Dupree

Thinking back to when we learned about Marcus Dupree, we had a lot of discussions in class about morality. Analyzing what happened to Dupree, the only rational anyone can truly use is their own morality and looking at the ethics of the situation as a whole. When looking at each group of people, you not only had to look at the facts, but you had to look at the context around it. When I was determining if someone was morally positive or negative, I was looking at whether or not their motives were pure or for self benefit. Take Uncle Curlee for example; he seemed like the father figure in Dupree’s life that would always look out for him, especially with his money, when in reality he was capitalizing off of his “investment.” When looking at a group ethically, it is less black and white, giving us a lot more grey area to deal with. When we think about bribes or offering people money for something we usually think that is morally wrong, but when say colleges are throwing offers and money at a talented football player suddenly that idea doesn’t seem so wrong anymore. When looking at morals vs. ethics one rationale is way more cut and dry than the other. As bad as it sounds, it's easier for me to judge one person's decisions vs. a corporation or group as a whole mentality.