylvester, 1994). This proves right the studies that have suggested that enjoyment improves learning while negative emotions such as anger stifle learning motivation. According to Lawson, the limbic system is the link between feelings and thoughts and thus emotions, which are interpreted by the limbic system, have the potential to disrupt or promote learning depending on whether they are negative or positive.
    Emotions affect the level of motivation in individuals, and hence they affect the desire to act for instance the desire to learn. As thought and emotions are interrelated, then negative emotions demoralize learners and this affect the learning process. Motivation encourages attentiveness which in return improves the learning ability. In cases of depression, emotional response is negative and hence the person is unmotivated reducing attention especially in school.  Lack of concentration lowers the capacity to learn effectively. Motivation also arises from ones beliefs which do control ones emotions. Positive emotions revoke strong beliefs that in return motivate someone and hence in the case of learning, they improve the drive to learn. These believes also usher in an environment favorable to learn. These beliefs can be rational (both constructive and positive) and irrational (destructive). Being related to emotions, beliefs are dependent on the reaction to events and memories. If one, for instance believes that they are smart and can pass well in any given discipline, then the belief compels them to prepare appropriately for tests and hence are able to learn effectively (Sylvester, 1994). These beliefs arise from memories of the past and hence the reason why they can be rational or irrational. Memories of failure in the past create irrational beliefs that are not motivational and such beliefs make people lack the enthusiasm to learn.
Beliefs also affect the way people think and the same thought process affects how people learn since learning requires thinking. Both learning and thinking are a function of the brain therefore the capacity to learn is affected. Having positive thoughts can raise the level of morale which creates an even stronger belief in oneself. This creates a clear mind in that one is in no doubt of their ability to excel and this improves the learning capacity. Irrational beliefs result form the doubt of ones ability to succeed, say passing an exam which is worsened by past experiences which are relayed to the present by emotions. It is well known that moods affect the learning to a greater extent. Emotions relate to persons moods through the thought process in that thoughts of a happy incident create a jovial mood which promotes learning. When in jovial or relaxed mood learning becomes more effective and easier given that this mood symbolizes absence of constraints. Such mood promotes memories of excitement which in future incidences cause a positive attitude that enhances learning. The mood, as a product of emotions, affects the way people make decisions, remember and most importantly respond to events. In a tense mood a person is likely to be anxious about an event and this in the case of a learning situation affects concentration and this deters the learning process.
Other aspects of emotions are optimism and pessimism which are more or less the same as beliefs. Positive emotions make one to be optimistic about the issues of life such as learning.  Being either optimistic or pessimistic determines ones line of thought which has a direct impact on the learning procedure. The tragedy happens when events in life are externalized in terms of emotions such as anger, sorrow or depression. In case a person is lacks emotional intelligence to effectively deal with emotions then learning fail to take place. Lack of emotional intelligence gives room for emotions to interfere with the learning process.
Emotions are an integral yet neglected ingredient in the success of the learning process of individuals. Emotions have ruined the lives of many with or without their knowledge, yet, it has cost the efforts of psychologists who have been trying to identify its relation to learning and other life processes. Basing on research findings, it is indisputable that emotions can completely change the fate of a persons life especially if they affect the learning process. Emotions are an issue of concern because like learning, they are a function of the brain. There is research prove that understanding oneself emotionally (emotional intelligence) is the key to dealing with emotional interference to the learning process. Through emotional intelligence, one can effectively handle the influence of emotions to the learning process and this entails training oneself to think rationally and to control emotions. This knowledge is also important to tutors in handling emotion cases appropriately in learning situations. Emotions, especially negative ones are known to be handled through involvement in activities that involve the whole body and that also promote social interaction. Such activities include cooperative learning and games among others. Mastery of ones emotions not only builds a high self-esteem, but also creates self confidence which is paramount to a successful learning process.     

 In Platos dialogues where he is the mouthpiece of his teacher Socrates, he gives life to the teachings of his teacher through his works, as the historical Socrates did not write down his teachings. Philebus is one of those dialogues, where Socrates discusses with his companions, Philebus and Protarchus. In the beginning of the dialogue Socrates were discussing the states of men which they want to attain. Philebus said that enjoyment, pleasure and delight and the other feelings similar to them. Socrates then stated that those are not the goals to be attained by rather wisdom, intelligence and memory as well as similar traits to them. Using right opinion and reasoning are those that Socrates holds more important. (Plato 2008) The third state that Socrates was referring to was the combination of pleasure and knowledge. In essence it is the middle ground of all the concepts aimed by man in order gain much more in life. Using ones reason, (Socrates knowledge) and emotions (Protarchus pleasure).

