Zwichenzug

1. A
   
2. B
   
3. A
   
4. D
   
5. C
   
6. A
   
7. D
   
8. D
   
9. A
   
10. D

Mira is processing payroll for her department when her supervisor suggests that she assign his time (and thus salary costs) to a federal grant program that is unrelated to the work functions he performs. Mira knows that falsely reporting her supervisor's time is improper and against university time-reporting policy.

Which of the following actions would be appropriate for Mira to take?

A. Tell her coworkers that she thinks her supervisor is doing something wrong.

B. Go along with his suggestion, because he is responsible for approving her payroll report.

C. Do as her supervisor suggests, since he's the boss.

D. Report her supervisor to the appropriate authorities.

You have reason to suspect that a state or university employee, or someone conducting business with the state or university, is violating the law or behaving unethically at work. What is your responsibility as a state university employee?

A. Consider whether embarrassment to you or the university would result if you reported the situation and, if so, remain quiet.

B. Avoid asking questions if doing so might interfere with accomplishing your daily responsibilities.

C. Report your concerns only if you believe that what's going on could affect your personal reputation.

D. Report your concerns to your supervisor, the university Ethics Officer, or the Office of Executive Inspector General for the Agencies of the Illinois Governor.

All but one of the following people are violating state rules by including false information on a university document. Who is acting properly?

A. Mike, an hourly paid employee who includes on his time sheet two hours of overtime he worked that was approved in advance by his supervisor so that he could meet a project's completion deadline.

B. Becky, who enters in the "Salary History" section of a university job application a salary that's $5,000 higher than she was actually making at her last job.

C. Derek, who in his department's section of the university annual report makes it appear that his department accomplished more work than it actually did.

D. Danielle, who puts on her time sheet that she worked 40 hours this week, even though she took a half-day off, without approval.

Ann, a university medical center employee, receives a call from a physician's office requesting routine medical records for a patient treated in her office. The caller requests that the records be faxed to her immediately since she is leaving on vacation tomorrow. Ann knows there is a law that requires the patient to authorize the release of such records and she has no such authorization from this patient.

Which of the following would be proper for Ann to do?

A. Fax the records to the caller, since she needs them immediately.

B. Request that the caller fax a written request.

C. Obtain the patient's authorization to release the records before sending them to the caller.

D. Offer to read the information needed by the caller over the phone, since it's not appropriate to send the patient's records without authorization.

James is a full-time university professor. Besides teaching several graduate classes, he consults on two major research projects for a public corporation. James obtained prior written approval of his research projects as required by university policy and state law. Lately his workload has caused him to cut back on office hours normally devoted to students. For now, James also delegates teaching duties for a weekly class to a graduate assistant. Which of the following is true of James's actions?

A. The university approved his consulting contract, so missing some of his teaching commitments is okay.

B. Reducing his teaching schedule is only temporary and therefore doesn't represent an ethical problem.

C. His actions are justified, since he is contractually obligated to his outside employer.

D. His research activities have interfered with his commitment as a state employee and he needs to resolve the situation.

Martin is an assistant in one of the university's administrative offices. He has been directed by his supervisor to destroy certain official records in preparation for moving into new office space and to free up some filing space. Martin knows that maintaining these records is a requirement of state law under the State Records Act (5 ILCS 160/1).

Is it wise for Martin to destroy the records?

A. Yes, because his boss told him to do so.

B. Yes, because even though he is aware of the State Records Act, getting rid of old records will save the university the cost of additional file cabinets and more office space.

C. Yes, because Martin is pretty sure the records are no longer needed.

D. No, because he knows that destroying the records without proper approval under the law is unethical and improper.

Candace witnesses someone in her department accepting a bribe. She knows she needs to report the incident quickly. As a state university employee, she's protected a few different ways when she files her report.

Which of the following best describes Candace's potential protections under the law?

A. She can request that her identity be kept confidential to the fullest possible extent.

B. The law offers her potential protection if someone tries to fire her in retaliation for making the report.

C. The law offers her potential protection if someone tries to reprimand, suspend, or demote her, or deny her a promotion, for making her report.

D. All of the above.

Professor Smith is a full-time faculty member who also conducts research that is often funded by private corporations. He has recently been contacted about conducting a short-term research project for a large corporation that employs his wife.

Which one of the following actions is appropriate for Professor Smith to take?

A. Review the university's policies regarding research and conflicts of interest.

B. Disclose the potential conflict of interest related to his wife's employer to his supervisor, department head, or the university's Ethics Officer.

