A deductive argument is an argument that is truth preserving, i.e., it establishes the truth of the conclusion provided that the argument's premises are true.
This point can be expressed also by saying that, in a deductive argument, the premises are intended to provide such strong support for the conclusion that, if the premises are true, then it would be impossible for the conclusion to be false.
An argument in which the premises follow the conclusion is called a VALID DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENT. If a valid argument has true premises, then the argument is SOUND.
All arguments are either valid or invalid, and either sound or unsound; there is no middle ground.
Here is a valid deductive argument:
Socrates is a man. All men are mortal. So, Socrates is mortal. (VALID AND SOUND)
An inductive argument is an argument that is intended to be strong when there is a high probability of obtaining the conclusion if the premises WERE TRUE.
So, inductive arguments ARE NOT TRUTH PRESERVING, THERE IS NEVER CERTAINTY ABOUT WHETHER THE CONCLUSION WILL OBTAIN:
click here for a video lesson,
Tuesday, October 30, 2018
Thursday, June 7, 2018
is business good or evil?
above the graph of maximin function
(this point goes to Anna, whom I thank for a productive discussion). her point if I remember, was in the form of a conditional: if a business is successful it has to engage in some form of wrongdoing.
The ethical egoist claims this is a false cause.
in fact, the opposite is the case. WHY? 1- a business happens out of economic selection. 2- they exemplify the moral principle of HOMO ECONOMICUS.
1- Doing business is not a decision caused by a cabal of neolithic elders in a cave, high on mushroom ecstasy. Business transactions happened out of necessity to ensure human survival!
Ancient economic history tells us there's no human progress without commerce.
Let's go back 20,000 years ago. Commerce starts with the simple practice of bartering. 7,000 years ago. Phoenicians and Babylonians exchanged goods all over Mesopotamia and east Mediterranean Sea. here's a business transaction.
A needs x, B has x. B needs y, A has y. (x, y) exchange happens. now both A and B are better off than before they started (this is the DNA of business).
This is called supply and demand. Salt was so valuable that Roman soldiers' salaries were paid with it. Wars are and were fought over commerce.
Karl Marx acknowledges that the history of mankind is based on economic leaps. In other words, merchants have changed the world.
Where does morals come in?
2- Bartering cannot happen unless there is TRUST. And trust can only occur when individuals keep their word (this is the beginning of the idea of DUTY).
WHY DO EARLY HOMO SAPIENS KEPT THEIR WORD? Not because they love their fellow sapiens, but because they need to succeed in order to survive. This is the basic insight of ethical egoism.
The same goes for businesses and corporations. A business that doesn't follow these basic rules is likely to fail (again, economic selection, what makes a business successful IS NOT success, is maximizing BEST INTERESTS). Maximizing is a concrete economic function given by:
mc = mr (where "c" is cost and "r" is revenue).
Wednesday, June 6, 2018
persons, groups, ethics, bezos & monopoly
dear class, as always I try to flesh out stuff we don't have the time, or space to properly address in class.
1. are groups persons?
my point to Paola a few classes back is that ethics is not about groups (of persons). definitions first. what's a person? if p is a person, p has 4 properties: reason, free will, autonomy, sentience.
only then we ascribe responsibility. Groups do not, cannot fulfill these properties in the same manner.
example: suppose we had 200 persons breaking into a Wall-mart and 55% of them steal items from the store. We'd have to ascribe different degrees of responsibility one by one. Speaking of the "group's responsibility" may be guilty of false analogy: what is true of the whole is true of the parts ("if A is made up of persons, A is a person") or fallacy of division: what is true for the whole is true of the parts ("if my foot hurts my toe hurts").
now, are corporations persons? as the modern definition of LLC implies:
The primary reason business owners opt to take the LLC route is to limit the principals' personal liability. Many view an LLC as a blend of a partnership, which is a simple business formation of two or more owners under an agreement, and a corporation, which has certain liability protections.As an individual, I own all my parts, but within a corporation, the parts own the whole. Big difference.
2. amazon and monopoly
is amazon a monopoly? definitions first: exclusive ownership through legal privilege, command of supply, or concerted action.
First, charging Amazon of being a monopoly doesn't fit with the prevailing definition of monopoly that's currently used by courts and the Federal Trade Commission since the 1970s. this is a crucial point:
The long term ability to raise price or exclude competitors. That is how that term is used here: a "monopolist" is a firm with significant and durable market power.if so, a company can grow as much as it wants and control as much of the market as it wants as long as prices are competitive and consumers don't suffer.
Second, keep in mind that Amazon isn't even the largest retailer in the U.S. Walmart IS with profits of half a trillion dollars last year, 3.5 times larger than Amazon's annual sales.
Critics of Amazon point to Whole Foods' 450 locations leverage (to push out competition in the grocery delivery business). Yet, despite its size, Amazon currently makes up only 3.6% of annual retail revenue in the U.S. which is nothing. Amazon doesn't sell cars or operate restaurants.
here, a compelling piece by economist charles sizemore.
economists have tweaked the complex relationship of Amazon with other business as a classic example of "coopetition," a combination of competition and cooperation. "
you're competing with Amazon, but you're partnering with Amazon, you're using their services yourself, so you're a customer of them as an organization. hope this works.
How Amazon employees felt about Amazon? in class, we debated this point. The company gets 3.8 our of 5 in worker satisfaction: a pretty good grade!
so?
Tuesday, June 13, 2017
Prostitution, choice and Kant's second formulation
As I said, even the Ethical Egoist would pause and think: "Doing that to my body may not be a good in the long run" (prudence is a plus for the ethical egoist). You know, the formalist would see the practice as wrong on reversible and universalizable grounds.
Now, the problem is more complicated. Prostitution is global phenomenon:
Cheated out of childhood in Russia.
Sex slaves in Italy.
Child sex workers in Nepal.
Child prostitution in South Africa.
Here is the Wikipedia entry on prostitution in the USA (see that there are different kinds, from brothel, to escort to child prostitution).
As I discussed in class, prostitution is not generally a "choice" but a socially determined malaise, young woman or man may exhibit certain behaviors and happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time:
* About 80% of women in prostitution have been the victim of a rape. It's hard to talk about this because... the experience of prostitution is just like rape. Prostitutes are raped, on the average, eight to ten times per year. They are the most raped class of women in the history of our planet (Susan Kay Hunter and K.C. Reed, July, 1990 "Taking the side of bought and sold rape," speech at National Coalition against Sexual Assault, Washington, D.C. ).
* Other studies report 68% to 70% of women in prostitution being raped (M Silbert, "Compounding factors in the rape of street prostitutes," in A.W. Burgess, ed., Rape and Sexual Assault II, Garland Publishing, 1988; Melissa Farley and Howard Barkan, "Prostitution, Violence, and Post-traumatic Stress Disorder," 1998, Women & Health.
* Prostitution is an act of violence against women which is intrinsically traumatizing. In a study of 475 people in prostitution (including women, men, and the transgendered) from five countries (South Africa, Thailand, Turkey, USA, and Zambia):
62% reported having been raped in prostitution.
73% reported having experienced physical assault in prostitution.
72% were currently or formerly homeless.
92% stated that they wanted to escape prostitution immediately.
(Melissa Farley, Isin Baral, Merab Kiremire, Ufuk Sezgin, "Prostitution in Five Countries: Violence and Post-traumatic Stress Disorder" (1998) Feminism & Psychology 8 (4): 405-426.