Socrates states that dialectic is, that whatever things are said to be is composed of one ad many and have the finite, and the infinite implanted in them seeing, then that such is the order of the world, we too ought in every enquiry this unity we shall find in everything. Having found it, we may proceed to look for two or more if required to and then subdividing each of these units, until at last the unity with which we began is seen not only to be one and many and infinite, but also a definite number the infinite must not be suffered to approach the many until the entire number of the species intermediate between unity and infinity has been discovered- then, and not till then we may rest from division, and without further troubling ourselves about the endless individuals may allow them to drop into infinity. (Plato 2008)
The dialectic is also referred to as the Socratic method, is where Socrates would start a conversation by asking his companions about something and proceed by asking more and more of the same topic further analysis the first question with Socrates guiding the conversation by pointing out some fallacies of the others answer and substituting his own.

Socrates concept of the soul is a combination of the four classes, the finite, infinite, combination of the pleasure and knowledge and the fourth cause, the one which enters into all things, the cause from the universal elements. (Plato 2008) The concept of soul in this dialogue in relation to the mind, reason, cause, knowledge, desire and the body is that the sensations and feelings of the body as experience through pleasure and pain and the harmony of it which are analyzed in the sphere of the body are then processed in the soul and stored as memory, which Socrates calls the preservation of consciousness. This consciousness gives the soul the ability to recover the sensations which the body has experienced. 

The soul, because of our consciousness that stores the previous experiences of the body has the opposite desires as that of the body. Socrates argues that our bodily functions and desires have in them the goal of fulfilling what is inadequate in it, for example the reason why we feel thirst is because there is emptiness in our body, the lack of liquid. Our soul in its recollection of the memories desires for liquids in order to quench the bodily thirst, the state of being emptied and replenished.

In the inquiry of the truth in opinions Socrates asks his companions if there is such a thing as opinion and pleasure. He further asks that why opinions can be either true or false but pleasure can only be true when both of them are real concepts. He gives test of opinion which will lead to a proposition once that observation is validated by another, in which case Memory and perception meet and they and their attendant feelings seem to almost to write down words in the soul, and when the inscribing feeling writes truly, then true opinion and true propositions which are the expressions of opinion come into our souls but when the scribe within us writes falsely, the result is false. (Plato 2008) However, as the question is about the goodness and badness of opinions and pleasures, it is within the area of the mind that tells us that the qualities of those concepts have an innate goodness and badness in them. Just as a wicked man will derive pleasure in wicked things, it can now be said that those pleasures are not good. Since both opinions and pleasures are real concepts, capable of being bad and good in themselves as Socrates stated, it is can be said that the determining factor of them being adjudged as such is the universal norm inherent to men of the goodness and badness of the circumstances in which they find themselves in to.
Socrates describes the mental and bodily pleasure. He first states that pleasure as being both good and bad in the way man aims for it is used for what kind of primary pleasure he feels. Bodily pleasure is the first thing that comes across and is also the easiest because it is based on our senses which we try to attain everyday as sensory beings. Sexual pleasure is put in the mix first as a means of procreation because one of the primary functions of every specie is to reproduce. The pleasure derived from sexual intercourse is both necessary and for amusement of ones senses. For a person who would want to propagate the population, siring children will be his main objective. He or she will find a mate and engage in sexual relations with the purpose of reproducing children, as many as they want according to their plans and needs. This can be derived as pleasure that is in itself good because the aim of it is not contrary to morality. The other side of finding pleasure in sexual relations without the need for reproduction as our genetic impulses requires of us but rather the base emotions of ecstasy f or that specific act in itself can be debated as bad pleasure. In this manner, in line with the argument of Socrates regarding bad pleasure is the purpose of the aim of that pleasure. An example is the sexual intercourse of teenagers without them having the purpose of reproducing is in itself the bad kind of pleasure because. What makes it bad pleasure, thinking along the lines of the argument of Socrates is that we feel that kind of thing, as members of the animal kingdom is when we are ready to reproduce. Without that aim of reproducing but only to satisfy the carnal desires then engaging in that will be bad.

