Quizzes

Ethics Quiz: The Gratuitous Diagnosis

/ Jack Marshall / 9 Comments

I am 100% on the other side of an ethics question recently raised for the New York Times’ ethics advice maven, “The Ethicist.” You tell me which of us you think is right.

Details aside, the inquirer asked if he should, as a retired neurologist, tell a woman he admittedly barely knows but whom he has been in frequent contact with recently that he believes she has Parkinson’s Disease…

….There’s been no occasion to mention my professional background, and I’m now uncertain about whether I should tell her about it and my clinical impressions. Her disease, at its current stage, is likely to be successfully managed with oral medication. However, it is neither obvious that she will have access to skilled neurological care nor that she will be willing to seek it. And a new diagnosis of Parkinson’s, without prompt treatment, on top of her recent loss and the challenges that have followed, may further overwhelm her. My wife is in favor of my informing her, because treatment would benefit her quality of life. I’m hesitant, as there has been no invitation to become more involved in her personal life, and I cannot provide her with a supportive doctor-patient relationship. What would you recommend?

I’ll tell you which of us ethicists believe what after you’ve formulated your own answer. For now, Your Ethics Alarms Ethics Quiz of the Day is,

What would YOU recommend?

Continue reading →

Ethics Quiz: Hating Satan

/ Jack Marshall / 11 Comments

Michael Cassidy, the former Mississippi candidate for Congress who destroyed the Christmas seasonal display put up by Satanists at the Iowa State Capitol building , was ultimately charged not just with criminal mischief, which is a misdemeanor and what such vandalism would usually draw as an offense, but felony third-degree criminal mischief. The enhanced charge was justified, according to the prosecutor, because the act was committed “in violation of individual rights” under Iowa’s hate crime statute.

The statue Cassidy attacked was of Baphomet, who isn’t exactly Satan but close enough for horseshoes, or goatshoes. The ancient pagan deity is used as a symbolic trademark by the Satanic Temple, a largely satirical pro-atheism and anti-religion organization. He’s a little like Mickey Mouse is to Disney. Understandably, however, serious Christians regard using Ol’ Baphy’s image to “celebrate” the Christian holiday of Christmas as blasphemy, which it is, because that’s how the Satanic Temple rolls. It think blasphemy is a joke. To that group, all religion is a joke.

Michael Cassidy is one of millions who don’t get it.

Your Ethics Alarms Ethics Quiz of the Day is…

Should a hateful act against a statue that mocks Christianity be treated as a hate crime?

“Evidence shows the defendant made statements to law enforcement and the public indicating he destroyed the property because of the victim’s religion,” triggering the violation of individual rights enhancement, said Lynn Hicks, a spokesman for the Polk County Attorney’s Office.

Wow, an entire office of assholes! The man committed a crime and an act of civil disobedience, protesting what he views as the absurdity of the state having to give a supposed Satanic organization equal representation with other religions in a holiday display. I have no idea what is gained by over-charging and taking the apparent position that it’s illegal to hate the personification of evil. Some legal commentators have climbed into the high weeds about whether atheism or Satanism are legitimate religions; the same weeds are available for debates over Pastafarians (The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster) and Scientologists. It’s an unnecessary issue here.

Hate crimes are thought crimes and, at Ethics Alarms, unethical to charge whatever they involve. Michael Cassidy should be allowed to hate Satan, Baphomet, their followers real or satirical, those who mock Christianity and Christmas and anyone or anything else he chooses, as long as he doesn’t also destroy property.

I, for example, hate grandstanding prosecutors.

“Ick or Ethics” Ethics Quiz: The Robot Collaborator

/ Jack Marshall / 13 Comments

As Jackie Gleason, aka. “The Great One,” used to say to begin his popular variety show on CBS (“Jackie Gleason? Who’s he?”), “And awaaaaay we GO!”

Rie Kudan, accepting the prestigious Akutagawa Prize for promising new Japanese writers, told the audience that her novel, “The Tokyo Tower of Sympathy,” was co-authored by ChatGPT and other AI programs. She revealed that her novel, which is about artificial intelligence, had approximately 5% of its dialogue composed by the popular bots and added by her “verbatim” to the text. “The Tokyo Tower of Sympathy” has met with unanimous raves by critics: “The work is flawless and it’s difficult to find any faults,” said Shuichi Yoshida, a member of the prize judging committee. “It is highly entertaining and interesting work that prompts debate about how to consider it.”

