The podcast and reading were very inciteful and educated me on the whole concept of ethics and morality differently from previously taught. The two types of claims, normative and relative, regarding ethics are interesting because of their vast differences. The normative framework shows a universal truth and that there is a good and bad whereas relative is the no universal truth and good or bad depends on each person. When investigating cultures with a hybrid model of normative and relative ethics like the United States, individual intentions help justify “right and wrong” regarding people’s moral compasses.

The concept mentioned in the podcast about an action’s intention is crucial in determining whether something is moral and ethical. Before even listening or reading, today at practice, I exemplified this perfectly. So, a few weeks ago, my teammate shanked a chip, and the ball got me. It was a complete accident, and we just laughed it off. However, I like to mess with people. Today, she was hitting, and I decided that it would be an excellent time to get her back. I punched an 8 iron at her low, and it caught her foot. I was happy, but she was a little, you could say, “heated.” Of course, she was fine, but because it was on purpose, it was evident that she was a little more upset, and my actions had more significant consequences than hers previously. I believe that intention bridges the gap between normative and relative frameworks because, universally, we know that hitting her intentionally was wrong. When you look at the individual level, few people think intentionally hitting my teammate is right because I purposely did the action knowing it bad. To what extent do you believe intention impacts your or the world’s moral compass?