* Many of the health problems of women in prostitution are a direct result of violence. For example, several women had their ribs broken by the police in Istanbul, a woman in San Francisco broke her hips jumping out of a car when a john was attempting to kidnap her. Many women had their teeth knocked out by pimps and johns. (Melissa Farley, unpublished manuscript, 2000). A woman (in another study) said about her health: "I’ve had three broken arms, nose broken twice, [and] I’m partially deaf in one ear….I have a small fragment of a bone floating in my head that gives me migraines. I’ve had a fractured skull. My legs ain’t worth shit no more; my toes have been broken. My feet, bottom of my feet, have been burned; they've been whopped with a hot iron and clothes hanger… the hair on my pussy had been burned off at one time…I have scars. I’ve been cut with a knife, beat with guns, two by fours. There hasn’t been a place on my body that hasn’t been bruised somehow, some way, some big, some small." (Giobbe, E. (1992) Juvenile Prostitution: Profile of Recruitment in Ann W. Burgess (ed.) Child Trauma: Issues & Research.Garland Publishing Inc, New York, page 126).
*The commercial sex industry includes: street prostitution, massage brothels, escort services, out-call services, strip clubs, lap-dancing, phone sex, adult and child pornography, video and internet pornography, and prostitution tourism. Most women who are in prostitution for longer than a few months drift among these various permutations of the commercial sex industry. All prostitution causes harm to women. Whether it is being sold by one’s family to a brothel, or whether it is being sexually abused in one’s family, running away from home, and then being pimped by one’s boyfriend, or whether one is in college and needs to pay for next semester’s tuition and one works at a strip club behind glass where men never actually touch you – all these forms of prostitution hurt the women in it. (Melissa Farley, paper presented at the 11th International Congress on Women’s Health Issues, University of California College of Nursing, San Francisco, 2000).So? Is Kant right or wrong?
Wednesday, May 17, 2017
homework, chapter 1 & 2, spring 2020
Define/ explain the following:
1. what's the reason for moral disagreements? are they bad?
2. what's the difference between morality and ethics?
3. descriptive ethical relativism, normative ethical relativism,
4.. cultural relativism,
5. is tolerance an absolute value? justify your answer.
6. can relativism be used as a form of moral isolationism? what happens then?
7. what's the fallibility principle?
8. what's wrong with moral isolationism?
Sunday, April 23, 2017
triff's notes on chapter 43 (Architecture)
Architecture is symbolic building. This follows Vitruvius three central themes: firmitas (strength), utilitas (functionality), and venustas (beauty).
Corbusier 5 points of Modern architecture (following his Villa Savoye)
1- pilotis,
2- replacement of supporting walls by a grid of reinforced concrete columns that bears the structural load is the basis of the new aesthetic.
3- free designing of the ground plan—the absence of supporting walls—means the house is unrestrained in its internal use (now the façade is free from structural constraints).
4- ribbon windows for illumination and ventilation,
5- roof gardens on a flat roof (providing aesthetic as well as essential protection to the concrete roof).
The representational theory: a building and its elements refer to the primitive building and its elements: a column represents a cut down tree, the capital represents a pad that sits the wooden beam atop it. A classical building refers to the elements of primitive building: to its primitive materials and to its methods of construction.
The semantic theory: this is, again, Goodman's theory. A building can denote its referent. Denotation is a simple relation and needs no further explanation. Example: The Sydney Opera House, we are told, denotes sailing boats.Understanding what the Sydney Opera House means is to apprehend the reference to sailing boats given by the building.
A building can also exemplify the properties it represents. For example: the building refers to its means of construction. Take Dutch architect separates elements into beams,columns, frames and openings in order that the elemental ‘putting-together-of-the-building’ becomes exemplified.
or this,
The experience counterargument: One's connection to a building doesn't entail that one understands the representational content of the classical building. Our appreciation of a classical building can constitute an aesthetic appreciation that is clumsy, rudimentary, deep or subtle without any recognition of the ancient origins of its form.
Retort of the representational advocate: It only helps to wear representational glasses, since they make for a richer experience by informing the experience. One understands a building better if one is disposed to its historic context and the architect's intentions.
If I understand the context of De Stijl movement, I'm better prepared to enjoy Rietveld's architecture.
Functionalism in architecture: One strand of modernism arising from this background regards the function of a building as determining its form, so that the form of the building is aesthetically conceived as being appropriate to the utility for which the building was designed. According to this view, the beauty of a building is to be assessed in terms of its form in relation to its function.
what is the function here?
the white cube!
Austere functionalism: now function akin to that used in engineering. building is not an aesthetic theory at all, but an accidental bonus at best, entirely irrelevant or even "false consciousness" at worst. Hannes Meyer advocates this position.
and yet, one can make the case that Meyer's building do refer to a BAUHAUS aesthetic!
Whatever the claims of the designers and their supportive theorists, the look of the works is aesthetically estimable and it seems incredible that this is mere caprice. Austere functionalism is a prime example of a critically engaged theory which immunizes its works from aesthetic criticism (by removing them from its orbit).
Scruton's architectural theory: It has two part, Appreciation and judging.
1- Appreciation means we both enjoy works of architecture and feel that we can come to understand them. I do not merely perceive a building in front of me, but I can come to see the building in terms of a descriptive content which pulls together the various fragmentary perceptions I have when moving in and around it. This descriptive content, being aspectual, is based upon, but irreducible to, the material building at which I stare. That is to say that the experience, so described, is imaginative. Thus my experience of the building is subject to the will. It is a way of seeing the building for which I am responsible. (I cannot be wrong about how I see the building.)
2- Judging: I have a judgement about what I see. And I can argue with others to try and persuade them of its force. I feel I can organize the disconnected pieces of my perceptual world into a single continuous imaginative experience of a unified whole. This activity, in which I find myself engaged, is by its very nature judgemental, for it seeks this unity in the work conceived as imaginative, harmonious, agreeable and sensible.
Corbusier 5 points of Modern architecture (following his Villa Savoye)
1- pilotis,
2- replacement of supporting walls by a grid of reinforced concrete columns that bears the structural load is the basis of the new aesthetic.
3- free designing of the ground plan—the absence of supporting walls—means the house is unrestrained in its internal use (now the façade is free from structural constraints).
4- ribbon windows for illumination and ventilation,
5- roof gardens on a flat roof (providing aesthetic as well as essential protection to the concrete roof).
The representational theory: a building and its elements refer to the primitive building and its elements: a column represents a cut down tree, the capital represents a pad that sits the wooden beam atop it. A classical building refers to the elements of primitive building: to its primitive materials and to its methods of construction.
The semantic theory: this is, again, Goodman's theory. A building can denote its referent. Denotation is a simple relation and needs no further explanation. Example: The Sydney Opera House, we are told, denotes sailing boats.Understanding what the Sydney Opera House means is to apprehend the reference to sailing boats given by the building.
Sidney Opera, architect: Jorn Utzon, 1970s
A building can also exemplify the properties it represents. For example: the building refers to its means of construction. Take Dutch architect separates elements into beams,columns, frames and openings in order that the elemental ‘putting-together-of-the-building’ becomes exemplified.
