At least two of the four posts required should be in the form of replies to fellow classmates in threads other
than your own.
Each of your replies should be at least 200 words, and informed by the course material. As such, the
replies must have citations and references in APA notation. Your list of references for each reply should
include all of the course material that has informed your reply, in addition to any research that you have
obtained on your own.
Your replies should focus on the specific examination presented by your fellow students. Address (a) the
characteristics of the relevant economic system as presented by your fellow student, (b) the analysis of
how laws and/or the economic system affect Uber, as presented by your fellow student, or (c) the moral
judgment presented by your fellow student. For any of these choices, you should examine whether the
examination or analysis was carried out accurately and successfully. You are encouraged to disagree and
challenge what was presented by your fellow student. This does not constitute an attack on your fellow
student but an attempt to arrive at a better understanding and application of the material. But you need to
provide reasons and support for your disagreement or challenge and propose a more accurate or
defensible alternative.
As mentioned in the Week 1 discussion, keep in mind that although the notion of the moral good will vary
among ethical theories, they often produce the same or similar results. So make sure to distinguish (a) the
intent and (b) the consequences of the action under examination