The mental pleasure is derived from the accumulation of knowledge which Socrates favors because knowledge is a good in itself. What motivates man to be knowledgeable is the pleasure it brings when he satisfies his curiosities. In the concept of the soul, it is described as the place where memory is stored for further recollection once the instance presents itself. The mental pleasure is to give the consciousness its purity and nobility for the benefit of others in imparting the knowledge attained and seeking it continuously.

In mixed pleasure, Socrates gave an example of itches. When our bodies are itchy, we scratch it. The moment we do the act of scratching the itch we feel a sensation of both pain and pleasure. The pain we feel is the destruction of the harmony of neutrality of our bodily state because of the emergence of that itch. The simultaneous pleasure we get from scratching that itch is the restoration of the harmony in our bodily state by eliminating the unpleasant effects of that same itch. (Plato 2008)  For unmixed pleasure, it also the attainment of knowledge which can be attributed from the pure pleasure derived from it without any consequences in its requirement and attainment. It is also for the base feelings of either negative or positive like the example given by Socrates such as envy. (Plato 2008) Pleasure derived from envy is a negative pleasure but it gives motivation to do better and to attain wealth in order to compete with other people. There is no pain to be avoided in that feeling because it is replaced by the motivation to attain pleasure, however negative that motivation may be.

In the claim of Gorgias, Socrates stated that the power or faculty, if there be such, which the soul has of loving the truth, and of doing all tings for the sake of it let us search into the pure element of mind and intelligence, and then we shall be able to say whether the science of which I have been speaking is most likely to possess the faculty, or whether there be some which has higher claims. (Plato 2008) Socrates goes on to say that the investigation of the sciences and the arts cannot be attained because they are in their nature changing and mutable and not of an eternal being. The investigations of these disciplines by Gorgias, in the mind of Socrates are concepts which have come to pass or will have come to pass (Plato 2008) The point of Socrates in his brief answer to the query is that the unchangeable and the immutable are the things which are of concern to him. Being convince that it is through reason that man can attain knowledge and the constant reflection of things will make a reasonable man attain the desired knowledge the arts and sciences which in order to be investigated will need the full use of the senses is of no consequence to Socrates. The relativity of the study of those is what made Socrates less interest in the pursuit of studying them, he asked the question how can anything fixed be concerned with that which has no fixedness The concept of the absolute, unchanging and immutable is the primary concern of Socrates in his philosophy. His primary tool for the inquiry to these concepts is mans inherent reason to understand. The reason why he did not answer the question regarding the arts and sciences is the immediate perception of the senses which is used to appreciate that investigation. The quest for the absolute truth cannot be attained by the faculty of the senses, which is why in the dialogues Socrates keeps on pointing out reason as the basis of inference and disregarding the feelings on things with the persons he is discussing with. Reason is used as the means in which the inquiry of the concept of the absolute will be made clear. The concept of happiness is derived as the ultimate end of the filtering of the emotional attributes of pleasure. The state of happiness is a virtue which men attains for and it is a state of mind which reason is used to further analyze its consequences in a persons life. In the analogy of the absolute and the relative, happiness is the ultimate goal of a person because it is a state in which a person arrives with sufficient reflection of his actions while pleasure is the temporary feeling of a surge of emotions that is not tempered by reason.

This paper will focus on time travel objections of which I will narrow on to, you cant change the past objection. By so doling I will be siding with metaphysical heirs who think that truth and reality are eternal and stable. Time travel has been described as the departure from a certain location at a given time to an earlier time but at the same place. This is termed as a B-movie scenario which has been strongly opposed by the physical theory which states that time can only flow in one direction. Time travel into the past is concomitant with time travel into the future. Therefore, by looking at time travel into the past, I cannot fail to link it with the future (Greg 55-70).

Time travel has been perceived as an impossible event as it would make it possible for one to change the past. Tims journey does not necessarily involve transforming the past. This is because it is very difficult to change the past as it is to change the future. According to Smart, it would not be rational if one talked of changing the future as it would also make no sense if one talked about the about changing the past. While looking at the past, we focus on what has already happened but when we look at the future the focus is on what is likely to happen. In both facets, nothing can be done as one has no control over events that happened in the past or that are going to happen in the future (Greg ). 

