cmp final - adnan fortuna

8/14/2019 CMP FINAL - Adnan Fortuna

1/33

1

Book Reviews on Contemporary Moral Problems

Seventh edition

Chapter One- Ethical Theories

Andrew Adnan Casio Fortuna

All rights reserved 2009


2/33

2

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 PhilippinesLicense.

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ph/


3/33

3

Table of Contents

Title Page ......................................................................................................................................1

Creative Commons ..2Table of Contents .3

James Rachels: Egoism and Moral Skepticism ...4

John Arthur: Religion, Morality, and Conscience ....6

Friedrick Nietzsche: Master and Slave Morality ..8

Mary Midgley: Trying Out One's New Sword ...10

John Stuart Mill: Utilitarianism ...12

James Rachels: The Debate over Utilitarianism ..13

Immanuel Kant: The Categorical Imperative 14

Aristotle: Happiness and Virtue ..15

Joel Feinberg: The Nature and Value of Rights ..17

Ronald Dworkin: Taking Rights Seriously .18

John Rawls: A Theory of Justice .19

Annette Baier: The Need for More Than Justice ...20

Use Case Diagram (Existing System) ...22

Use Case Narrative (Existing System) ..23

Activity Diagram (Existing System) .26

Use Case Diagram (Proposed System) ........29

Use Case Narrative (Proposed System) ....30

Activity Diagram (Proposed System) .31

Scanned Receipt ..32


4/33

4

Andrew Adnan Fortuna

ITETHIC

Book: Contemporary Moral Problems

Book Review: Chapter 1 Egoism and Moral SkepticismLibrary Reference: N/A

Internet Reference: http://www.amazon.com/Contemporary-Moral-Problems-James-White/dp/0495553204/ref=pd_sim_b_2/185-6566170-6503008

Learning Expectation:

I expect to learn the profound meaning of Egoism and Moral Skepticism. Honestly, I have no ideawhat these two things are. I know some I guess; like the word ego. I believe that what I think I knowabout Egoism and Moral Skepticism is far from the right answer.

Quote:

No one, it is commonly believed, would have such iron strength of mind as to stand fast in doing right or keep his hands off other mens goods, when he could go to the market-place and fearlessly help himself to anything but he wanted, enter houses and sleep with any woman he chose, set prisoners free and kill men at his pleasure, and in a word go about among men with the powers of a god. He would have behaved no better than the other; both would take the same course.

Book Review:

To start off, I would gladly begin explaining what Egoism is. Egoism has two parts namely,Psychological Egoism and Ethical Egoism. Psychological Egoism is a perception where in humans dothings which is motivated by self-interest. Some actions seem to be act of altruism, but the truth is that, itis still for the person itself. Psychological Egoism claims that people do stuff, like helping others, becausein some way, it benefits them. I think that the right word to describe Psychological Egoism is the wordSelfishness. Being selfish is motivated by self-interest. You do things that will benefit you regardless ofthe people around you. You do not care if the people around you will suffer or not as long as you arehappy with the way things are. I for one do not like this because I believe that I am a person who has theattitude of being sensitive when I am around other people. Most of the time, I see to it that I will not hurt oroffend anyone whenever I do something. I usually consider other peoples feelings. As a human being, Ialso commit mistakes. I am sometimes not aware of the people around me thats I tend to offend them.

The second part of Egoism is Ethical Egoism. It is stated that Ethical Egoism means that it isethically right to tag on self-interest and wrong not to pursue self-interest. For me, it sounded like EthicalEgoism implies Psychological Egoism because it is written that it is ethically right to pursue self-interestwrong not to pursue self-interest.

Integrative Questions:

1.) What is a kind of egoism which is a perception where in humans do things which is motivatedby self-interest?


5/33

5

2.) What is a kind of egoism which means that it is ethically right to tag on self-interest andwrong not to pursue self-interest?

3.) Does Ethical Egoism imply Psychological Egoism?4.) Psychological Egoism has how many arguments?5.) What legend did the author used as an introduction?

What I have learned:

I learned that Psychological Egoism is the term that is used to the people who are provoked byself-interest. I also learned that Ethical Egoism implies Psychological Egoism because it is stated that it ismorally right to purse self-interest.