Rietveld's Schroeder House, 1924
or this,
Rietveld's Chair, 1917
The experience counterargument: One's connection to a building doesn't entail that one understands the representational content of the classical building. Our appreciation of a classical building can constitute an aesthetic appreciation that is clumsy, rudimentary, deep or subtle without any recognition of the ancient origins of its form.
Retort of the representational advocate: It only helps to wear representational glasses, since they make for a richer experience by informing the experience. One understands a building better if one is disposed to its historic context and the architect's intentions.
If I understand the context of De Stijl movement, I'm better prepared to enjoy Rietveld's architecture.
Functionalism in architecture: One strand of modernism arising from this background regards the function of a building as determining its form, so that the form of the building is aesthetically conceived as being appropriate to the utility for which the building was designed. According to this view, the beauty of a building is to be assessed in terms of its form in relation to its function.
what is the function here?
Austere functionalism: now function akin to that used in engineering. building is not an aesthetic theory at all, but an accidental bonus at best, entirely irrelevant or even "false consciousness" at worst. Hannes Meyer advocates this position.
Hannes Meyer's ADGB,
and yet, one can make the case that Meyer's building do refer to a BAUHAUS aesthetic!
Whatever the claims of the designers and their supportive theorists, the look of the works is aesthetically estimable and it seems incredible that this is mere caprice. Austere functionalism is a prime example of a critically engaged theory which immunizes its works from aesthetic criticism (by removing them from its orbit).
Scruton's architectural theory: It has two part, Appreciation and judging.
1- Appreciation means we both enjoy works of architecture and feel that we can come to understand them. I do not merely perceive a building in front of me, but I can come to see the building in terms of a descriptive content which pulls together the various fragmentary perceptions I have when moving in and around it. This descriptive content, being aspectual, is based upon, but irreducible to, the material building at which I stare. That is to say that the experience, so described, is imaginative. Thus my experience of the building is subject to the will. It is a way of seeing the building for which I am responsible. (I cannot be wrong about how I see the building.)
2- Judging: I have a judgement about what I see. And I can argue with others to try and persuade them of its force. I feel I can organize the disconnected pieces of my perceptual world into a single continuous imaginative experience of a unified whole. This activity, in which I find myself engaged, is by its very nature judgemental, for it seeks this unity in the work conceived as imaginative, harmonious, agreeable and sensible.
Saturday, April 22, 2017
notes on Nietzsche chapter 7
the will: a blind force
which constantly strives for an unattainable resolution, to perpetuate further striving (see it as evolution's survival of the species).
the world: the realm of facts and pain (what existentialists called "absurd"). the multiple refraction of the world constitute the world of representation and experience.
dyonisian: the "primordial unity" of things, a state of "intoxication" in which the deepest and most "horrible truths" of the world are glimpsed.
apollonian: the illusory, "mere appearance" of things. a dream-like state in which all knowledge is knowledge of surfaces. aesthetically speaking, apollonian is the beautiful as intelligible.
the sublime: (in Kant's aesthetics) the overwhelming, awe-inspiring and yet elevating experience of things which exceed rational apprehension).
N's use of dynisian/apollonian: both Dionysian and Apollonian cross-fertilize one another, so that the metaphysical horror of existence is simultaneously revealed and made bearable (in aesthetics the prime example is TRAGEDY (especially Greek tragedy).
in N2 the appearance/reality distinction is transposed into the real world of human experience.
art lies: "art is the lie that sanctifies and the will-to-deception then has a good conscience". art beautifies life by interposing a veil of lies between us and truths about the world that we cannot bear (note: Wilde said the same thing contemporaneously in his The Decay of Lying).
life-affirming valuations: it's the acknowledgement of the instincts of the SELF: they make our spirit soar, we become proud of ourselves.
life-denying valuations: we fall prey to weakness, to bad faith, do double morality.
master morality: master morality is nobility, qualities of open-mindedness, courage, truthfulness, trust, and an accurate sense of one's self-worth. the master is rooted in self-affirmation & self-glorification of life.
slave morality: the inverse of master morality, based on resentiment. self-denying, pessimistic, cynical, subservient to norms, slave morality devalues what the master values and the slave does not have.
art and the artist: art is a transformative and interpretative activity. art includes all creation and imposition of forms. the artist finds and creates new meaning.
morality as a constraint: every morality involves the regulation of behavior through the repression of (at least some) instincts.
morality is a special case of the aesthetic. morality constraints, art liberates
Self-poesis: one is and becomes one's work of art. to achieve self-poesis one has to be ruthless with oneself, both in recognizing ones own bad faith (the different ways that we lie to ourselves) and fixing it by reinterpreting it.
christian/pagan dichotomy: the christian construes himself as an immortal soul, while the pagan understands all suffering in relation to the spectator of it. the pagan sees life as a movie he has to play.
amor fati: love your fate.
the world: the realm of facts and pain (what existentialists called "absurd"). the multiple refraction of the world constitute the world of representation and experience.
dyonisian: the "primordial unity" of things, a state of "intoxication" in which the deepest and most "horrible truths" of the world are glimpsed.
apollonian: the illusory, "mere appearance" of things. a dream-like state in which all knowledge is knowledge of surfaces. aesthetically speaking, apollonian is the beautiful as intelligible.
the sublime: (in Kant's aesthetics) the overwhelming, awe-inspiring and yet elevating experience of things which exceed rational apprehension).
N's use of dynisian/apollonian: both Dionysian and Apollonian cross-fertilize one another, so that the metaphysical horror of existence is simultaneously revealed and made bearable (in aesthetics the prime example is TRAGEDY (especially Greek tragedy).
take the dilemma of Orestes written by Euripides: 1- he feels duty bound to avenge the murder of his father, Agamemnon, even though to do so will take killing his mother and becoming guilty of matricide. 2- the murder of Agamemnon by Orestes' mother, Clytaemestra, was committed to avenge the sacrifice of her daughter, Iphigeneia, by Agamemnon he rown dad! (but wait! the sacrifice of Iphigeneia had been demanded by the gods as atonement so that "fair Helen" could be retaken from Troy). 3- So, Orestes is caught up in a horrible web of obligation and necessity dictated by generation after generation of his ancestors wreaking violent revenge on each other. Each act requires to respond to an earlier one, but none able to claim any ultimate moral justification.Nietzsche (part 2)
in N2 the appearance/reality distinction is transposed into the real world of human experience.
art lies: "art is the lie that sanctifies and the will-to-deception then has a good conscience". art beautifies life by interposing a veil of lies between us and truths about the world that we cannot bear (note: Wilde said the same thing contemporaneously in his The Decay of Lying).
life-affirming valuations: it's the acknowledgement of the instincts of the SELF: they make our spirit soar, we become proud of ourselves.
life-denying valuations: we fall prey to weakness, to bad faith, do double morality.
master morality: master morality is nobility, qualities of open-mindedness, courage, truthfulness, trust, and an accurate sense of one's self-worth. the master is rooted in self-affirmation & self-glorification of life.
slave morality: the inverse of master morality, based on resentiment. self-denying, pessimistic, cynical, subservient to norms, slave morality devalues what the master values and the slave does not have.
art and the artist: art is a transformative and interpretative activity. art includes all creation and imposition of forms. the artist finds and creates new meaning.
morality as a constraint: every morality involves the regulation of behavior through the repression of (at least some) instincts.
morality is a special case of the aesthetic. morality constraints, art liberates
Self-poesis: one is and becomes one's work of art. to achieve self-poesis one has to be ruthless with oneself, both in recognizing ones own bad faith (the different ways that we lie to ourselves) and fixing it by reinterpreting it.
christian/pagan dichotomy: the christian construes himself as an immortal soul, while the pagan understands all suffering in relation to the spectator of it. the pagan sees life as a movie he has to play.
amor fati: love your fate.