It seems clear that the author’s public admission (“I made active use of generative AI like ChatGPT in writing this book. I would say about five per cent of the book quoted verbatim the sentences generated by AI.”) was designed to fuel that debate.

I think we can all agree that this was shrewd on the author’s part. But is what she admitted to ethical?

Your Ethics Alarms Ethics Quiz of the Day is…

Is having an AI program write all or part of your book or novel ethical, or merely something that feels wrong right now that we’ll eventually accept?

Continue reading →

Ethics Quiz: Trump’s “Dome”

/ Jack Marshall / 23 Comments

Here is part of what Donald Trump said in Iowa:

“I didn’t like it when Ronald Reagan suggested it because we didn’t have the technology. We do have the technology now, and we’re going to build a giant dome over our country to protect us from a hostile source. And I think it’s a great thing, and it’s going to all be made in the United States, and that’s something that I consider productive. You know, when I watch, uh, our guys operate those things, it’s unbelievable. Missile coming in, missile coming in. These geniuses sit down. Most of them are, you know, they’re from MIT. But they sit down, bing! bing! bing! bing! boom! ph-sheee! It’s gone, it’s amazing! I think we could use…do you like that? I mean, isn’t that better than giving other countries billions of dollars? Billions! We’re going to get billions of dollars out of the country and so they can build a dome, but we don’t have a dome ourselves! We’re going to have the greatest dome ever!”

Okaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay…

Your Ethics Alarms Ethics Quiz of the Day goes like this…

Is it responsible to vote for someone who talks like this the power of the American Presidency?

…because, to be brutally frank, I’d have hesitated to vote for a student candidate for president of the 8th grade in junior high who gave a speech like that. Wouldn’t you? It bothers me that Trump would say all that, it bothers me that he thinks it’s going to win votes by saying it, it bothers me that he obviously doesn’t have a clue what he’s talking about, and it bothers me that he has such a low opinion of the American public.

Ethics Quiz: The Star’s Apology

/ Jack Marshall / 6 Comments

Last month, actress Susan Sarandon became a deserving casualty of the Hamas-Israel Ethics Train Wreck after she spoke at at a pro-Palestinian rally and said that American Jews feeling threatened by the pro-Hamas protesters, demonstrators and rioters (like the Cornell students who had to hide in their dorms)were “getting a taste of what it feels like to be a Muslim in this country, so often subjected to violence.” This epically stupid comment got her dropped by United Talent Agency, whose management is Jewish. As I noted here, “the agency concluded, probably accurately, that Sarandon’s comments diminished her value to them, and perhaps having a pro-terrorism client might deter more rational artists from seeking their aid.”

Apparently Sarandon, who has progressed through her romantic lead stage into and out of her mother role stage and now is getting grandmother parts isn’t quite ready to hang up her acting spurs, and decided that she had made a potential career-ending mistake that needed fixing. So she has now issued this apology:

Your first Ethics Alarms Ethics Quiz of December is…

Is her apology sincere, trustworthy, and sufficient?

Continue reading →

Ethics Quiz: The Dominatrix Congressional Candidate Principle?

/ Jack Marshall / 9 Comments

Yikes.

Courtney Casgraux, 41 (above), describes herself as an international businesswoman as she runs for a seat in the United States House of Representatives for Oregon ‘s first district. Casgraux’s campaign, launched last spring, was rocked over Labor Day weekend when her past occupation as a BDSM dominatrix was revealed via video on Reddit. Casgraux was outraged. “To shame me for something that helped create the life that I have today where I have opportunity … made me really mad. Because it felt like an attack on women, not just an attack on me,” she said.

Really? Letting the public know about the past activities of a Congressional candidate is wrong? Interesting take, Madam.

In response, Casgraux says she is “reclaiming her sexuality” though a campaign collaboration with Playboy. Sure, why not? Remember, she’s running in Oregon. Did I mention what party she belongs to? Do I need to?

On Instagram the former-dominatrix wrote,

First and foremost, I would like to thank Playboy for giving me the opportunity to express what freedom means to me and welcoming me into the Playboy family. Over the last month Playboy has not only championed me but my Congressional Campaign. I’m looking forward to utilizing my platform to educate, uplift voices and fundraise for those less fortunate. My journey with Playboy is just beginning so be on the lookout for more things to come.

Boy, I can’t wait. She continued, “Secondly, I’m reclaiming this American Flag and what it represents, and that’s FREEDOM AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.” (Actually, that’s “liberty and justice for all,” but never mind…)

Her campaign website further elaborates: “As a fiercely independent single mother who has had to navigate the adversities of life, I understand firsthand the struggles that American families face on a daily basis.” OK, she’s an Oregon Democrat: can you guess her platform without peaking? Yes, she wants to secure LGBTQ “rights and equality,” guarantee “abortion rights” nationwide, pass “comprehensive gun reform” and take “immediate action on climate change.”

