Question

Naomi's good friend tells Naomi that she has an opportunity for her to make some extra money. Her friend asks Naomi for $100 and tells her she will get back $250 by the end of the week. Naomi doesn't ask for specific details but gets the impression that the opportunity is not on the "up and up." Reflection Questions: Does Naomi have a responsibility to make sure she understands the specific details of the opportunity before deciding whether to lend her money? Explain why or why not. Should Naomi lend her friend $100 with the promised return of $250? Explain why or why not. Explain how Naomi's decision in Question 2 demonstrates a pre-conventional, conventional, or post-conventional level of moral reasoning in complete sentences.

Answer 1

1. Does Naomi have a responsibility to make sure she understands the specific details of the opportunity before deciding whether to lend her money? Explain why or why not.

Yes, she does, it is true that before deciding to lend her friend the money, Naomi would be responsible for making an effort to comprehend the details of this contract.

​

2. Should Naomi lend her friend $100 with the promised return of $250? Explain why or why not.

Yes because not only would Naomi earn a bit of money she would be helping her friend that asked for her help, this could make their relationship stronger and if more significant and better business opportunities come up in the future they can trust each other.

​

3. Explain how Naomi's decision in Question 2 demonstrates a pre-conventional, conventional, or post-conventional level of moral reasoning in complete sentences.

I would consider her response somewhere between pre-conventional and conventional. In stage 2 of pre-conventional reasoning states that the individual considers the value of exchange. in stage 3 of conventional reasoning, it says that the expectations of others drive behavior. Since Naomi is doing this to benefit both her and her friend I would say its both.