Naomi's good friend tells Naomi that she has an opportunity for her to make some extra money. Her friend asks Naomi for $100 and tells her she will get back $250 by the end of the week. Naomi doesn't ask for specific details but gets the impression that the opportunity is not on the "up and up." Reflection Questions: Does Naomi have a responsibility to make sure she understands the specific details of the opportunity before deciding whether to lend her money? Explain why or why not. Should Naomi lend her friend $100 with the promised return of $250? Explain why or why not. Explain how Naomi's decision in Question 2 demonstrates a pre-conventional, conventional, or post-conventional level of moral reasoning in complete sentences.

Respuesta :

Yes, Naomi has a responsibility to understand the specific details of the opportunity before deciding whether to lend her money because ignorance is not an excuse.

What is Due Diligence?

This refers to the comprehensive appraisal of a business with the aim of evaluating its potential and assessing its risks.

Hence, we can see that if Naomi is a risk taker, she can lend her friend $100 with the promised return of $250, as far as she has a high-risk tolerance.

The decision of Naomi to lend the money if she is a risk taker can be classified as the post-conventional level of moral reasoning because she has moved beyond the perspective of her society.

Read more about due diligence here:

https://brainly.com/question/17188570

#SPJ1