Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
An appeal to the law (argumentum ad legem in Latin) is an informal fallacy in which someone tries to encourage or defend an action based on its legality, or condemn it as morally reprehensible, purely because it is illegal. [1]
President Donald Trump is heading to the Supreme Court for the first time in his second term, using an emergency appeal to call on the justices to let him fire the head of a government ethics ...
Guilt is the emotion that is experienced when an individual violates an internalized moral, ethical or religious belief. Guilt's effect on persuasion has been studied only cursorily. Not unlike fear appeals, the literature suggests that guilt can enhance attainment of persuasive goals if evoked to a moderate degree. [31]
The Potter Box is a model for making ethical decisions, developed by Ralph B. Potter, Jr., professor of social ethics emeritus at Harvard Divinity School. [1] It is commonly used by communication ethics scholars. According to this model, moral thinking should be a systematic process and how we come to decisions must be based in some reasoning.
The 4-3 ruling issued Wednesday by the New York Court of Appeals overturned two previous court decisions, which determined the state Commission on Ethics and Lobbying in Government was created ...
President Donald Trump will ask the Supreme Court to allow him to fire the head of a government ethics watchdog agency in the first appeal from his litigious second term to reach the nation’s ...
There may be responses to the above relativistic critiques. As mentioned above, ethical realists that are non-natural can appeal to God's purpose for humankind. On the other hand, naturalistic thinkers may posit that valuing people's well-being is somehow "obviously" the purpose of ethics, or else the only relevant purpose worth talking about.
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), was a United States Supreme Court case in which a court-appointed attorney filed a motion to withdraw from the appeal of a criminal case because of his belief that any grounds for appeal were frivolous.