Reflection Paper On Ethical Simulation

Ethics Simulation Reflection: Accounts of Snake Island from a “Shipwrecked” Perspective

While my fate in our Ethical Simulation did not end as planned, I still feel as though a lot of the ways I viewed things and approached certain situations was successful. However, this analysis was not necessarily implemented in such a way that an outsider would see the same successes. Had I stayed true to my assigned character and made a better attempt to make my voice heard throughout the decision-making process, I think I could have been an asset to our survival. However, as it was, I failed to do this, and the outcome of nearly half of our lives reflected this. We certainly could have improved our tactics as a whole, which would have established a better chance of survival on the island. As it was, the consequences that followed our actions were a direct reflection of the amount of thought put into them, be it a success or utter failure. In general, the decisions made resulted in the latter, and for good reason.

This worked in my favor exactly once that I can remember. Early on in the simulation, Michael attempted to filibuster our efforts to form punishments to the rules the judicial committee was working to establish. I had previously noticed his rationalization of another situation using a phrase similar to “universally applicable.” With this information, and a working knowledge of Kantianism, I structured an argument for why Michael’s attempt to hold the floor was simply un-universalizable and that he needed to stop. While this activated the ethics we learned earlier in the semester, in hindsight, this is unrealistic. In the real world, most people that we encounter will not be operating under one specific ethical model and they especially won’t use the terminology that allows it to be