Answer the given questions, also incluse reference at the end of each answer.

Each answer should be 200words.

Q1. Where does the knowledge originate at this "personal level"? How does one discover this? Since we are such a diverse people, could we come up with ethical views that are relative to the person?

Q2. I have a young man in my soccer program that barely does his school work and will lie about submitting his work--he will look you in the eye without blinking and lie. He is a junior and we have pushed this young man for years. He has run one mile and 50 burpees for every D and 100 for every F. He carried 2 Fs and 2 Ds consistently--he runs more than Forest Gump. We met with his father. We had him play with the reserves. We counsel. Cajole. Yell.

Two of my assistant coaches want to remove him from the program and send a powerful message to the program. I want to fight the fight through his senior year. The school rules allow us to retain who we want. This is where my ethics and rules come together. My mantra is "If these kids were perfect, they wouldn't need us coaches. It's why we're here." Meanwhile, I want to consider my coaches' views. Thoughts? Guidance?

Q3. Hippocrates, Plato and Aristotle may refer to you as a choleric. Part of ethical leadership is emotional intelligence--knowing yourself and others (Goleman, D., 2006. Emotional intelligence).Do you think you are choleric by nature?

Q4. I share your basis for my ethical construct. I do so because I identify that as true. If you consider it true, then we must "love God...and love our neighbor..." If it is not true, then it is an arbitrary basis. This is why we Christian scholars are vital to society--we base our beliefs, actions and constructs on reason.

A frequent atheist argument is that Christianity is not based on reason. If we seek truth and can articulate it, we become powerful change leaders. We can even use Newton's Laws of Motion to argue in favor of God. (e.g., Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that state of motion unless an external force is applied to it;Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy, 1687). With this we can ask an atheist, well explain what first got things moving?

Aquinas, hundreds of years earlier, reached a similar conclusion from a philosophical basis in the Summa Theologica (1274). Often referred to as the proof of the First Mover. As scholars, we build from these different arguments and can scaffold a reasoned argument all the way to the decalogue and Christ's commands.

Thoughts? Can you see how this process is about changing how we think?

Part 2

1. Why and how would regulating the price of the shoes be ethical. Is it ethical to charge someone more money just because they live in a different area? Why isn't that a form of discrimination?

2. Why wouldn't people in the poorer areas simply buy the shoes and sell them online for a profit? Or, why wouldn't people simply drive to the part of town where the prices are cheaper?

3. There is considerable research--Google Scholar produced 1,800,000+ articles--demonstrating failed effects of price regulation. Why would this work?