This world is full of all different kinds of people. Following those people comes various ways of thinking, values and morals. There can never really be a “right” way of thinking, but to society there are certain thing considered morally or unmorally acceptable. So what are morals? Morals are basically a set of values that help us as individuals see what is right and good over what is wrong and bad. But since our world is so diverse not all societies have the same morals. In the “Homeless Hotspots” scenario some people may think it is a benefit to society, while other see it as a way to degrade and take advantage of the unfortunate. In order to truly know which is accurate we must break the scenario down using the model of decision making. …show more content…
Since our world is extremely reliant on technology like our smartphones, people are concerned that the cellular networks in the area will be too overwhelmed for the excessive amount of users. In order to fix this “problem” an agency suggested high-speed Wi-Fi connections, or hotspots. Seems like a realistic solution until the agency decides to put said hotspots on volunteers from a local homeless shelter. All the homeless volunteers, who agree to this would get paid $20 per day and whatever donations they receive would be theirs to keep. The main problem to this possible solution the fact that human being used as an internet service. It’s basically dehumanizing people. Even though they are homeless and may have done bad thing in their life to get in that place, it still doesn’t make them any less human. People are always people and shouldn’t be treated like objects or services. In our society in North America, we are humane and value people as people. As previously mentioned all people think differently and value various things. In this dilemma some people may agree with it, while some may not. One option for this dilemma could be to continue with the Wi-Fi hotspots being placed on the homeless volunteers