6/33

6


ITETHIC


Book Review: Chapter 2 Religion, Morality, and ConscienceLibrary Reference: N/A



I expect to learn the connection between religion, morality and conscience. I want to know if insome way, religion is needed when it comes to morality. I also expect to learn a heavier definition of thethree. I expect that the article will fully-describe the meaning of religion, morality and conscience and

further elaborate each.

Quote:

Whatever implies contradiction does not come within the scope of divine omnipotence, because it cannot have the aspect of possibility. Hence it is more appropriate to say that such things cannot be done that God cannot do them.

Book Review:

John Arthur starts off by asking us readers what is morality and does it need religion some way?After reading his work, a lot of things entered my mind. I agree that there are a lot of things that can bemotivating to act morally so for me, religion is not really necessary for someone to act morally. A goodexample of this is when you are asked to steal a watch or something, what is the first thing that goes intoyour head? Is it, you will not do it because it is wrong or you will not do it because you might end up inhell. Well for me, the first thing that will enter my mind is that, I will not do it because it is wrong. Somorally speaking, religion is not that necessary. I am not saying that Religion wont be tagging along.Religion plays a part too. Perhaps for some people, whenever they do something, they seek God for help.They ask God for guidance. Whenever they are faced in a situation wherein they are asked to dosomething bad, I believe that the first thing that enters their minds is that God might punish them or theymight not go to heaven. In John Arthurs point of view, he does not believe that religion is necessary, thatis why he rejects the Divine Command Theory stating that religion is necessary for morality becausewithout God there could be no right and wrong.


1.) How does religion differ from morality?2.) How are they connected?3.) Does morality need religion?4.) What is the theory that states that religion is necessary for morality because without God

there could be no right and wrong?5.) Does John Arthur consider the Divine Command Theory as a theory to believe in?


7/33

7


I learned that John Arthur believes that Religion is not necessary for morality. He thinks that Godis not the one who decides whether it is right or wrong. For me, I do not agree with John Arthur. I truly

believe that God has all the say in everything that we do. Without God, there is no right or wrong. I fullysupport the Divine Command Theory.


8/33

8


ITETHIC


Book Review: Chapter 3 Master and Slave MoralityLibrary Reference: N/A



I expect to learn whether the idea of master and slave is a good thing or bad thing. If it is a goodthing, I want to know the advantages and disadvantages of it. If it is bad, I want to know why it is bad.

Quote:

Nietzsche argues that a healthy society should allow superior individuals to exercise their will to power, their drive toward domination and exploitation of the inferior. The superior person follows a master-morality that emphasizes power, strength, egoism, and freedom, as distinguished from a slave- morality that calls for weakness, submission, sympathy, and love.

Book Review:

Master-slave morality has its advantages and disadvantages. Of course it is much better if youare the superior one rather than being the slave. Who wouldnt choose to become the master right? As Isaid this so-called master-slave morality has its pros and cons. An advantage for this one is that thepeople are able to practice their will power and for the slaves, they are able to practice obedience,submission etc. A disadvantage perhaps might be power-grabbing might occur since no one wants to beenslaved in the first place.

If you are a religious type of person, your perception in this article is somewhat different becauseyou look at it in a very good way. As a religious person, you believe that we have been under this master-slave morality. God has been our master and us being his disciples or followers. For some people, thisarticle might not be a good one for them because in my opinion, no one wants to be enslaved unlessyoure a kind of guy who really wants enslavement. This article still depends on how you live your life. Ifyoure religious, this article might be a good thing for you.


1.) Does Friedrich Nitzsche believe in the Master-Slave Morality?2.) What is Will to Power?3.) What is the difference of Master-Morality and Slave Morality?4.) What is the meaning of Master-Morality?5.) What is the meaning of Slave-Morailty?


9/33


10/33

10


ITETHIC


Book Review: Chapter 4 Trying out Ones New SwordLibrary Reference: N/A



I expect to learn a deeper understanding towards Moral Isolationism. I also expect to learn that astory of a sword will help me better understand ethics.

Quote:

My own impression is that we believe that outsiders can, in principle, deliver perfectly good indictments-only, it usually takes more than two weeks to make them damning.