Monday, April 17, 2017
animals & rights (triff's notes)
speciecism: the view that moral rights are extended only to human animals.
human exceptionalism: humans have uniquely distinct capacities and it is on the basis of these capacities that humans have moral status over other animals.
person properties: reason, free will, sentience, autonomy. most animals lack the human level of reason and free will. though a dolphin, a gorilla and an elephant can be considered quasi-persons, dogs are getting more attention now (but a dog doesn't have the brain of a dolphin or a primate).*
animals however have sentience.
legal persons: animals don't respond for themselves.
animal rights' problems:
1- the problem with animal rights is that they can't defend these (a right to life would be paramount. if so, we can't eat them).
2- the scalar** problem: do we extend rights to all animals? it would be impossible. imagine killing insects that attack food, or livestock. just mammals? if so, why not fish, birds, insects? some have suggested "danger of extinction" as a scalar.
in the end humans would have to invoke exceptionalism.
animal welfare: it's the concern for the treatment of food animals, both during their lives and when they are slaughtered. animals should be pre-stunned prior to slaughter (there are exemptions for religious groups to provide kosher (or shechita) and halal meat.
_________________
*primates have a degree of the following: episodic memory, self-consciousness, self-knowing, self agency, referential and intentional communication, mental time-travel, numerosity, sequential learning, meditational learning, mental state modeling, visual perspective taking, understanding the experiences of others, intentional action, planning, imagination, empathy, metacognition, working memory, decision-making, imitation, deferred imitation, emulation, innovation, material, social, and symbolic culture, cross-modal perception, tool-use, tool-making, cause-and-effect.
human exceptionalism: humans have uniquely distinct capacities and it is on the basis of these capacities that humans have moral status over other animals.
person properties: reason, free will, sentience, autonomy. most animals lack the human level of reason and free will. though a dolphin, a gorilla and an elephant can be considered quasi-persons, dogs are getting more attention now (but a dog doesn't have the brain of a dolphin or a primate).*
animals however have sentience.
legal persons: animals don't respond for themselves.
animal rights' problems:
1- the problem with animal rights is that they can't defend these (a right to life would be paramount. if so, we can't eat them).
2- the scalar** problem: do we extend rights to all animals? it would be impossible. imagine killing insects that attack food, or livestock. just mammals? if so, why not fish, birds, insects? some have suggested "danger of extinction" as a scalar.
in the end humans would have to invoke exceptionalism.
animal welfare: it's the concern for the treatment of food animals, both during their lives and when they are slaughtered. animals should be pre-stunned prior to slaughter (there are exemptions for religious groups to provide kosher (or shechita) and halal meat.
_________________
*primates have a degree of the following: episodic memory, self-consciousness, self-knowing, self agency, referential and intentional communication, mental time-travel, numerosity, sequential learning, meditational learning, mental state modeling, visual perspective taking, understanding the experiences of others, intentional action, planning, imagination, empathy, metacognition, working memory, decision-making, imitation, deferred imitation, emulation, innovation, material, social, and symbolic culture, cross-modal perception, tool-use, tool-making, cause-and-effect.
** We can think of interests as scalar; crucial interests are weightier than important interests, important interests are weightier than replaceable interests, and all are weightier than trivial interests or mere whims. When there is a conflict of interests, crucial interests will always override important interests, important interests will always override replaceable interests, etc. So if an animal has an interest in not suffering, which is arguably a crucial interest, or at least an important one, and a person has an interest in eating that animal when there are other things to eat, meaning that interest is replaceable, then the animal has the stronger interest and it would be wrong to violate that interest by killing the animal for food if there is another source of food available.
Sunday, April 16, 2017
the 3 moments in the aesthetics of Nietzsche
let's start with Nietzsche idea of Will (der Wille): a blind force which constantly strives for an unattainable resolution, and so serves merely to perpetuate further meaningless striving.
contrast the will to the world (der Welt). the world is therefore the pain of irreparable lack (what existentialists called "absurd"). the multiple refraction of the world constitute the world of representation and experience.
Next, N contraposes the "Dionysian" and the "Apollonian" principles. Here we get an idea of his aesthetics. the Dionysian is the "primordial unity" of things, a state of "intoxication" in which the deepest and most "horrible truths" of the world are glimpsed.
(side note Kant had called something similar "sublime", i.e., he overwhelming, awe-inspiring and yet elevating experience of things which exceed rational apprehension).
opposed to the Dionysian we get the Apollonian, which stands for the illusory, "mere appearance" of things. Apollonian indicates a dream-like state in which all knowledge is knowledge of surfaces. Aesthetically speaking, the Apollonian is the beautiful as intelligible, as conforming to the capacities of the representing intellect.
N's claim is that both Dionysian and Apollonian principles cross-fertilize one another, so that the metaphysical horror of existence is simultaneously revealed and made bearable. The ravages of intoxication are transfigured by dreams, and the sublime is beautified by the veil of appearances. Tragedy (especially Greek tragedy) reconciles both existence and the world.
Nietzsche (part 2)
In Twilight of the Idols N writes: "if we abolished the real world: what world is left? the apparent world perhaps?. . . But no! with the real world we have also abolished the apparent world!".
now the appearance/reality distinction falls squarely within the ordinary, everyday world of actual experience.
so, in N2 the appearance/reality distinction is transposed into the real world of human experience.
this he calls human too human struggling between lies and truth.
the lie that performs the task of making life bearable. "art is the lie that sanctifies and the will-to-deception then has a good conscience". art beautifies life by interposing a veil of lies between us and truths about the world that we cannot bear (note: Wilde said the same thing contemporaneously in his The Decay of Lying).
for N2 art-as-lie is structurally identical to the Apollonian... in a famous unpublished note of 1888, he writes: "we possess art lest we perish of the truth."
N2 groups moralities under two heads: "noble morality," is rooted in a triumphant Yes". it's self-affirmation, self-glorification of life." on the other hand we have "slave morality," which from the "outset says No."
now art not morality, is the most fundamental symptom of a psychological economy. why art?
*art comprises "all creation and imposition of forms." the artist is the one that finds new meaning in relation to the whole. art includes every transformative, interpretative activity. its moral domain is "narrower" than the aesthetic. so, morality is simply a special case of the aesthetic.
*morality is a constraint: every morality involves the regulation of behavior through the repression of (at least some) instincts (Freud later uses this as his überich or superego).
At the lower limit, N2 places the noble moralities of human prehistory, in these man/animals we find the smallest degree of repression consistent with self-consciousness.
Art, liberates all these (repressed) forces.
Nietzsche part 3
N3! explores the idea of self-poesis or self-stylization = you're your own work of art.
to achieve self-poesis one has to be ruthless with oneself, both in recognizing one’s own bad faith (the different ways that we lie to ourselves) and fixing it by reinterpreting it.
