BLAW 200 Week 15 Initial Post PDF

Preview

Summary

weekly discussions...

Description

Critical thinking is a process. "Critical" refers not to being negative, but to being analytical (as in a critique). Among other aspects, critical thinking requires discipline, which differentiates the rational ( logos) from the emotional (pathos); the objective from the subjective; assumptions from conclusions; and an open-minded willingness to challenge one's beliefs with the far stronger psychological norm of cognitive dissonance. Consider any topic on which you have (or had) a strong opinion. Has your opinion about that topic changed during the course? Have the legal discussions had an impact? If so, what changed in your thinking? If not, what were the underlying factors that led to the initial beliefs remaining the same?

Whos fault was it for the MCD coffee burn Part II Week 3, Hot Coffee https://manoa.grtep.com/index.cfm/businesslaw/page/youdonewrongpg3

I decided to throw it back to when we did the topic about Hot Coffee. Remember Stella the old lady who got nasty burns from her MCD hot coffee? So I (at the time) thought it was Stellaʻs fault because she was just clumsy. Now that I am looking back I feel bad for that poor lady. A lot of you had commented on my original post basically saying Iʻ m wrong and you guys were right. I feel so cruel (lol). So, ʻI m going to take a quick look again at the case and determine where I went wrong. I will admit that I had a point when I discussed the difference in mobility with Stellaʻ s age, because it was true. However, I understand that that doesnʻ t make it Stellaʻ s fault. While taking both this class and my accounting class I have learned quite a bit about liabilities. I now understand that by McDonalds making their coffee as hot as they made it, it was a liability to them and could/did cause some serious injuries to consumers. A somewhat similar point I had made was that one would generally be careful with hot coffee and try their best to not spill it because they know it would burn. I even said I was careful (which I think at the time was meant to prove my point further lol). However, mistakes still happen but this also was not the true reason that would put Stella at fault. Sure it mightʻ ve “aided” in the incident happening, but was not the real fault. Now I understand that MCD did make their coffee hotter than the average coffee shop and that did indeed put them at risk (or make it a liability). This temperature of coffee had the potential (and actually did) to burn the skin down to “the layers of muscle and fatty tissue”. All in all, I was able to look at this case from the other side and see it in another perspective (this one being mostly Stellaʻ s fault). As some of the peers who replied to my post had said, it was good to see the different approach I had taken as they were able to see the other side of things. Now I just feel bad for being so harsh on that poor lady (seriously I do). Sources:

Liebeck v. McDonald's. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.tortmuseum.org/liebeck-v-mcdonalds/ Messinger, T.J. (2017). Business Law: Navigating the Turbulent Realm of Commerce, Iowa: Great River Learning....