Time travel into the past is strongly opposed based on the fact that since we cannot inundate with future tourists. For one time travel into the past lacks a well defined destination. This destination is not real as it is not in existence. What is in existence is the present which should be embraced. The past is fixed and though it might seem accessible, past events cannot be modified. This view has been backed up by Aristotle in his remark that the past cannot even be changed by God who is the controller of all things. The past therefore is inaccessible as there is clearly defined destination on which one should go (Greg 57).

Time is designed in such a manner that is moving forward. Therefore, in regards to time travel, one is forced to change ones position with time. By travelling back into space is spatial and temporal as it does not follow the assigned and acknowledged order of events. By going back, a disruption in the order of events is caused where the past is assigned two locations. Otherwise the current is contradicted in relation to preceding and succeeding time. This is as noted by Ayer who says that it is self-contradictory if the same event is assigned two distinct places (Greg ). 

Travelling back in time needs a Parmenidean world which is stretched in the sphere of time as well as, an extension into space. This is contrary to the belief that all that is required is a successive order of events merely isolated from each other by asymmetrical amounts of time. Time travel into the past entails a double occupancy short coming and with this it becomes difficult to set two motions at the same place and at the same time. By going back into the past does not mean that the world will stand still. Instead it will involve two simultaneous actions where there will be forward as well as a backward motion. It is however not possible to have a zigzag aggregate in the aspect of time (Greg 1999).  

Despite the fact that it is not sensible to converse about changing the past, it would be effective if one considered affecting the past instead. This would be by changing the perception of our past actions if we feel that the past would have been different had another action been taken. The past only enables us to make a decision as per the present events. We might have wanted an event to occur in certain way but since it did occur in that particular way, our hands are tight in relation to the outcome. However, due to past mistakes we can now make informed choices to change the outcome of a similar event in the past (Greg 63-64). 
Cause always comes before an effect. Therefore, once an effect in regard to a particular cause has occurred, it becomes impossible to control this cause. With time travel, there is need of reverse causation where one intends to reverse the cause-effect relationship. Ayer has said that it is not clearly established as to how something that was not of existence before would later on exert a causal influence into something that has already happened (Greg 63-64).

We cannot assume the fact that time is fixed and there is no eternal order that dictates the way events do unfold. The present is what counts as it is already there and real. Just the same way Lewis says that there is no clear alternative result that prevails in the present time this can therefore be likened to the fact that there is also no alternative to changing what already happened in the past.

An instance of time travel is where Tim who is in 2000 decides to go back to the year 1920 on a mission to kill his grandfather, but he cannot. Why Because it is impossible to alter the order of events as they happen. To change a past event entails altering the order of causation which is not possible.

     From what I have derived, it is not possible to travel back into the past and change past events. What is of importance is the current order of events. Just the same way that the future cannot be changed, the past is not alterable as well. Though the past appears accessible and some people even propose a time machine, this is just fiction. There is no way that events can turn around and much less at an instant.