N3's motto is truth is ugly but art comes to the rescue.
self-poesis avoids complacency. we need to interpret ourselves, but interpretation is BIASED. we lie to ourselves perpetuating stagnation. uninterpreted life is worse: we remain ignorant. so, the challenge, is to interpret suffering correctly. now N3 explains the difference between christian and pagan self-poesis.
the christian construes himself as an immortal soul while the pagan understands all suffering in relation to the spectator of it. the pagan sees life as a movie he has to play. this is N3's idea of AMOR FATI ("love your fate"). this is close to triff's REALITY IS PERFECT mantra.
so, the christian's version of life is a form of poverty of life. the pagan, by contrast has a nobler approach because it looks at life in the face. why? because suffering is LIFE AFFIRMING. a symptom of abundance.
contrast the will to the world (der Welt). the world is therefore the pain of irreparable lack (what existentialists called "absurd"). the multiple refraction of the world constitute the world of representation and experience.
Next, N contraposes the "Dionysian" and the "Apollonian" principles. Here we get an idea of his aesthetics. the Dionysian is the "primordial unity" of things, a state of "intoxication" in which the deepest and most "horrible truths" of the world are glimpsed.
(side note Kant had called something similar "sublime", i.e., he overwhelming, awe-inspiring and yet elevating experience of things which exceed rational apprehension).
opposed to the Dionysian we get the Apollonian, which stands for the illusory, "mere appearance" of things. Apollonian indicates a dream-like state in which all knowledge is knowledge of surfaces. Aesthetically speaking, the Apollonian is the beautiful as intelligible, as conforming to the capacities of the representing intellect.
N's claim is that both Dionysian and Apollonian principles cross-fertilize one another, so that the metaphysical horror of existence is simultaneously revealed and made bearable. The ravages of intoxication are transfigured by dreams, and the sublime is beautified by the veil of appearances. Tragedy (especially Greek tragedy) reconciles both existence and the world.
Nietzsche (part 2)
In Twilight of the Idols N writes: "if we abolished the real world: what world is left? the apparent world perhaps?. . . But no! with the real world we have also abolished the apparent world!".
now the appearance/reality distinction falls squarely within the ordinary, everyday world of actual experience.
so, in N2 the appearance/reality distinction is transposed into the real world of human experience.
this he calls human too human struggling between lies and truth.
the lie that performs the task of making life bearable. "art is the lie that sanctifies and the will-to-deception then has a good conscience". art beautifies life by interposing a veil of lies between us and truths about the world that we cannot bear (note: Wilde said the same thing contemporaneously in his The Decay of Lying).
for N2 art-as-lie is structurally identical to the Apollonian... in a famous unpublished note of 1888, he writes: "we possess art lest we perish of the truth."
What does all art do? does it not praise? does it not glorify? does it not select? does it not highlight? By doing all this it strengthens or weakens certain valuations. . . Is this no more than an incidental? an accident?Something in which the instinct of the artist has no part whatever? Or isit not rather the prerequisite for the artist’s being an artist at all . . . Is this basic instinct directed towards art, or is it not rather directed towards the meaning of art, which is life?N2 uses an arsenal of metaphors to make this point: life-affirming valuations and life-denying valuations, superabundance and hunger, ascending life and declining life, strength and weakness, health and sickness.
N2 groups moralities under two heads: "noble morality," is rooted in a triumphant Yes". it's self-affirmation, self-glorification of life." on the other hand we have "slave morality," which from the "outset says No."
now art not morality, is the most fundamental symptom of a psychological economy. why art?
*art comprises "all creation and imposition of forms." the artist is the one that finds new meaning in relation to the whole. art includes every transformative, interpretative activity. its moral domain is "narrower" than the aesthetic. so, morality is simply a special case of the aesthetic.
*morality is a constraint: every morality involves the regulation of behavior through the repression of (at least some) instincts (Freud later uses this as his überich or superego).
At the lower limit, N2 places the noble moralities of human prehistory, in these man/animals we find the smallest degree of repression consistent with self-consciousness.
Art, liberates all these (repressed) forces.
Nietzsche part 3
N3! explores the idea of self-poesis or self-stylization = you're your own work of art.
to achieve self-poesis one has to be ruthless with oneself, both in recognizing one’s own bad faith (the different ways that we lie to ourselves) and fixing it by reinterpreting it.
N3's motto is truth is ugly but art comes to the rescue.
self-poesis avoids complacency. we need to interpret ourselves, but interpretation is BIASED. we lie to ourselves perpetuating stagnation. uninterpreted life is worse: we remain ignorant. so, the challenge, is to interpret suffering correctly. now N3 explains the difference between christian and pagan self-poesis.
the christian construes himself as an immortal soul while the pagan understands all suffering in relation to the spectator of it. the pagan sees life as a movie he has to play. this is N3's idea of AMOR FATI ("love your fate"). this is close to triff's REALITY IS PERFECT mantra.
so, the christian's version of life is a form of poverty of life. the pagan, by contrast has a nobler approach because it looks at life in the face. why? because suffering is LIFE AFFIRMING. a symptom of abundance.
Tuesday, April 11, 2017
triff's notes on rights
what is a right? a right is a normative rule about what is owed of people or allowed of people.
rights express a certain relationship between two parties, the rights
holders and the rights observers. Rights have two faces, depending on
whether they are viewed from the perspective of the person who has the right or
from the POV of the person who ought to respect the right.
what's an entitlement: a permission to act from the standpoint of the rights holder (it imposes a duty on others to oblige).
natural rights: are "natural" in the sense of "not man-made", one owns them because one belongs in the HOMO SAPIENS club. therefore, they are universal. they apply to all people, and do not depend from the laws of any specific society. they are inherent.
absolute right: an absolute right is the
strongest right, which cannot be overridden by any other
types of considerations (e.g., utility or expedience) that do not involve rights. example, right to freedom. imagine the right of a city to impose levies on my property for the construction of a project that benefits a section of the town my property is not on. in this case my right to freedom overrules the rights of the town to demand my acquiescence.
prima facie rights: it means that at first sight, the right appears applicable but upon
closer scrutiny, we may decide that other considerations outweigh it.
legal rights: these are based on a society's customs, laws, statutes or actions by legislatures the right to vote (a felon may not enjoy that right).
negative rights: these are permissions not to do things, or entitlements
to be left alone. another way of looking at it is that negative rights are natural. Lockean proviso of rights: right to freedom, private property and pursuit of happiness.
positive right: is an entitlement ("one is entitled to") a specific service or treatment from others, and these rights have been called positive rights. example: welfare rights. see that positive rights are rights one consents in others having. one is not "born with them".
once again: a difference between negative and positive rights is that a negative right forbids others from acting against the right holder, while a positive right obligates others to act with respect to the right holder. If you think of the Kantian categorical imperative, a negative right can be associated with perfect duties (one is obligated to perform them) while positive rights are connected to imperfect duties (one is not obligated to perform them).
political rights: they protect individuals' freedoms from infringement by governments, social organizations, and other private individuals. they include peoples' physical and mental integrity, life, and safety. they include: protection from discrimination on grounds such as race, gender, sexual orientation, national origin, color, age, political affiliation, ethnicity, religion, and disability. they also include negative rights such as freedom of thought, speech, religion, press, assembly, and movement.
from the previous definition of political rights, one infers the rights to equal opportunity.
right to equal opportunity: is a state of fairness in society (in education or employment or housing) where people are treated similarly, unhampered by artificial barriers or prejudices or preferences, except when particular distinctions can be explicitly justified.
example: take a person applying for a job. 1- her chances should be based solely on her qualifications. she should not be discriminated against because of position, connections, religion, sex, ethnicity, race, age, gender identity, or sexual orientation.
making a distinction based on anything other than her qualifications would amount to denying others of equal opportunity.
