Overview
PROMPT(I have attached the two readings as pdf files): Remember to write one original reflection (approx. 150-250 words) and respond to another student's reflection (in approx. 2-4 sentences).
Reflections should address specific topics and problems from the week's readings. Please do not attempt to summarize the readings in so short a space; rather, analyze a particular problem or reflect on the contemporary relevance of an ethical concept.
It is more important to raise critical questions here than to "have the answers." You are encouraged to end your reflection with a question to your peers (this will make it easier to spark dialogue over the discussion board!). ****Here is a students reflection that you need to respond to***
Hi everyone! This week's reading was all really interesting to me, but what stood out to me the most in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights reading was the tension between moral clarity and its practical weakness. The UDHR asserts that human rights such as dignity, good working conditions, and freedom from exploitation are all/should be universal. Yet, in today's world, these rights constantly get undermined by forces that allow responsibility to be lost across states, corporations, and consumers. This reading assumes that once specific rights are named, they will be protected. But just saying it does not mean enforcement of these things.
This idea becomes clearer when considering labor rights in the supply chain. Article 23 confirms the right to just and favorable conditions at work. Multinational corporations often try to work in areas where enforcement of these rules arent as good. When violations in these situations happen, blame is often placed on the governments, even though businesses benefit from conditions that make the exploitation possible. I think this raises major ethical issues and questions: Who should be morally responsible when there is harm from systems rather than individual wrongs?
The UDHR is very compelling, but its overall effectiveness largely depends on whether moral responsibility can extend past states. If rights are actually universal, should the responsibility for protecting them be universal as well? How should responsibility be assigned where harm happens to be a structural problem vs personally intentional?