Book Review:

I really enjoyed reading this article. I was clueless at first on how Mary Midgley connected a storyabout a sword to moral issues. I must admit, she did quite well. I had fun learning about tsujigiri. It is anact practiced by the Japanese wherein the Japanese Samurais test their swords with human beingsregardless if they did something bad or not. If I were to ask my own opinion, I totally disagree with theirculture. But who am I to judge them right? For them, this is a good thing because this helps the JapaneseSamurais test their swords. In their culture, if Japanese Samurai were to used tsujigiri and their samuraiwas not able to slash a person with just one blow, that Japanese Samurai is a disgrace to his family andto his country. Back to my opinion, I still do not get why do Japanese have to sacrifice a life just to testhis/her own sword? I truly believe that there are a lot of ways to test it, like using it against a tree, etc.

Mary Midgley believes that a person has no right to criticize ones culture if that person has notyet tried to live and apply that culture to his/her life. I agree to what Mary Midgley said because we reallyhave no right to judge other peoples culture because we had no experience of applying it whatsoever.


1.) Does Mary Midgley believe in Moral Isolationism?2.) What is Moral Isolationism?3.) What is tsujigiri? 4.) Who does the Japanese Samurais use to test out their swords?5.) Is tsujigiri ethically right?

What Ive learned:

What I learned in this article is about how differently culture can be. We may have a culture herewhich is very indifferent in some other places. A good example of this is our eating of balut eggs. Insome other places, eating balut eggs is not pleasant.


11/33

11

So that means, we do not have the right to judge other peoples culture because we are all madedifferently. We all have different points of view. I believe that if tsujigiri was practiced here in thePhilippines, this might not be that brutal for us no more. That even might be a good thing for us.


12/33

12


ITETHIC


Book Review: Chapter 5 UtilitarianismLibrary Reference: N/A



I expect to learn the definition of Utilitarianism and its importance. I want to know what benefitswe may get out of it. I also want to learn if it is being applied now a days.

Quote:

If I was asked, what I mean by difference of quality in pleasures, or what makes one pleasure more valuable than another, merely as a please, except its being greater in amount, there is but one possible answer,

Book Review:

My understanding of Utilitarianism is that, Utilitarianism means that the important perception isthe perception of the majority. Whenever you do something, you should see to it that it should make themajority happy regardless of what the minority thinks. Your focus is the perception of the majority.

Utilitarianism believes that whatever the majority thinks is what is good for everyone. In this world,all of us may have similar perceptions, some may have different perceptions. Those people with similarperceptions may end up getting same answers when they are asked. Lets say 100 randomly chosenpeople we asked to answer a survey, of course, to decide who wins, it is the answer made by the mostnumber of people or better yet, the majority.

I myself am a believer of this Utilitarianism. Some maybe choose to become different, but as forme, whenever I am faced with a tough decision, I usually ask a lot of people first of what they think; andwhatever answer the majority says, that will be my answer.


1.) What is Utilitarianism?2.) Which is more important? The majority or the minority?

3.) What is the other term for the Greatest Happiness Principle?4.) If you were called as a hedonist, what do you believe in?5.) What is the Principle of Utility?


What I learned in this article is that Utilitarianism has many basic principles. It all entails that whatis important is what the majority thinks. Utilitarianism does not care whether the minority will not betreated fairly as long as the majority thinks it that way.


13/33

13


ITETHIC


Book Review: Chapter 6 The Debate over UtilitarianismLibrary Reference: N/A



I want to learn how James Rachels argued on what John Stuart Mill wrote about Utilitarianism. Ithink that James Rachels thinks that Utilitarianism is not a good thing.

Quote:

The utilitarian doctrine is that happiness is desirable and only thing desirable, as an end; all other things being desirable as means to that end

Book Review:

According to John Stuart Mill, Utilitarianism focuses on the majority and Happiness is the mostimportant thing. Well, I believe that James Rachels does not think so. James Rachels does not agree thatHappiness is not something that is known as excellent and required for its means of bringing it about.What James Rachels think of happiness is merely a reaction whenever something good happens. Healso believes that the Principle of Hedonism dates back a long, long time ago. He does not believe that itstill exists now a days.

Classical Utilitarianism is defined as to maximize utility is the sole moral obligation according toJeremy Betham and John Stuart Mills. But for other anti-utilitarians, they believe that the basic idea ofthis theory is correct, they even want to preserve that idea. All it needs is some modifications. Thoughmany are anti-utilitarian, it was shocking for them that the theory is still alive though there was a proposalto ditch the theory. I believe that they still did not take it out because the idea is good.