Monday, April 10, 2017
homework chapter 43, architecture
1. what is the representational theory of architecture, pros and cons.
2. what is the semantic theory, pros and cons.
3. what is content and the aesthetics of architecture?
4. what is the difference between aesthetic and austere functionalism?
5. what's Scruton's account regarding the difference between experiencing and judging architecture?
2. what is the semantic theory, pros and cons.
3. what is content and the aesthetics of architecture?
4. what is the difference between aesthetic and austere functionalism?
5. what's Scruton's account regarding the difference between experiencing and judging architecture?
Tuesday, March 28, 2017
chapter 6 ethics of duty
Kant's Formalism: Formalism is the theory that AIR because of the action's form.
1. Kant’s Categorical Imperative: What makes an action right is that everyone can act on it (which yields universalizability), and you'd have everyone acting on it (which yields reversibility: Golden Rule).
2. Duties: obligations one has by virtue of one's embeddedness in society. Perfect duty: A duty that must always be performed no matter what. And imperfect duties.
click here for my notes on Kantian ethics + categorical imperative.
3. Kant's Second Formulation: TREAT PEOPLE AS ENDS, NEVER AS MEANS TO AN END. Problems with the second formulation? C/A The problem with Kantian theory is the problem of exceptions to the rule. Should I keep a promise even if it puts someone's life in danger? Then, some times we have to treat people as means to ends.
click here for my notes on Kant's second formulation.
1. Kant’s Categorical Imperative: What makes an action right is that everyone can act on it (which yields universalizability), and you'd have everyone acting on it (which yields reversibility: Golden Rule).
2. Duties: obligations one has by virtue of one's embeddedness in society. Perfect duty: A duty that must always be performed no matter what. And imperfect duties.
click here for my notes on Kantian ethics + categorical imperative.
3. Kant's Second Formulation: TREAT PEOPLE AS ENDS, NEVER AS MEANS TO AN END. Problems with the second formulation? C/A The problem with Kantian theory is the problem of exceptions to the rule. Should I keep a promise even if it puts someone's life in danger? Then, some times we have to treat people as means to ends.
click here for my notes on Kant's second formulation.
Monday, March 27, 2017
phi 2801 topics for Exam #3 (painting, film, music)
Picasso's portrait of Gertrude Stein
Twofoldness theory: This kind of seeing is what Richard Wollheim calls "seeing-in". We sometimes see figures in clouds or water stains or ink blots, and when we do, our experience amalgamates features of the "design" with features of the presented object. Awareness of one does not annihilate awareness of the other; rather, the two aspects blend into one "twofold" experience.
Arguments against film as art: Roger Scruton and Theodor Adorno suggest that the fictional dimension of a film is perverted by the mechanical and/or commercial nature of film-making, this commercial function conflicting with the‘autonomous’ development necessary for art's idea of purposelessness.
Einseinstein's montage: The concept refers to the creation of new, higher levels of meaning and experience through the juxtaposition of any more basic elements. Eisenstein discriminated different types of montage and elaborated the notion in numerous directions. Here are some of the different montage ideas he explores in his book Film (1957).
Arnheim's Gestalt aesthetics: This is the definition of art as embodying "purposiveness without purpose": the notion that aesthetic objects (whether natural or man-made) are distinctive because of the manner in which they are cut loose from practical ends. This disengagement from practical purposes enables aesthetic objects to be used for purely perceptual or contemplative purposes: roughly speaking, the aesthetic object becomes an occasion for reflection rather than action.
Benjamin's idea of aura: According to Walter Benjamin, the traditional artistic object possesses an "aura" which arises from the fact that the object is unique. Benjamin sees art as a descendant of religion; the aura of an artistic object is the secularized equivalent of the mystical & religious icons and artifacts. The advent of techniques of mechanical reproduction sweeps away any such aura, by undermining the uniqueness of the artistic object. The thousands of digital reproductions of the The Mona Lisa become degraded tokens of the original painting.
Expressionist theory: People value music because of how it makes us feel, i.e., its ability to evoke emotion in us.
Representationalism: Music is essentially iconic. Music is an imitation or representation of, and thereby refers to extramusical human emotions, character, and ideas. Referentialism is NOT EXPRESSIONISM. Saying that a piece of music makes us sad (Expressionism) need not be taken to imply, or to be implied by, saying that the music is an imitation of sadness or that IT is about sadness (Representationalism).
Formalism in music: There are many non-referential aspects of music with aesthetic power, such as rhythm, counterpoint, motivic relationships, harmonic structure, and so on.
Kivy's expressionistic theory of music: Kivy rejects simple arousalism. When he says: "It is quite compatible with my perceiving the most intense emotions in a work of art that I not myself be moved in the least". Rather, the listener’s response to expressive character is one of recognition: it is a cognitive rather than affective response. The recognition of expressiveness happens via recognition of music’s resemblance to the human behavioral expression of emotion. If a piece is sad it is because one perceived a structural similarity between sad music and the behavioral expression of sadness (for example, one imagine hopeless helpless moods. Kivy is attracted to Plato's idea of music as imitation.
Walton's representationalist version: According to Walton, as the listener imagines the experience of musical sounds to be an experiencing of particular emotion. Music stimulates the listener's imaginative experience, whether it's conflict and resolution, motion and rest. But the fictional worlds induced by music are far less determinate than those in painting and literature.
Goodman's semantic theory of reference: According to Goodman a sad piece of music metaphorically possesses the property of sadness and exemplifies that metaphorical property. Goodman is NOT saying that sadness is a property music has. INSTEAD that sad music bears a symbolic relation to the property of sadness.
HIGH & LOW ART
High art: painting, sculpture, performance, photo, film, classical music, jazz, ballet, modern dance, theater.
Low art: crafts, video, folk dance, break dance, rock, rap, vaudeville, burlesque.
Modern High Art: All the 20th century "ISMS": Cubism, Fauvism, Expressionism, Futurism, Dadaism, Surrealism, Conteptual Art, Minimalism, Abstractionism, etc.
A taste public: According to Herbert Gans, users generally make choices of values and taste as a result of their cultural content. There are five taste publics: high culture, upper-middle culture, lower-middle culture, low culture and folk low culture.
PAINTING
1. Mimetic theory: in mimetic theory art imitates an idea by means of representing. so the value of a painting derives from what it
represents. we say that the painting has a valuable aesthetic property when it represents something as having that property. Example: the portrait of Stein (above) accurately represents her as stern and stout, or inaccurately represent her as timid and delicately built.
2. Formalism theory: it originates in the early twentieth century by the art critics Clive Bell and Roger Fry as a way to accommodate abstract art. Both critics distinguish "plastic form" from its "illustrative content." Form comprises lines, shapes, and colors (and the relations between them) of its design. For most formalists, plastic form also comprises the three-dimensional shapes and planes represented in a painting (and relations among them).
3. Parallelism theory: Defended by art historian E. H. Gombrich (1969). Painting either exhibits a form design (e.g. its flat surface composed of brush strokes, marks and lines) OR its content (the three-dimensional scene it represents), but never both at one and the same time. This is analogous to the way we can see Wittgenstein duck/rabbit drawing, which he called "seeing-as."