Your Ethics Alarms Thanksgiving Ethics Quiz is,

Should her dominatrix past be held against her by voters?

Continue reading →

Ethics Quiz: This…

/ Jack Marshall / 7 Comments

This resurfaced video of the Senate Majority Leader gleefully tripping the light fantastic with the New York Democratic Attorney General, one of the party’s several prosecutors engaged in an effort to use the criminal justice system to hamstring Donald Trump before the 2024 election, raises several ethics questions, but I’ll focus on just one.

Your Ethics Alarms Ethics Quiz of the Day is…

Is participating in this public spectacle ethical conduct for a prosecutor?

Before I comment, let me just say…Ick.

Continue reading →

Ethics Quiz: Jim McGreevey Rises Again!

/ Jack Marshall / 12 Comments

It comes down to two alternative words: redemption or chutzpah.

Former New Jersey Gov. Jim McGreevey resigned from his position in 2004 after announcing to the world that he had been living a lie and was gay, as his crushed wife stood loyally by his side. (She then divorced him as soon as she could.) He’s been wandering in the wilderness ever since, but yesterday he formally reentered politics by announcing his intention to become mayor of the state’s second largest city, Jersey City, last week.

A lawyer with the Georgetown Law Center degree and a Masters from Harvard, he was considered a rising Democratic Party star with a picture-perfect family and obvious ability. But a man he had appointed to a position in his administration under odd circumstances threatened to sue McGreevey for sexual harassment, and shortly thereafter, the governor was making a sensational statement at a press conference in which he revealed that he was a “gay American” and that he had engaged in an adulterous affair with a man. He then announced that he would resign, which McGreevey did, though he delayed long enough to avoid a special election.

And now…he’s baaaaack!

Your Ethics Alarms Ethics Quiz of the Day is…

Is it ethical to give McGreevey another chance at elected office?

Continue reading →

Ethics Quiz: Personal Assistant Ethics

/ Jack Marshall / 16 Comments

I almost called this, “Stop Making Me Defend Robert De Niro!’

De Niro proved beyond a reasonable doubt that he’s a toxic, narcissistic asshole when he was going around the country shouting “Fuck Trump” at various Trump Derangement gatherings. He’s a great actor, but at 80 he’s now in that difficult period of decline when he should be retired but can’t resist the paychecks or the sudden lack of public attention.

De Niro’s ex-personal assistant Graham Chase Robinson is suing him for discrimination, and the trial is not showing the actor in a very favorable light. As her various allegations were presented to him on the stand—-asking her to scratch his back, giving her degrading tasks, making unreasonable demands (like asking Robinson to “Uber him” a martini from a favorite bar at 11 p.m.), not respecting her personal time (he called her twice while she was at her grandmother’s funeral telling her to buy a bus ticket for his son), and being abusive (he called her a “fucking spoiled brat”), De Niro’s response was always some version of, “Big deal. So what?”

De Niro paid his personal assistant $300,000 a year.

Your Ethics Alarms Ethics Quiz of the Day is…

Is it unethical for someone to pay an assistant to accept abuse and disrespectful treatment?

Continue reading →

Ethics Quiz, TV Talk Show Dept.: Unethical Or Well-Known Standard Practice? [Corrected]

/ Jack Marshall / 20 Comments

Ann Althouse posted that video as genuine. Is it possible that Ann has never been on a TV talk show or news show? I sure have, and there is no chance, none, that Graham Norton sprung a surprise request on British theater and movie icon Judy Dench, who is 88, that she deliver a Shakespeare speech or sonnet on the spot.

Guests on talk shows are always prepped; they are told what the interview is going to cover, and no competent host, certainly not a veteran like Norton, would dare risk embarrassing a guest by putting them on the spot without notice and adequate preparation time.

Of course Dench knew she was going to be asked to recite some Shakespeare, and was ready. Being an actress, she also was ready to act as if the request was a surprise. And, of course, knowing little or nothing about how show business works, most of Norton’s viewers were impressed and fell for the stunt. Norton wins. Dench wins.

And someone who styles herself a truth-teller passes along the sham as genuine.

Your Ethics Alarms Ethics Quiz of the Day is…

Is Norton and Dench’s put-on ethical?

Continue reading →