Integrative Question:

1.) What are the three summarized proposition of the Classical Utilitarianism according to JamesRachels?

2.) Is the idea of Utilitarianism a good one or not?3.) Do the anti-utilitarians want the theory to be removed?4.) Are Consequences all that matter?5.) Is Happiness the only thing that matters?


I learned that many people are not really a fan of Utilitarianism. They think that Happiness is theonly thing that matters. They believe that a lot of things matter asides from Happiness.


14/33

14


ITETHIC


Book Review: Chapter 7 The Categorical ImperativeLibrary Reference: N/A



I expect to learn how Immanuel Kant discussed Good Will. I also expect to learn what he meansby the Categorical Imperative.

Quote:

Act only on that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should be a universal law

Book Review:

In my opinion, Immanuel Kant rejects utilitarianism because he believes that it is not good that theminorities are left behind. He does not care even though the majority is happy. It is still unjust for theperson who stands up for what they believe in even though the majority believes that that thing is right.Immanuel Kant came up with the Categorical Imperative to correct the mishaps of what Utilitarianismtalked about. Categorical Imperative states that we are allowed to act upon our own desires which willbenefit not only us but also for the others; not only for the majority, but also for the minority as well.

Immanuel Kant believes that the highest form of good is good will. He said that a good will isbased from a persons duties which are done without asking for anything in return. It is done because thatperson just wants to do it; because he just wants to make someone or everyone happy.


1.) Does Immanuel Kant disagree on utilitarianism?2.) What is a good will according to Immanuel Kant?3.) What is the Categorical Imperative?4.) Does the Categorical Imperative correct the mishaps of Utilitarianism?5.) Is Good Will similar to a duty?


I learned that Immanuel Kant basically disagrees to what John Stuart Mill said aboutUtilitarianism. I learned that Immanuel Kant does not believe that all that is important is the perception ofthe majority. Immanuel Kant believes that the minorities should not be left out.


15/33

15


ITETHIC


Book Review: Chapter 8 Happiness and VirtueLibrary Reference: N/A



I expect to learn on how Aristotle defines what he thinks about Happiness and Virtue. I expect tolearn about his viewpoints on the matter. I also expect to learn that he will compare his opinions onHappiness and Virtue with someones opinion about it.

Quote:

If happiness is activity in accordance with virtue, it is reasonable that it should be in accordance with the highest virtue; and this will be that of the best thing in us.

Book Review:

Aristotles happiness is way different form a normal persons perception of happiness. Aristotlemade it clear that happiness for him is not accompanied by pleasure; what most of us think is right, buthappiness is being happy without doing something bad. It should always be something good. There are alot of things that can make a person happy, but not all of those things are good. A good example of this isdoing drugs. For some people, taking drugs can make them feel happy, but as we all know, it is definitelynot good to take some. Of course there are still other ways to become happy by doing something nice.For me, it makes me feel very happy inside when I get to teach and play with little kids. This makes mefeel happy and it is not a bad deed as well.

For others, the things that might be good for me might be bad for them. So, I believe that whatreally is the basis for real happiness is what the people think of a good deed. What their perceptionsabout it. We people are created differently. We have our own perceptions and ideas. We think differentfrom others. Some other things that I do you think might be bad but might be good in my opinion vice-versa.


1.) What is Aristotles definition of happiness?2.) What is Aristotles definition of virtue?3.) Does all human being seek happiness?4.) Is happiness al about pleasure, honor or wealth?5.) What does come from training and habit, and generally is a state of character that is a mean

between the vices of excess and defiency?


16/33

16


I learned that happiness for Aristotle is not all about pleasure, honor or wealth. What happinessfor him is doing something good without asking for anything in return that will make you happy. I really likeAristotles definition of happiness because, if all of the people in the world are like that, the world might bea better place to live in.


17/33

17


ITETHIC


Book Review: Chapter 9 The Nature and Value of RightsLibrary Reference: N/A



I expect to learn what is the real nature and value of rights. I also expect to lean that JoelFienberg will have a different approach towards what is a right.