Twofoldness theory: This kind of seeing is what Richard Wollheim calls "seeing-in". We sometimes see figures in clouds or water stains or ink blots, and when we do, our experience amalgamates features of the "design" with features of the presented object. Awareness of one does not annihilate awareness of the other; rather, the two aspects blend into one "twofold" experience.
FILM
Arguments against film as art: Roger Scruton and Theodor Adorno suggest that the fictional dimension of a film is perverted by the mechanical and/or commercial nature of film-making, this commercial function conflicting with the‘autonomous’ development necessary for art's idea of purposelessness.
Einseinstein's montage: The concept refers to the creation of new, higher levels of meaning and experience through the juxtaposition of any more basic elements. Eisenstein discriminated different types of montage and elaborated the notion in numerous directions. Here are some of the different montage ideas he explores in his book Film (1957).
Arnheim's Gestalt aesthetics: This is the definition of art as embodying "purposiveness without purpose": the notion that aesthetic objects (whether natural or man-made) are distinctive because of the manner in which they are cut loose from practical ends. This disengagement from practical purposes enables aesthetic objects to be used for purely perceptual or contemplative purposes: roughly speaking, the aesthetic object becomes an occasion for reflection rather than action.
Benjamin's idea of aura: According to Walter Benjamin, the traditional artistic object possesses an "aura" which arises from the fact that the object is unique. Benjamin sees art as a descendant of religion; the aura of an artistic object is the secularized equivalent of the mystical & religious icons and artifacts. The advent of techniques of mechanical reproduction sweeps away any such aura, by undermining the uniqueness of the artistic object. The thousands of digital reproductions of the The Mona Lisa become degraded tokens of the original painting.
MUSIC
Expressionist theory: People value music because of how it makes us feel, i.e., its ability to evoke emotion in us.
Representationalism: Music is essentially iconic. Music is an imitation or representation of, and thereby refers to extramusical human emotions, character, and ideas. Referentialism is NOT EXPRESSIONISM. Saying that a piece of music makes us sad (Expressionism) need not be taken to imply, or to be implied by, saying that the music is an imitation of sadness or that IT is about sadness (Representationalism).
Formalism in music: There are many non-referential aspects of music with aesthetic power, such as rhythm, counterpoint, motivic relationships, harmonic structure, and so on.
Kivy's expressionistic theory of music: Kivy rejects simple arousalism. When he says: "It is quite compatible with my perceiving the most intense emotions in a work of art that I not myself be moved in the least". Rather, the listener’s response to expressive character is one of recognition: it is a cognitive rather than affective response. The recognition of expressiveness happens via recognition of music’s resemblance to the human behavioral expression of emotion. If a piece is sad it is because one perceived a structural similarity between sad music and the behavioral expression of sadness (for example, one imagine hopeless helpless moods. Kivy is attracted to Plato's idea of music as imitation.
Walton's representationalist version: According to Walton, as the listener imagines the experience of musical sounds to be an experiencing of particular emotion. Music stimulates the listener's imaginative experience, whether it's conflict and resolution, motion and rest. But the fictional worlds induced by music are far less determinate than those in painting and literature.
Goodman's semantic theory of reference: According to Goodman a sad piece of music metaphorically possesses the property of sadness and exemplifies that metaphorical property. Goodman is NOT saying that sadness is a property music has. INSTEAD that sad music bears a symbolic relation to the property of sadness.
HIGH & LOW ART
High art: painting, sculpture, performance, photo, film, classical music, jazz, ballet, modern dance, theater.
Low art: crafts, video, folk dance, break dance, rock, rap, vaudeville, burlesque.
Modern High Art: All the 20th century "ISMS": Cubism, Fauvism, Expressionism, Futurism, Dadaism, Surrealism, Conteptual Art, Minimalism, Abstractionism, etc.
A taste public: According to Herbert Gans, users generally make choices of values and taste as a result of their cultural content. There are five taste publics: high culture, upper-middle culture, lower-middle culture, low culture and folk low culture.
Tolerant hierarchicalism: Popular art is dominated by a need for familiar forms, an intolerance of ambiguity, a tendency toward easiness and indulgence in stimulated emotion. In spite of all this there is a time and place for popular art.
Intolerant hierarchicalism: Popular art (low) is essentially flawed. A rare view.
Pluralism: There are two classes of works, but he finds each group significantly valuable. Each group has different aesthetic needs.
Nöel Carroll's defense of HIGH:
1. Massification: In order to appeal to a mass audience, the mass work must gravitate “toward the lowest level of taste, sensitivity, and intelligence”. This is not compatible with distinctive expression (unique expression flowing from a personal vision), yet distinctive expression is what art should aim at.
2. Passivity: Genuine art should require active spectatorship. But mass or popular art, in order to generate broad appeal and accessibility, abets passive reception. It is easy and safe.
3. The formulaic: A common complaint is that popular or mass art is formulaic,whereas real art is original in its conception and in its goals.
4. Autonomy: Many theorists view the arts from the perspective of political. Adorno, for example, held that a central function of art is to provide a critical perspective on society; its goal should be liberation from the social,economic and political realities.
Thursday, April 14, 2016
how to present the final exam
Phi 2604 Critical Thinking and Ethics
Doe, John
Final Exam
Times New Roman p. 12
double spaced answers.
just the answers, not the questions.
Doe, John
Final Exam
Times New Roman p. 12
double spaced answers.
just the answers, not the questions.
Final Exam chapter 27
1- Peter Singer is talking about Bengal, which he calls "the present situation," but that was in 1972. Can you think of a place in the world right now that fits that "emergency" profile? Which? If so, what (following Singer) would that prove?
2- What is Singer's thesis in chapter 27 regarding affluence and famine?
3- Singer writes: "... if it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening without thereby sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, we ought, morally to do it." What does he mean? Do you agree or disagree, explain your answer.
4- Singer says the following: "... If we accept any principle of impartiality, universalizability, equality or whatever, we cannot discriminate against someone merely because he is far away from us (or we are away from him)." What is he driving at?
5- Singer makes an argument on p. 248 for giving more than $5 to the Bengal Relief Fund. What is it? Do you agree? Why?
6- What does "supererogatory" mean? On p. 251 Singer talks about "common distinction between duty and supererogation." What does he mean?
7- Are you acting immorally by buying a luxury car while others are starving? Justify your answer.
8- Are you acting immorally by paying college tuition for your children while other children have no opportunity for any schooling? Justify your answer.
9- Do you have a moral obligation to try to alleviate extreme poverty in your own country before attempting to do so in other countries? Explain.
2- What is Singer's thesis in chapter 27 regarding affluence and famine?
3- Singer writes: "... if it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening without thereby sacrificing anything of comparable moral importance, we ought, morally to do it." What does he mean? Do you agree or disagree, explain your answer.
4- Singer says the following: "... If we accept any principle of impartiality, universalizability, equality or whatever, we cannot discriminate against someone merely because he is far away from us (or we are away from him)." What is he driving at?
5- Singer makes an argument on p. 248 for giving more than $5 to the Bengal Relief Fund. What is it? Do you agree? Why?
6- What does "supererogatory" mean? On p. 251 Singer talks about "common distinction between duty and supererogation." What does he mean?
