Applied Ethics Case Analysis
8 weeks · 0 milestones
Analyse a real ethical dilemma — bioethics, AI ethics, business ethics, environmental ethics, or political philosophy — using at least two competing ethical frameworks (consequentialism, deontology, virtue ethics, contractualism, or equivalent). Name each framework, cite primary or secondary philosophical sources, and demonstrate what each framework concludes about the dilemma and why they conflict. Proof is the written analysis plus a documented review by a philosophy academic or applied ethics practitioner who challenges your framework application — specifically, whether each framework is being applied correctly and whether you have identified the genuine point of ethical conflict. Their written questions and your written responses are required parts of the proof.
Milestone map
Milestone map
3 milestones
Select a real documented ethical dilemma from published case studies in technology ethics, medical ethics, environmental ethics, or business ethics (or a real documented case from an ethics board ruling, a whistleblower case, or a product decision generating public ethical debate). Apply two or more named ethical frameworks to the dilemma: at minimum consequentialism and deontology; optionally virtue ethics, contractualism, or care ethics. Document each framework's verdict, where they agree, where they diverge, and why the divergence exists.
Proof required
Ethics analysis document (600+ words) identifying the real documented dilemma with a cited source, applying two or more named ethical frameworks with their specific verdicts, and explaining where and why the frameworks diverge.
What gets checked
- Dilemma is a real documented case with a cited source — not a fictional scenario invented for the analysis
- Both frameworks produce their own verdicts — not two ways of reaching the same conclusion
- Divergence is explained with reference to the frameworks' foundational principles, not just listed