For my Implicit Association test, I looked to see if implicitly associate mentally ill individuals with danger. The results of this test were that I make a weak association of this kind. This is not surprising, as I have family members impacted by mental illness, likely giving me a less negative association. I am skeptical of whether or not the speed to which I match words of danger with mental illnesses represents my underlying beliefs about this large community. Nevertheless, the results were nothing too shocking.

Hoyt’s piece on the implicit biases that work against women is highly representative of the world we live in. When she discusses how stereotypes against women contrast with the stereotypes of leaders, this is most evident. Implicit biases that leaders should be white and male have forever dominated our society. In recent weeks, I have found this to be extremely clear within the democratic primary. Passionate female politicians are frequently called stubborn, angry, and argumentative. When they actively try to work against these stereotypes, they are thought to be weak and overly idealist. Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar have faced plenty of criticism of this nature, and it is certainly not all coming from individuals aware of their policies. Females wishing to lead the country always face this paradox as a direct result of implicit leadership biases. They are discriminated against in this way, and such an obstacle is extremely difficult to overcome. I personally believe that once a female wins the presidency, these biases will gradually fade, but until then, women face an unfortunately difficult uphill battle.

I always find it valuable to spend time analyzing and applying the world’s moist influential moral perspectives. The dichotomy of consequentialism vs. Deontology is especially interesting, and has been apparent in just about every Leadership and PPEL class I have taken. Whether or not we value outcomes or principles more is an extremely dificult question to answer. Only by looking at theorhtical cases, as like in this piece, can we come closer to answering difficult moral questions.

Personally, I find a lot of similarities in the way I think to deontology. It seems obvious to me in many situations that guding principles can lead individuals to do the right thing. The issue I have with consequentialism is that we can never be fully sure what the outcomes of an action will be until said act is committed. With a deontological perspective in place, it seems much more guartunteed that one will be in the right. Following moral principles can shape an engtire argument, as it acts as a premise throughout the entirety of arguments that they exist within. By acting based entirely on guiding moral principles, it seems very hard for one to act in an immoral manner. Overall, this piece increased my knowledge of ethics, and was an interesting and useful read.