Quote:

When a person is said to deserve something good from us what is meant in parts is that there would be a certain propriety in our giving that a good thing to him in virtue of the kind of person he is,perhaps, or more likely, in virtue of some specific thing he has done.

Book Review:

Joel Feinberg created a world called Nowheresville in order for us readers to understand morethe concept of rights and duties. Nowheresville is a made-up world created by Joel Feinberg wherein hewanted us readers to visualize a world like our own, except the people who are living there has absolutelyno RIGHTS. In this way, we can determine how important rights are. Joel Feinberg also discussed thisso-called logical correlativity of rights and duties . This has two (2) parts. The first part is about all dutiesentail other peoples rights; and secondly, all rights entail other peoples duties. Feinberg believes that thefirst part is the one that needs concern.


1.) What are rights according to Joel Feinberg?2.) What is Nowheresville?3.) What is logical correlativity of rights and duties?4.) What are the two parts of logical correlativity of rights and duties?5.) What is the difference between rights and duties?


I learned that a world cannot exist without rights. It can physically exist, but I believe that it will bevery chaotic. Imagine you live in Nowheresville. How can you ever express your own opinion if you do nothave the right to say it? In our world today, most of us rely on the rights that are given to us. Withoutthese rights, it will be very hard to live.


18/33

18


ITETHIC


Book Review: Chapter 10 Taking Rights SeriouslyLibrary Reference: N/A



I expect to learn the importance of rights and why Ronald Dworkin gave time to write somethingabout taking rights seriously. I expect that this article is a good one and will help me grow to become abetter person.

Quote:

There is a clear difference between saying that someone has a right to do something in this sense and saying that it is the right thing for him to do, or that he does no wrong in doing it.

Book Review:

In my opinion, Ronald Dworkin shares that, it is unethical for a person to interfere with onesrights for we are made differently. Ronald Dworkin believes that we should only focus on our rights ratherthan messing with other peoples rights. I strongly agree with Ronald Dworkin because we really aremade uniquely. We have our rights, so why mess with others? A good example that I can illustrate iswhen Former President Ferdinand E. Marcos ruled the Philippines. He took away the rights of the FilipinoPeople. What is the result? The Philippines economy fluctuated and chaos began in the Philippines. Ourforeign investors started to lessen. No one wanted to invest in the Philippines anymore because of it.After Ferdinand Marcos reign, many presidents gave back the peoples rights. Now the Philippines istrying to improve step by step.


1.) Does Ronald Dworkin believe that it is wrong to interfere with other peoples rights?2.) What does Taking Rights Seriously mean according to Ronald Dworkin?3.) What is the Kantian idea?4.) What are the benefits if we take rights seriously?5.) Do Constitutional rights represent moral rights against the government?


I learned that Ronald Dworkin condemned people who interfere with other peoples rights. Hedoes not get why people have to mess with other peoples rights because we have our own rights. Whydont we just focus on our rights rather than interfering with others rights?


19/33

19


ITETHIC


Book Review: Chapter 11 A Theory of JusticeLibrary Reference: N/A



I expect to learn on how John Rawls explains to us the Theory of Justice. I want to know if JohnRawls will disagree or agree with the previous authors works.

Quote:

All social values liberty and opportunity, income and wealth, and the bases of self-respect are to be distributed equally unless an unequal distribution of any, or all, of these values is to everyones advantage.

Book Review:

John Rawls wants to express that every people should be treated equally. No one should befavored. Now a days, we are living in a world wherein it is very unjust. Government official or sometimesin the Judicial Court favors people who are known in the business world; in short, rich people. In reality,Money is being a source of judgment among people. If you have lots of money, you are respected andtreated nicely, but if you are just a normal person, or unfortunately, a less fortunate person, you are nottreated equally like how they treat the richer people.

John Rawls stated two principles of justice. The first principle is that each person is to have anequal right to the most extensive basic liberty compatible with a similar liberty for others. Secondly, socialand economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both reasonably expected to be toeveryones advantage, and attached to positions and offices open to all. These two principles mean justone thing. Every person should be treated equally.


1.) What does the theory of justice mean according to John Rawls?2.) How many principles of justice are there?3.) What does the first principle mean?4.) What does the second principle mean?5.) What are the consequences of the two principles of justice?


I learned that John Rawls believe that every person should be treated equally regardless ofhis/her status in life. Money should not be a basis of whether that person gets to be treated right or not.