7- Are you acting immorally by buying a luxury car while others are starving? Justify your answer.
8- Are you acting immorally by paying college tuition for your children while other children have no opportunity for any schooling? Justify your answer.
9- Do you have a moral obligation to try to alleviate extreme poverty in your own country before attempting to do so in other countries? Explain.
Tuesday, April 12, 2016
Tuesday, April 5, 2016
HW, chapter 29
1- What is Walzer's definition for terrorism? p. 266
2- Define the "indirect approach."
3- Is terrorism a "civilian strategy"?
4- The increasing use of terror represents a breakdown of what political code?
5- on p. 268 there are three cases. what is common to all three?
6- On p. 268, Walzer mentions three categories. Go over these.
7- Which people do terrorists try to kill? p. 269
8- Is there a difference between the "Russian Revolutionaries"? the "Stern Gang"? and the IRA? ISIS?
9-Compare these on q. 8 with the NFL's campaign in Viet-Nam
Explain Walzer's distinction of "targets" on p. 271.
2- Define the "indirect approach."
3- Is terrorism a "civilian strategy"?
4- The increasing use of terror represents a breakdown of what political code?
5- on p. 268 there are three cases. what is common to all three?
6- On p. 268, Walzer mentions three categories. Go over these.
7- Which people do terrorists try to kill? p. 269
8- Is there a difference between the "Russian Revolutionaries"? the "Stern Gang"? and the IRA? ISIS?
9-Compare these on q. 8 with the NFL's campaign in Viet-Nam
Explain Walzer's distinction of "targets" on p. 271.
homework #7, chapter 7
a) right, b) entitlement, c) claims, d) duties, e) responsabilities,
2. what is a negative right? give examples.
3. what is a positive right? same as above.
4. As per classification of rights define: a) absolute rights, b) prima facie rights, c) scalar rights,
More interpretive questions,
5- do you agree with Gregory Vlastos (page 199), that all rights are prima facie rights? (think of scalar rights to inform your question)
6- do you agree that there are absolute rights?
7- since legal rights and moral rights are different is one more "inherent" than the other?
8- how do you justify someone having a "natural" right to freedom? (think of your own freedom)
9- some people, ideologies and governments believe that rights are not inherent, but given. do you agree or disagree and if so, explain.
10- you think animals deserve rights? (if so, should you kill them?)
read this link about euthanasia
11- is involuntary euthanasia moral?
12- do you believe there's something called "dying with dignity"?
for question 12 read this (scroll to "who is at risk for suicide")
6- do you agree that there are absolute rights?
7- since legal rights and moral rights are different is one more "inherent" than the other?
8- how do you justify someone having a "natural" right to freedom? (think of your own freedom)
9- some people, ideologies and governments believe that rights are not inherent, but given. do you agree or disagree and if so, explain.
10- you think animals deserve rights? (if so, should you kill them?)
read this link about euthanasia
11- is involuntary euthanasia moral?
12- do you believe there's something called "dying with dignity"?
for question 12 read this (scroll to "who is at risk for suicide")
Monday, March 28, 2016
HW, Chapter 30
1- what's mcpherson´s definition of terrorism?
2- on p. 276 mcpherson makes a point about war deaths and combatants vs. non-combatants. why?
3- then he cits article 51 of the geneva conventions to address what he calls "proportionality principle" and offers two reasons. comment these.
4- what's mcpherson's conclusion regarding the "proportionality principle"?
5- is there a difference between nelson mandela's terrorist activist and the terrorism defended by ISIS? explain your answer.
6- what's mandela's justification of terrorism? do you agree?
7- read mcpherson's last paragraph on p. 279. do you agree? explain your answer.
2- on p. 276 mcpherson makes a point about war deaths and combatants vs. non-combatants. why?
3- then he cits article 51 of the geneva conventions to address what he calls "proportionality principle" and offers two reasons. comment these.
4- what's mcpherson's conclusion regarding the "proportionality principle"?
5- is there a difference between nelson mandela's terrorist activist and the terrorism defended by ISIS? explain your answer.
6- what's mandela's justification of terrorism? do you agree?
7- read mcpherson's last paragraph on p. 279. do you agree? explain your answer.
Tuesday, March 22, 2016
Exam #2 (Chapter 37)
Bring this test, printed, headed (top, left hand-side) Times New Roman, p. 12,
Heading:
Phi 2604, Test #2
T,R 8:25am
Doe, John
____________________________________
1- What is the main argument of Tom Regan's "The Case for Animal Rigthts"?
2- Mary Anne Warren disagrees with Regan. Why?
personp= a being with 1. reason, 2. sentience, 3. autonomy, 4. free will?
3- what is the "weak animal rights" position?
4- Mary Anne Warren takes Regan's argument into three stages: mention each one.
5- Take this of the best known animal rights defender utilitarian Peter Singer:
6- What does "inherent value" mean?
7- How does a "perfectionist theory" is adumbrated into the "inherent value" argument according to Regan?
8- What is the "respect principle"?
9- From Regan's perspective, do the trees in a forest have inherent values? why?
10- Do you see a difference between "value" and "right"? Explain.
11- Do you agree with Mary Anne Warren argument in p. 348 of how much is enough?
12- What is Regan's answer to the objection of how far down the biological ladder should we go in granting rights?
13- Do you take the following quote by Mary Ann Warren as a defense of animal rights? If so, what kind?
Heading:
Phi 2604, Test #2
T,R 8:25am
Doe, John
____________________________________
1- What is the main argument of Tom Regan's "The Case for Animal Rigthts"?
2- Mary Anne Warren disagrees with Regan. Why?
personp= a being with 1. reason, 2. sentience, 3. autonomy, 4. free will?
3- what is the "weak animal rights" position?
4- Mary Anne Warren takes Regan's argument into three stages: mention each one.
5- Take this of the best known animal rights defender utilitarian Peter Singer:
In "Animal Liberation," Singer argues that in assessing the consequences of our actions, it is necessary to take the interests of animals seriously and to weigh any adverse affect on those interests from human actions as part of the consequences of those actions. Humans have failed to do this, Singer argues, because of a species bias, or speciesism, that results in a systematic devaluation of animal interests. Singer claims that speciesism is no more morally defensible than racism, sexism, or other forms of discrimination that arbitrarily exclude humans from the scope of moral concern.Do you agree with Singer that our treatment of animals shows this kind of species bias? If so, provide one example.
6- What does "inherent value" mean?
7- How does a "perfectionist theory" is adumbrated into the "inherent value" argument according to Regan?
8- What is the "respect principle"?
9- From Regan's perspective, do the trees in a forest have inherent values? why?
10- Do you see a difference between "value" and "right"? Explain.
11- Do you agree with Mary Anne Warren argument in p. 348 of how much is enough?
12- What is Regan's answer to the objection of how far down the biological ladder should we go in granting rights?
13- Do you take the following quote by Mary Ann Warren as a defense of animal rights? If so, what kind?
The weak animal rights position seems an unstable compromise between the bold claim that animals have the same basic moral rights that we do and the common view that animals have no rights at all.14- Then on p. 352, Mary Ann Warren declares this:
The most plausible alternative to the view that animals have moral rights is that although they do not have rights, we are, however obligated not to be cruel to them.Is she definitely defending this position as a substitute to Regan's? If think not, what is she saying?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)