faith vs. reason

click here for more information,

Cultural relativism, deep values, peripheral values, defensible moral judgments,

Moral realism: morality is real; it's rooted in reality. It's a product of homo sapiens interaction with their environment. Example. Killing an animal for sustenance is not the same as killing it for fun. The difference between the two is proportionality. The first brought us animal farming, and the second is a sadistic practice condemned in ancient traditions. Animals were our early totems. An animal's life is worthy (homos are animals too).

This brings up the idea of moral standards. 

1. Moral vs. non-moral standards: Human behavior of fundamental consequence for human welfare. 

2. Morality and etiquette (etiquette are codes of polite behavior in different societies). If a person doesn't shower, he's somewhat unpolite, but we don't call him immoral.

Etiquette is quite important and part of a culture's sacred rites. Each culture's etiquette must be respected. The ancient saying goes: "When in Rome, do as Romans do." In Confucian Philosophy, this is known as LI. 

3. Morality and Law (not everything that is legal is moral; for example, slavery was legal but not moral).

SO WE WANT MORALITY TO BE ALWAYS ABOVE LEGALITY.

4. Are there moral standards? YES. Click here for more of my lecture on moral knowledge,

Moral relativism points to two main arguments: Morals are relative to...

History: Moral standards of the past are relative to time/space. For example, Rome was a slavery/bound society. In America during the 18th century, slavery was legal. 

HERE IS THE ARGUMENT: As a moral realist, how do I approach the issue when I know that slavery is wrong in 2023? No contradiction exists in a moral action being right in 2023 and not in 1723. Why not? It's not contradictory. Remember the definition "something cannot be both right and wrong at the same time". But this is not the same time.

Another way at it is this: Slavery would still be wrong in 1723, only they couldn't see it. WHY NOT? They miss the 300 years of development of ideas we enjoy in 2023. That's called Weltanschauung (or worldview). The same argument can be made concerning our future in 2323 (300 years into the future). There will be issues in 2323 that cannot be seen today in 2023. Are we wrong? PROBABLY. That doesn't mean that we are wrong about what we don't know.......... YET. 

5. Cultural relativism: what makes an action right for the members of a culture is that it's approved by the culture. 

Counterarguments to subjective and cultural relativism: 1—Both theories are self-contradictory; an action cannot be both right and wrong at the same time. 

Difference between fundamental moral values SHARED BY MOST CULTURES (such as killing your own, stealing from the group, adultery, respecting the elders, incest, etc), and ETIQUETTE values (fashion, marrying customs, eating, rituals, etc).

7. Defensible Moral Judgments: Moral judgments = Moral norms + facts (what this means is that we want our moral judgments to be defensible. We want to be able to give reasons for why we believe what we believe. 

8. Are there universal moral principles? YES. And one can point to two important principles. Principle of justice: Treat people fairly. Principle of mercy: Avoid unnecessary suffering.

cause and effect for exam 1

1. A causes B (direct causation). if A is necessary and sufficient for B, meaning A precedes B and A guarantees B. Ex: The pool stick striking the billiard ball causing it to jump. 
2. A & B & C cause D (contributory causes): if A & B & C, are contributory, they are co-occurrent causes. therefore, for the specific effect, a contributory cause is neither necessary nor sufficient for the effect (because it is by definition accompanied by other causes). 
3. correlation is not sufficient for causation.

Ex: If Pluto's barking causes Dick to wake up, 
 
Pluto's barking is a necessary cause of Dick's waking up if the barking precedes the waking, but it doesn't imply the latter will occur, i.e., Dick may not wake up (it's not guaranteed).      

Pluto's barking is a sufficient cause of Dick's waking up if the the barking guarantees the waking, although a another cause may also contribute to Dick's waking (noise coming from the bathroom where Dick's wife was taking a shower). here the presence of the waking doesn't guarantee the prior occurrence of the barking.

Deductive and inductive arguments

click this link for more information,

questionnaire on fallacies

Below, identify the following fallacies (based on this post)

1. Thomas Elder attack on social welfare should not be taken seriously. He is said to have been a degenerate.

2. You will get pregnant if you have sex. Sally had sex once, and now she is pregnant. 

3. Your honor, the defendant must be guilty because no one can prove his innocence. 

4. Rare taste: you either have taste or you don't. 

5. Men are all alike: selfish creatures who spend every weekend glued to a television tube. 

6. I am sure that you will agree that we should all work together to increase the profit of this company. Anyone not agreeing with this policy will be fired immediately.  

7. Everyone believes that Lander University is improving its academic programs yearly; therefore, I conclude that Lander will be a much higher rated school several years from now. 

8. Theodore Teabody, the great historian, says that H. Beard's book is the best logic book in the world. I believe him since the word of such a great man shouldn't be disputed. 

questions about values

1. as per values, which secondary value do you find more important?
2. as per religious and spiritual values, do you find a lack of some of these values today? why do you think?
3- what does it mean to say that correlation doesn't imply causation?

questions about cause and effect?

