Reflection Assignment (respond to all questions/prompts)

What was the ethical issue you wrote about for your signature assignment? Why did you
choose this ethical issue? What did you know about the issue before doing any research?
How did your research (including the evaluation of the viewpoints, evidence, and logical
fallacies) impact your thinking?
The ethical issue I wrote about for my ethics paper was the treatment of primates in zoos,
specifically if they were receiving the proper mental, physical, and emotional care while being
kept in activity. I chose to analyze this issue for my paper because I had recently went to the
Hogle Zoo before the paper was assigned. I had had an amazing time watching the animals, but I
couldnt help but think in the back of my mind whether or not they were really being treated
fairly. They didnt look like they were any less off and it seemed as if the zookeepers really did
care about the animals, but still you can never really tell unless you take a look behind the
scenes. Thus, when the paper was assigned about a month later, I realized I could find out more
about the questions I had in the context of studying the primates of these zoos and knew almost
immediately that this was the topic that I should write my paper about. While I did happen to
know a little bit about the issue before I wrote the paper, looking back, the knowledge I had was
very limited in scope. I knew that groups such as PETA opposed zoos and I knew that not all
zoos in the past had treated their animals well, but I also knew that there had to be zookeepers
out there that were passionate about what they wanted to do and really did provide for the
animals under their care. In short, I didnt know nearly enough to be confident about my stance
on the issue. In the course of writing this paper, however, I was surprised to find that zoos even
today can treat their animals rather rotten, as the Las Vegas zoo case example, the fact that only
41 percent of all zoos are AZA accredited, and the fact that animals from zoos could very well be
sold to circuses and traders, shows. Despite these things, I am ever the optimist. While I know
that the current conditions of zoos could be greatly improved upon and while this essay has made
me much more aware of the extreme conditions that animals could experience while in captivity,
I have turned the matter over in my mind and have decided that the benefits that they provide,
such as inspiring others to care about the environment and providing educational opportunities,
are what should prevent humans from shutting zoos down altogether. However, if zoos are
allowed to continue to exist, humans should take up the duty of protecting the animals within
their zoos. Humans, even ordinary citizens, should be cautious and should speak up to the zoo or
the government immediately if they spy any mistreatment. If guided by such entities, the quality
of life for the animals in zoos can increase dramatically.

How might you apply the critical thinking and communicating about ethical issues skills in
other learning contexts (e.g. other courses, home, work, elections, Thanksgiving dinner,
etc.)? Offer and explain at least three specific examples of where and how you used or
might use the critical thinking and communicating skills (one example should be from this
course).
I think that the critical thinking and communicating about ethical issues skills I have learned
from this assignment can be used in many instances. First, and perhaps the most obvious use, I
can use critical thinking skills anytime I have to evaluate the pros and cons of a certain
controversial situation, in areas such as politics, economics, and society, in general. For
example, immigration is a hot-button issue nowadays and by researching the historical context of
this issue and by researching the benefits and costs of immigration reform, I can make up my
own mind about the issue and I can know where I stand on it. I can also use these skills in more
everyday situations, i.e in family and daily life and in social interactions. For example, say that
my friends try to convince me to steal a handbag at the mall. I can use the critical thinking skills
I used in the essay, along with an examination of my values, to evaluate the pros and cons of the
situation. Hopefully if I were placed in that situation, I would decide not to steal the handbag
because it will cause the store to lose money and because it is morally wrong to steal another
persons property. Another thing I can do, once I have evaluated the pros and cons of a subject,
is that I can take what I have learned and try to synthesize some possible solutions to the problem
and I can use the writing skills I have learned to respectfully promote my views on the position
and hopefully help others make up their own minds on the situation, as well. Finally, these skills
can be used to evaluate different scientific theories and methods, both past and present, and they
can also be used to evaluate the different merits of historical events, as well. In example that
combines both perspectives, before Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace published their
theories of evolution and the scientific community began to take the theory of evolution
seriously, many people believed in fixity of species and believed that God had created all of the
life-forms on earth about 6,000 years ago. Despite the compelling evidence that supports the
theory of evolution and a large geologic time span, many people such as Christian
Fundamentalists, even today, oppose the teaching of evolution in schools and continue to believe
in fixity of species. If someone were confused as to which side to believe and wanted to research
this polarizing debate further, an investigation of the subject and an analysis and evaluation of
the issue may help that person to come up with their own viewpoint of the debate and to learn
more about each side.

Hmm Moment: What content are you still perplexed about and why? Explain how you
will apply the skills used in the essay (e.g. research skills, writing skills, etc.) to grapple with
this content?
One thing that I still grapple over about the subject of the treatment of primates in zoos is the fact
that not all zoos are AZA accredited. If the AZA has higher standards of care than most other
zoos do and a zoo seems to treat their animals pretty fairly without the accreditation, why dont
all zoos who are capable of doing so apply for this accreditation? A few possibilities that comes
to my mind is that it may cost more to become AZA accredited, it may be a lengthy process to
get this accreditation (including upgrading different zoo structures), or some zoos may feel that
applying for AZA accreditation is unnecessary if a zoo already has structures that are up to AZA
standards in the first place. A quick internet search will give me an overview of my question and
can point me to other sources and a trip to the library to find a couple of books about it may help,
as well. Another thing I could do is interview a zookeeper that works in a zoo that does not have
AZA accreditation and yet still seems to treat its animals fairly anyway. While it would be
preferable to meet the zookeeper face-to-face as I desire to see the zoo behind the scenes, it
neednt be necessary. I could always conduct the interview over a computer or could write the
zookeeper a letter.

AHA Moment: What specific AHA moment have you had in this course about human
evolution (broadly defined)? (This does not have to be the same as your Hmmmm
moment).
I learned in a lecture one day that many primates who live in monogamous units actually hold
hands in order to reaffirm their love for each other and to signal to others that they are a pair. It
struck me as being so much like the human habit of holding hands (humans even do it for the
same purposes, I think) that it caused me to really re-examine my perceptions of our primate
cousins and it made me realize that humans and primates are so much more similar to each other
than I had previously thought. This was further confirmed to me by reading my textbook reading
assignment a couple of days later, in which I noted several other similar behaviors such as and,
most importantly, a shared use of culture. Humans like to believe that we are so special because
of our heavy use of culture, but in reality, quite a few primates, especially apes, actually use
culture to at least some degree. If primates and humans both share this affinity for culture and
share certain behavioral traits, what if the thing that makes humans so special isnt actually so
special after all? Does this mean that humans are no better than the other creatures of the earth?
How did humans come to rely so much on culture while our ape and primate relatives use it on
such a lesser scale? The first step to answering these questions, and more, is to examine primate
and humans common ancestry through the field of biological anthropology. Already we know
that culture was a great adaptive advantage to the various environments of the past. The
principle of evolution states that those of our ancestors that had genes that were better suited to

culture were able to survive and pass down their traits to their offspring, increasing the frequency
of the culture trait over time. By evolving the use of culture, humans were able to survive
numerous diverse environments and were able to spread out across the globe. Most likely, the
ancestors of all the other primates evolved different traits that helped them to survive the same
environment and thus, didnt need to rely on culture as heavily. So while culture and some of
our behaviors may not be as unique to humans as we thought, we should not also discount the
contributions that humans have made to the world, both good and bad, because of our more
widespread use of it.