Treats to individual rights would be distortion. This means people's different interpretation of rights. Someone could bend the rules and technically still be within the law, but it can still be debated.
Answer:
The statement which is the best argument against Social Darwinism is:
B. A good work ethic can eliminate a lot of the disadvantages of poverty.
Explanation:
Social Darwinism is a philosophy that incorporates notions taken from Darwinism, applying them to sciences such as sociology and economics. As we know, <u>Darwinism is based on the idea of "survival of the fittest". Therefore, Social Darwinism explains differences in status, wealth, and success by stating that those who have those things are better than those who do not. In other words, if someone is poor or unsuccessful, that means that person is not "evolved" enough.</u>
The problem with Social Darwinism is that is justifies discrimination and imperialism. It places the blame on those who are actually suffering the consequences of a broken and unfair system. With that in mind, we can easily eliminate options A and C, since they agree with Social Darwinism. Option D can also be eliminated because it merely states a fact that is true, but does not refute Social Darwinism.<u> Letter B is the best option. It argues that there is a way to eliminate many of the disadvantages, that is, it shows the problem with the system, refuting Social Darwinism.</u>
Answer:
The correct option is D: Cultivating your inner moral character
Explanation:
Virtue ethics is a branch of ethics that focuses on the morality of an individual. According to this branch of ethics, a moral or virtuous individual is one who exhibits great habits such as generosity and honesty. Virtue ethics concentrates on the person performing the action and his moral character rather than on the action itself.
