You are in a remote mountain village. A group of terrorists has lined up 20 people from the village; they plan on shooting them for collaborating with the enemy. Since you are not from the village, you will not be killed. Taking advantage of your position, you plead with the terrorists not to carry out their plan. Finally, you convince the leader that it is not necessary to kill all 20. He takes a gun, empties it of all its bullets except one, and then hands it to you. He has decided to kill only one villager to set an example to the rest. As an honored guest and outsider, you will decide who will be killed, and you will carry out the deed. The terrorists conclude with a warning; if you refuse to kill the villager, then they will revert back to the original plan of killing all 20. If you choose to walk away even though walking away may appear cowardly--- staying and killing a villager would make you like the terrorists and that goes against everything you stand for (your integrity). Which prescriptive approach are you using?

Virtue

Explanation:

Virtue approach: The term "virtue approach" is described as one of the different ethics that is being proposed by Aristotle and a few other ancient Greeks. Virtue ethics is distinguished as a "character-based approach" related to morality that tends to assume that an individual acquires virtue via practice. An individual who practices of being generous, brave, honest, just, etc then he or she develops a moral and an honorable character.

In the question above, the given statement signifies that the person is using the virtue approach.

the anasazi indians were real pioneers and created roads and irrigation systems for watering their crops. they were also great architects and the cliff dwellings are one of their biggest achievements.

explanation:

the historians cited in the article all agree with one another about the cause of the civil war. despite coming from different backgrounds and cultures, the historians agree that slavery was the root cause of the civil war. the fact that all these historiansgenerally agree with one another makes their shared viewpoints more reliable and valid, especially because the historians have different backgrounds and all work for the well-respected institutions of howard university, clemson university, and the university of colorado.