1. are you surprised that most causes are not direct? could you give an example of your own of a cause you thought it was direct and it is not?
2. what difference do you think it would made (for human responsibility) if some of the causes you took to be "direct" are really "indirect" or "contributory"? 
3. has this discussion of cause-and-effect made you reevaluate "received" ideas of causation in the media, or from yourself? can you offer an example?

Homework #2 (deduction and induction)

Are these deductive or inductive?

1. The sum of the interior angles of any triangle is 180°. In triangle #1, angle A is 30°, angle B is 90°. Therefore, angle C is 60°. 
2. If I get an A, then I will pass this course. Odds are, I will make a B. So, I probably won't pass this course. 
3. The platypus is not a mammal (google & find out) because no mammal lays eggs, and the female platypus does.
4. The last time I ate here, the shrimp dish I ordered was disgusting. It must be the case that this restaurant buys lousy seafood. 
5. The sign on the candy machine reads "Out of Order." The candy machine must be broken. 

are these valid or invalid? 

1. If it rained, the streets are wet. The streets are wet, so it must have rained. 
2. If Richard Roe is willing to testify then he's innocent. He's not willing to testify therefore he's not innocent. 
3. If Bogotá is north of New Orleans and New Orleans is north of Mexico City, then Bogota is north of Mexico City. 

are these strong or weak? 

4. Every day you've lived has been followed by another day in which you've been alive. Therefore, everyday you ever will live will be followed by another day in which you are alive. 
5. Nobel prize-winning biologist Herbert Ralls says that chlorinated hydrocarbons in our water supply constitute a major threat to the public health. Since no scientists disagree with him on this point. Accordingly, we conclude that the presence of these chemicals is a threat.
6. Every day you've ever lived has been a day before tomorrow, so, every day you will ever live will be a day before tomorrow. 

Triff's office hours

M,W,F, 8-9:50am
T,R, 8-11am
T, 3:30-5:30pm (let me know via email you're coming for this slot)
W, 4-5:30pm (let me know via email if you're coming for this slot)

axiology & the importance of values

imagine a world without values? without right, wrong, good, bad, beautiful, ugly, pleasant, nice, hateful, etc?

the branch of philosophy that studies value is axiology (from the Greek axios meaning "worth").

aesthetic values: depending the capacity to elicit pleasure (positive value) or displeasure (negative value) when appreciated or experienced aesthetically. examples: beauty, ugliness, elegance, taste, harmony, token: beauty,

economic values: (we are homo economicus): the measure here is efficiency, affordability & productivity (productivity = output volume/ labor input), then, practicality, token: price,

social/cultural values: the measure is how humans live in groups and which traits are seen as worth having, such as honor, honesty, valor, sympathy, benevolence, gratitude; token: sociability,

political values: these are traits that balance power with justice, such as influence, leadership, competitiveness; token: fairness,

religious values: these are values that are associated with purposefulness, worship and rituals, such as faithfulness, altruism, unity, token: holiness, 

spiritual values: values that are meant to strengthen the inner self, such as freedom, achievement, , simplicity, health, vigor; token: blessedness,

how to argue your point (in philosophy)

1. Discussion is a civilized enterprise between two (or more). One talks one listens.
2. Be always prepared.
3. DO NOT talk on top of your interlocutor. Wait until they finish their point. expect the same, if they interrupt you politely say: "Excuse me, I'm not finished."
4. DO NOT EVER raise your voice (it shows you're emotionally invested making your argument weak).
5. DO NOT hurry, avoid speaking fast. you need to be in command of your thoughts. take your time to answer back; be deliberate and in control.
6. If there's room for agreement, say: "I agree," or "That's a good point." it makes your interlocutor feel comfortable, which is always good for you.  
7. Be generous (even if you're winning). how? give a point if you can, for ex. "You're right about that."
8. Be affable throughout the exchange. smile if there's a chance (there always is). affability shows you're ease which shows open mindedness, a great trait of character.
9. The discussion doesn't have to be won. not in one meeting. you can say "we should continue this at some other time."

topics for our final exam fall 2019

click here for my lecture on rights,
click here for my lecture on animal rights,

deductive and inductive arguments (fall 2019)

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,

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).

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?

Prostitution, choice and Kant's second formulation

Now that we're talking about Kant's formalism and the issue of treating people as "means to an end" the topic of prostitution came up. Jose and Maria (if I recall) brought up a dissenting point to Kant's formulation (well done!). Here is Kant's response if he lived now: Treating yourself as a means to an end is to ignore your DIGNITY. Your body is important and transactions through it will pay a price.

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?

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?

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.

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?

 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. 

 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.

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).

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.

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.

** 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.