Rene Descartes, often referred to as the Father of Modern Philosophy, was a rationalist who believed that human reason is the fundamental source of knowledge (Kisner 144).  Descartes applied the philosophical technique of methodological doubt in his Meditations on First Philosophy (Albl 20).  According to this method, one must doubt everything that can be doubted, and refuse to accept anything as having been known unless it is established with certainty.  However, there is no certainty in any matter available to human understanding or perception.  Descartes doubts the things he sees and experiences.  He even doubts his good old belief in Gods greatness.  It is eventually discovered that Descartes is concerned with a sense of having no knowledge whatsoever, given that his human understanding and perceptions have failed to meet the criteria of being certain or foolproof (Albl 20-21).  Still, almost everybody that has learned about Descartes can tell with certainty that the philosophers most famous statement is I think, therefore I am.  In other words, the philosopher is permitted by reason only to believe in his own thoughts  or doubts, as in the case of Descartes (Albl 21).  Nothing is known with certainty it is the mind that gathers knowledge, but even ones thoughts can be doubted because they may or may not produce correct answers or explanations as in two plus two is always four. 
     Descartes provides his explanation about the uncertain nature of human perceptions in the following example
I have formerly accepted as true and certain those things I learn through the senses.  Like the fact that I am seated by this fire, in a dressing gown, with this paper in my hands.  And how could I deny that this body is mine, unless I was as mad as those whose cerebella are so clouded by black bile that they believe they have an earthenware head or a glass body  Yet, I must remember that I have dreams, which are almost as insane.  Often I have dreamt that I was dressed and seated near this fire, whilst I was lying undressed in bed  It seems to me that I am now awake, but I remind myself that I have dreamt that too.  Yet even dreams are formed out of things real and true (Descartes) 
Descartes is describing the nature of dreams with reference to reality as ordinary people see it.  If I see myself writing this paper in a dream, and the dream seems truly real to me at the time I am dreaming in bed, I would remember the dream while writing this paper today.  This remembrance would lead me to wonder whether I am dreaming at this point, too.  Given that both the dream and the reality of writing this paper appear real to me, what was the purpose of my dream  And, what is truly real  Was my dream more or less real than the reality I am living just now  Seeing that I am doubting the reality of my dream versus the reality I am living right now, is reality not relative to the real which is meant to be solid and of an absolutely certain or explainable nature 
     Descartes provides another example to reveal the uncertain or relative nature of human knowing or perception
Let us consider one simple corporeal thing  this piece of wax freshly taken from the hive, with the sweetness of its honey and the aroma of flowers.  It has its color, its figure, its size.  It appears hard, cold, and if you strike it with the finger, it will emit a sound.  But while I speak, I take it near to the fire the smell, color, shape is all destroyed.  It becomes liquid, it heats so that scarcely can one handle it, and when one strikes it, no sound is made.  All sensation is changed, yet we confess that it is the same wax. (Descartes)
The fact that the wax changes its shape, form, and texture shows that it is not an unchanging object that one would recognize as a certainty.  The form of the wax is, in fact, relative to the conditions through which it passes.  Furthermore, Descartes reveals that human perceptions cannot be based on sight alone.  The wax changes its shape, form, and texture.  Therefore, if we were to base our understanding or knowing on our sight alone, we would conclude that wax is a separate object in its solid form, and another one in liquid form.  Moreover, we cannot base our understanding on imagination alone, seeing that our imagination does not allow us to include an infinite number of possibilities in our understanding of the texture of the wax.  We are led to believe, as a result of this reasoning, that human perception of external objects, that is, the wax and the act of sitting by the fireplace, is entirely based on judgments of the mind and the conclusion it reaches (Sepper 168).  Then again, the mind could be confused enough to start doubting whether a dream is real, or whether that which it knows as reality is a dream.  In the end, I would only be able to reach the conclusion that I think, therefore I am.  It does not mean that I would trust all that I have thought, however.   
     Like the Father of Modern Philosophy, David Hume also believed that the sight alone cannot provide humans with real knowledge about external objects.  In his An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, the philosopher has written
Let an object be presented to a man of ever so strong natural reason if that object be entirely new to him, he will not be able, by the most accurate examination of its sensible qualities to discover any of its causes or effects.  Adam could not have inferred from the fluidity of water that it would suffocate him, nor from the warmth of fire that it would consume him. (Hume)
Neither reason, nor imagination could reveal to a man the meaning of an external object in his first experience with this object.  Unlike Descartes, Hume rejects the certainty of personal- or self-identity because he has no faith in the substance of the mind (Flage 69-71).  This is because the mind does not comprehend the reality of all things that the human being perceives as external objects.  Hume writes further
We fancy that from our first appearance in the world we could have inferred, without experience, that one billiard ball would communicate motion to another or that a stone raised in the air without support would fall.  If we could pronounce concerning such effects, without consulting past observation, after what manner, I beseech you, must the mind carry out this operation  Is there anything a priori which might prevent the stone from moving upwards or the or the billiard ball from remaining at rest  In all our reasonings the mind can never find the effect in the supposed cause. (Hume)  
In Humes view, one may only express skepticism with regards to things that he or she has not yet seen or understood.  The philosophers comprehension of knowing or perception neither denies nor affirms the existence of external objects.  Hume believes that individuals may only know about the external world through their perceptions of it.  And, these perceptions may be accurate or inaccurate, as in the case of the mirage which looks real but is not (Flage 172).
     Humes philosophy leads us to doubt our perceptions while doubting them not.  Based on his worldview, science can make great progress with the understanding that our perceptions and knowledge are incomplete, and therefore, we may continue to move forward in search of new insights that may possibly clarify our perceptions and understanding of external objects.  Although much of Humes philosophy may remind the reader of Descartes view of the world, the reader is led to doubt his or her personal identity as Hume does, given that the mind does not always lead the thinker to the right conclusions (Flage 130-133).  If I were the first person on earth to throw an object in the air, I might have thought that that object would continue its upward movement instead of being pulled down by the force of gravity.  Hence, I would have made a wrong conclusion about the object of my perception.  I thought, therefore I was.  All the same, I did not want to be led to a wrong conclusion by my mind.  Why did my mind mislead me into thinking that the object thrown up in the air would continue its upward movement  Seeing as I did not, even for a moment, wish to be misled by my mind, and did not desire to be untruthful to myself, my sense of I am is a falsehood given that this I am is in my mind, and my mind can lead me to wrong conclusions.  I can make mistakes, and therefore, the substance of my mind is not truly real either  Just as the mirage, which is there and not there at the same time, my mind is with me today a perception the knowledge of which may be furthered through greater understanding with the mind alone.  Hence, my mind or I learned with the help of my sight that an object thrown in the air must fall. 
     According to Descartes definition of what is real, the substance that the mind is made of cannot be understood with certainty either.  What is more, one must agree with Hume that reason would not always lead people to right answers for all questions.  This is proved by my mistake in judging that the object thrown in the air would continue its movement upward.  There was every reason for me to believe that the object would continue moving upward.  Yet there was no reason for me to believe that.  Given the uncertain nature of the use of reason, too, one must conclude that human reason may not always provide us with correct explanations.  Hence, everything is open to doubt.