20/33

20


ITETHIC


Book Review: Chapter 12 The Need for More than JusticeLibrary Reference: N/A



I expect to learn that Annette Baler will explain why there is a need for more than Justice. I wantto know whether justice is enough or not. I also want to know the reason why Annette Baler spent time towrite an article about the need for more than justice.

Quote:

It is however also true that the moral theories that made the concept of a persons rights central were not just the instruments for excluding some persons, but also the instruments used by those who demanded that more and more persons be included in the favored group.

Book Review:

What Annette Baler is stating in her article is that it lays in the governments hands the need formore than justice. If our government takes care of the people, then there is no need for more than justice.Criminal rates will go lower since the government sees to it that the people are taken good care of.People will not be forced to do bad stuff because they are in good hands. Of course, the governmentshould see to it that the people would not be abusive. The government should still limit things so thatpeople will no tend to be very dependable in the government. If the government allows the people toabuse them in the first place and suddenly limits them that might cause the people to go against thegovernment and force them to commit crimes again.


1.) Will crimes lessen if the government takes good care of the people?2.) What does Annette Baler mean about the need for more than justice?3.) Does the for more than justice necessary?4.) What is an alternative to the Kantian justice perspective?5.) Who developed the Kantian philosophical tradition?


I learned that Annette Baler believes that all that it takes to not need to have more than justice iswhen the government sees to it that the people of that country are happy and well- protected.


21/33

21

Use Case Diagram (Existing)

System Name: Copyright Registration System

Applicant

Secretary

Cashier

Staff

Submit work andapplication form

Processpayments

Issue

stamps


22/33

22

Use Case Narrative (Existing System)

Identification Summary

Title: Submit work and application form

Summary: The applicant will submit his/her work and application form

Actors: Applicant, Secretary

Creation date: February 26, 2009

Created by: Adnan Fortuna

Flow of events

Preconditions:

1. The student should have his/her application and work ready.

Main Success Scenario

1. The secretary has already processed the application form

Error Sequences:

1. Incomplete data and needed requirements

2. Affidavit is not notarized to the public

3. Payment issues

Post Condition

1. The secretary will ask the applicant to pay to the cashier.


23/33

23


Title: Process payments

Summary: The applicant will pay at the cashier.

Actors: Applicant, Cashier



Flow of events

Preconditions:




Error Sequences:

1. Payment Issues2. Cashier not present.

Post Condition

1. The applicant will be issued a receipt.


24/33

24


Title: Issue stamps

Summary: The applicant will buy a stamp from the staff

Actors: Applicant, Staff, Secretary



Flow of events

Preconditions:

1. The student should have a paid the cashier.


1. The staff issued a stamp.

Error Sequences:

1. Unavailable stamp.

Post Condition

1. The applicant will go back to the cashier for final processing.


25/33

25

Activity Diagram (Existing)



Applicant

Submit Work

Submit ApplicationForm


26/33

26



Title: Process payment

Applicant

Bring Application Form

Pay due payment

Applicant

Issue Receipt


27/33


28/33

28

Use Case Diagram (Proposed)


Applicant

Secretary

Cashier

Submit work andapplication form

Processpayments and

stamps


29/33

29

Use Case Narrative (Proposed System)



Summary: The applicant will submit his/her work and application form

Actors: Applicant, Secretary



Flow of events

Preconditions:




Error Sequences:

1. Incomplete data and needed requirements

2. Affidavit is not notarized to the public

3. Payment issues

Post Condition

1. The secretary will ask the applicant to pay to the cashier.


30/33

30


Title: Process payments and stamp

Summary: The applicant will pay at the cashier.

Actors: Applicant, Cashier



Flow of events

Preconditions:



1. The secretary has already processed the application form and issued a receipt

Error Sequences:

1. Payment Issues.2. Cashier not present.

3. Lost Stamp.

4. Misplaced application form.

5. Misplaced work.

Post Condition

1. The applicant will be issued a receipt.


31/33

31




Applicant

Submit Work

Submit ApplicationForm


32/33

32



Title: Process payment

Applicant

Bring Application Form

Pay due payments

Cashier

Issue Receipt

Issue Receipt


33/33

cmp final - adnan fortuna

Documents