C. Avoid committing to the research project until it has been determined in conjunction with the university's administration that a conflict of interest does not exist.

D. All of the above.

Jason receives a couple of tickets to a professional basketball game from one of the contractors he's been working with on behalf of his university. He suspects that he should not accept the tickets. However, he recalls that the contractor is doing some work at the arena where the game is being held, and he thinks this would be a good opportunity to see some of the contractor's work before deciding whether to use this contractor for the next phase of his university project.

What's the best action for Jason to take?

A. Take his wife to the game because she's a big basketball fan.

B. Take his wife to the game because it's a good opportunity to check out the contractor's work.

C. Thank the contractor for the gift, but return the tickets and explain that the state Gift Ban prohibits him from accepting them.

D. Give the tickets to his neighbor.

Duane, a student-employee, is contacted by an investigator from the Office of Executive Inspector General, who requests his participation in a confidential interview. During the interview, Duane is questioned about coworkers who were asked by their supervisor to spend part of the workday collecting signatures from fellow students for a political campaign petition.

After Duane hangs up with the investigator, whom can he discuss the investigation with?

A, His coworkers who were asked to collect petition signatures.

B. His supervisor's boss.

C. His roommate, since he doesn't work for the university.

D. No one, except individuals specifically authorized in advance by the OEIG investigator.

…the dispositional analysis is perhaps best seen as an attempt to encapsulate or to summarize, or to systematize, as well as can be done, the various remarks we come to treat as platitudinous in coming to master [a] term…In this admittedly vague sense, it can therefore lay some claim to giving us knowledge of all the platitudes. And, accordingly, it can therefore lay some claim to constitute an analysis. (31-2)

Why are analyses unobvious and informative? Because even though someone who has mastery of some concept C must have certain inferential and judgemental dispositions, it may not be transparent to her what these inferential and judgemental dispositions are, and so, a fortiori, it need not be transparent to her what the best summary or systematization of the platitudes that describe these dispositions is. Whereas mastery of a concept requires knowledge-how, knowledge of an analysis of a mastered concept requires us to have knowledge-that about our knowledge-how. It might therefore take time and thought to see whether or not C* constitutes an analysis of C because it takes time and thought to figure out what the relevant inferential and judgemental dispositions are and what the best systematization of the platitudes describing these dispositions is. (38)

• One of the core problems of latter day Kantian moral theory is that of showing how pure rationality could yield an other-directed morality (that is, the problem of showing how pure rationality could lead one to value other rational agents as such). The leading Kantians of two decades ago ago offered accounts which boiled down to rational consistency, but left it unclear why agents should be committed to consistency. More recent authors (Herman, Korsgaard) have given a fuller account of the way that agents develop conceptions of value over time. These proposals solve the problem of value commitment, but fail to explain why agents are constrained to choose a conception of value that fits Kantian precepts.
  
• Pragmatic thought, especially that of Dewey, also has the resources to explain the development of a conception of value over time. Unlike Kantians, pragmatists seem not to be committed to the claim that all ethical rules are linked by a core commitment to autonomy (or, to the-self-as-rational). Since this is so, pragmatists are free to say that different activities each have their own distinctive good.

• Pragmatic thought provides a way to build an empirical conception of a reason responsive self. The pragmatic conception of the self is that of an agent who creates knowledge by interacting -- sometimes in a way that could be characterized as experimenting -- with the world. It turns out that some of the most salient features of the world in which we live are other other selves which interact with the world in similar ways. Moreover, these other selves both make demands on the agent and respond, sometimes favorably, to demands made by the agent. We can refer to these facts by saying that we exist in a social world. An important upshot of the fact that we live in a social world is that our interpretation of the world is fundamentally shaped by our perception of reasons. Which is to say that one of our basic projects is that of sorting out legitimate and illegitimate demands.

• About the only argument Rawls gives for either of these is the fact that both seem to be inseperable from a commitment to democratic forms of government. This line of thought boils down to: if you are committed to democracy, then you ought to be committed to this. But this seems circular, since the point was to justify the commitment to democracy.
  
• In Theory (40), Rawls hints at another source for justifying this commitment, namely the Kantian idea of autonomy.
  
• But the Kantian justification can't be satisfactory, since Kantianism isn't able to provide a compelling argument for the parallel point about individual reasoners. Pragmatism, on the other hand, does have the resources to provide an empirical account of the self which implies this claim.