Values are very important in all scientific processes. They are involved from the initial stage of deciding to perform science, selection of projects, the choice of method to solve the problem, the characterization and interpretation of the obtained data, and to the final stage of drawing conclusions.
There are two roles of values direct and indirect roles. The difference in role is central to the understanding of values in reasoning throughout the scientific process (Douglas, 2009, p. 96).Direct roles gives evidence and this gives reason to accept a claim outlined in a theory. This means that they influence a decision making process and leads us to a certain choice. They do this by adding value to an intended option or outcome and either make one to accept or dismiss an option. In this case therefore, uncertainty is irrelevant to the importance of value in judgement. It is leading because it knows the outcome and only seeks to know if this outcome is what is desired. On the contrary, indirect evidence determines the importance of the inductive gaps left by the evidence (Douglas, 2009, p. 96). It promotes integrity of the task. Indirect role of values come in handy where the evidence available is lacking or is not there at all which means that uncertainty prevails. Its function is now to determine if this available evidence is enough or not. It thus helps one to make a decision in accepting or rejecting the claim on basis of the current level of uncertainty. Note that values can not be used as evidence and therefore can not be used as reasons to accept claim.  A good example to illustrate this is the reason why people check the oil and water level in their cars before setting on long distances they do this because of the consequences involved.
Heather Douglas (2009) says, in cases of politicized science, the norm against a direct role for values in the decisions about empirical claims is violated (p.113). This is because scientists sometimes change their interpretations or suppress their findings in order to satisfy their authorities. These are cases of direct roles in play at the wrong places. The results are being dictated to what people think or want. The Diethylstilbestrol (DES) discovered in 1938 that acted like oestrogen was an example of a politicized science though there were reasons to believe it was risky in pregnant women particularly for causing birth defects and crossing the placental barrier, it was still used as to prevent miscarriages in women.

Kants deontological theory argues that the action is ethical and morally acceptable if individuals are motivated and are driven by goodwill. Regardless of the consequences, the action that is aimed to promote goodwill will always be ethical and moral. Whether firing H-1 workers before laying off and firing other full-time American workers is ethical depends on the motivation, which drives such policies. If the need for the U.S. to help American-born employees to preserve their employment is the main policy motivation, then laying off H-1 workers is morally justified. However, if goodwill of the firm is the central motivating factor, laying off and firing H-1 workers is unethical. The fact is in that not all H-1 workers are inefficient and inactive and not all American-born employees are efficient enough to keep their positions. In case employers are driven by the desire of fairness, justice, and equality in employment, firing H-1 workers simply because of their H-1 status is unacceptable and goes against the basic principles of deontology.
    Question  7
    Whistleblowing is usually defined as
the voluntary release of non-public information, as a moral protest, by a member or former member of an organization outside the normal channels of communication to an appropriate audience about illegal andor immoral conduct in the organization or conduct in the organization that is opposed in some significant way to the public interest (Rufus).
Given that utilitarianism is about promoting the greatest good for the greatest number of people, a person who takes a decision in favor of becoming an anonymous whistleblower should be confident that such actions will at least work for the benefit of the whole organization. This, however, is possible only in case (a) a whistleblower possesses sufficient and reliable evidence (preferably documented) to convince managers that the situation is serious and requires immediate resolution and (b) a whistleblower has sufficient evidence and confidence to believe that his (her) actions will work for the benefit of the whole organization. Thus, through the prism of utilitarianism, only documented evidence and a solid reason to be confident that whistleblowing will not do any harm to the organization can make whistleblowing morally justified.
    Question  8
    When it comes to Internet security, companies often face a dilemma. They may choose to reveal and openly discuss the flaws in their computer systems, in order to warn employees about possible failures. They may also keep to the principles of silence and non-transparency in everything with regard to exploiting computer systems in the workplace. The natural question is in whether it is more ethical to promote transparency in everything that concerns security and computer systems or whether it is better to keep silence to prevent potential hacking attacks. Everything depends on what ethical principles the company wants to pursue. If transparency and openness is the ultimate ethical and organizational goal, then discussing security issues openly may be reasonable and even necessary. However, and to be objective and realistic, such transparency and openness are not always ethically justified.
    Very often in their actions, professional hackers vote for all information to be accessible and free  the vision which is too idealistic and romantic to be true (Tavani 176). Given the many purposes of the information and the ways in which it can be used, it would be more acceptable not to discuss various security flaws in public, and there are several reasons for that. First, not to reveal such information to the public means to hold the grip of control over this information and to be able to use it. Second, not to reveal this information to the public also means to reduce the probability that this information will be modified, changed, and used for illegal purposes. That means that the principle of obscurity for the sake of security is in accordance with both Kantian ethics and utilitarianism it promotes goodwill and creates the greatest good for the greatest number of people in an organization. However, to make sure that this decision does not have any ethical flaws, the information about security breaches and potential weaknesses should be disclosed to a limited number of organizational professionals, who deal with computer systems directly and are responsible for the information security in the organization. Tavani is correct keep private any information that should be private and keep free any information that should be free (177). In the discussed case, there is no ethical need for revealing the information about potential security flaws to employees and external parties, who may later use this information to achieve their not always legal objectives.
    Question  9
    When the whole world is actively fighting to combat hackers and to protect vulnerable and private information from unauthorized intrusions, a small computer lab in California works to teach college students the basic skills of hacking Grant Joy runs a program that surreptitiously records every stroke on a PC, including user names, passwords, and credit-card numbers (Kushner). The action, which is so unusual and challenging in its boldness, nevertheless has a simple explanation the lab is expected to teach students how to identify and correct potential security flaws. Unfortunately, a whole set of ethical controversies stand behind this explanation, and in no way can they justify the decision to create a hacking lab in a college. To a large extent, this is a matter of hacking being ethical or unethical. And that hackers probably serve the most sophisticated societal needs is not a good justification for security break-ins.
    Certainly, if deontological ethics confirms goodwill as the major driver of ethical behaviors, then the discussed computer lab is nothing else but an ethical desire to protect the world from computer threats and to heal the main computer vulnerabilities. But in the context of deontology, and taking the discussed computer lab as an analogy, an explosion in the center of an overcrowded mall would be also justified as a matter of testing the vulnerabilities of the malls emergency systems (Tavani 177). From the viewpoint of consequentialism (utilitarianism), teaching hacking in colleges is unethical simply because those who teach hacking cannot fully evaluate the consequences of such knowledge. Can one guarantee that those working in class will not use their knowledge against society As a result, neither deontological nor utilitarian perspectives can justify the creation of a hacking lab in any college.