Team Steroids

Here are some links:

An Unfair Advantage (Center of Applied Ethics)
In Defense of Steroids (Reason)
The Overhyped Harm of Steroids (National Review)
Don't Believe the Hype (Reason)
The Steroid Wars (New Yorker)
Yes, Steroids Enhance, But So Does Steak (Slate)
HGH: No Side Effects, But it Doesn't Work (Slate)
Remember, THG Was Legal and Not Banned by B'ball (Slate)

Team Egoism

First, you should read some of the section on Morality and Self-Interest (beginning on page 31o) in our Vice and Virtue textbook. Some specific articles worth reading: Rachels's "Egoism and Moral Skepticism" (pages 332-342), Pojman's "Egoism, Self-Interest, and Altruism" (345-349), Rand's "The Virtue of Selfishness" (342-345), and Browne's "The Unselfishness Trap" (327-332).

Also, here are some links:

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Article on Egoism
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy Article on Egoism
Reason's Issue on Ayn Rand
Rand, Net Philosopher-Queen (London Review of Books)
Benevolent Egoism: Yes, But is it Egoism? (Reason)

Team Death Penalty

First, you should read the section on the death penalty in the "Do the Right Thing" textbook. This includes the articles by Louis Pojman and Hugo Adam Bedau on pages 361-383.

Also, here are some links:

• Here's an encyclopedia of philosophy article on the death penalty.
• Here's a large collection of resources on the ethics of capital punishment. I mean, wow.
• What about the financial cost of the death penalty? Although it's common sense to think that keeping a criminal in prison for life would cost more than putting her to death, many studies suggest that the opposite is true. The additional legal battles in death penalty cases may cost more than a life sentence.
• Finally, here's a nice article on measuring the reliability of the justice system. How often do courts convict the wrong person?

Natty Law & Virtue Ethics

Here are some links on recent stuff we've done in class.

• An audio interview on Aquinas's natural law theory of ethics.
• Two audio interviews (one and two) on virtue ethics.
• An audio interview on Aristotle and happiness.

Also, here's a visual reminder of the just-right aspect of virtue ethics:

Midterm on Monday

This is just a reminder that the midterm is on Monday, November 3rd.

Also, CONGRATS TO THE WORLD CHAMPIONS OF BASEBALL!

Black + White = Gold

For those who don't know what a mashup is, you're in luck. You can start with one of the best ones out there:

(December 4th, from DJ Danger Mouse's Grey Album)

The internet has more to say about the Grey Album here.

Kant, You Ignorant Slut

I thought it might help us all if I opened up a post dedicated solely to complaining about how tough the Immanuel Kant reading was. Leave your best Kant insults insults in the comments of this post.

[can't get enough Kant?]
[want tips on reading these articles?]

Links Worthy of a Swine

Here are some links that are loosely related to the stuff on happy ethics (utilitarianism) that we are studying. Most of these deal with psychology. There's a lot of psychological research on happiness popping up lately. The first two links are overviews of the psychology of happiness:

Some Dark Thoughts on Happiness
and
Hedonic Man

The second is a slightly optimistic take on our ability to change our baseline level of happiness. This is important to know for an ethical theory that values maximizing happiness:

The Hedonic Set Point Can Go Up

The next link deals with a famous moral thought experiment, the trolley problem. This gets brought up a lot when evaluating happy ethics:

Psychology of the Trolley Problem

The last link is an advanced overview of consequentialist ethical theories. Utilitarianism is a consequentialist theory, since it only looks at the consequences of an action to figure out whether an action is morally good or bad:

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Entry: Consequentialism

So what makes you happy? WaWa? Ping pong? Cookies?

God Stuff

Here are some links on God ethics (divine command theory).

• A transcript and audio of the entire F.C. Copleston & Bertrand Russell debate on the existence of God excerpted in our John Arthur reading. (Or just click the 'play' button on the audio player below.)
  
• A quick explanation of the Euthyphro Dilemma.
• An advanced overview of God ethics from my favorite free online philosophy encyclopedia (yes, there are more than one free online philosophy encyclopedias).

Cole Hamels Is An Exception

Thanks to Josh, our anti-I'M-SPECIAL-ism pin made it to the Phillies game today. Not to go against the message of the pin or anything, but I'm taking credit for the win. Clearly the pin is lucky.

Paper #1 Guidelines

The first paper is due at the beginning of class on Friday, October 17th. It's worth 5% of your final grade. Here's the assignment:

Assignment: Write an argumentative essay on one of the topics below. Papers must be typed, and must be between 300-600 words long. Provide a word count on the first page of the paper. (Most programs like Microsoft Word & WordPerfect have automatic word counts.)

Paper Topics:
1. Out of the eight ethical theories that we have studied—cultural relativism, God ethics (divine command), happy ethics (utilitarianism), Kant, Aquinas’s natural law, Aristotle’s virtue ethics, Kohlberg’s moral development, and Gilligan’s ethics of care—which do you think is best? Why? What are some (at least two) seemingly good objections that someone might make to that theory? How would you reply to those objections? Explain & defend your position.

2. Provide a detailed criticism of one of the ethical theories we’ve discussed in class. First, explain the theory, and present a charitable argument (what you take to be the best argument) in its favor. Then critically evaluate the argument. What are good objections to the argument? Consider how a proponent of the theory might respond to your objections, and explain why these responses are unsuccessful.

3. Which do you think is more important in determining whether an action is morally right or wrong: the consequences of the action (what happens as a result of the action), or the motivations behind the action (the reasons why someone chooses that action over other actions)? Why?

-Describe an ethical theory that we have studied that care more about the consequences of an action.
-Then describe an ethical theory that we have studied that care more about the motivations of actions.
-In arguing for one side over the other, describe a specific moral dilemma in which these theories would give different decisions based on the action’s consequences vs. its motivations. Be sure to fully explain and defend your position.

[NOTE: I’m not looking for one right choice here. You can choose either side, as long as you defend it with a well-reasoned argument.]

4. In class, we’ve discussed the “Hitler Intuition”: Hitler’s actions don’t just seem wrong for you or me; they seem objectively wrong. Many have used this intuition to support the claim that there must be an objective morality of some kind. Examine this intuition.

-If you agree that it is solid evidence for objective morality, explain exactly how this intuition works. What makes it objectively true that Hitler was immoral? What is the basis of your judgment? In other words, what grounds objective morality? Which ethical theory we’ve discussed do you think this supports? Explain and defend all your answers.
-If you do not believe that this intuition is solid evidence for objective morality, you are probably a relativist. Explain why this intuition doesn’t provide enough evidence for the existence of an objective morality. Why is it OK to say that Hitler’s actions weren’t universally bad? How is it that Hitler is simply bad to me, but not objectively bad?

5. Within the parameters of ethical theories discussed in class, write on a topic of your choosing. (Sean must approve your topic by Friday, October 10th.)

Quiz #1

Quiz #1 will be held at the beginning of class on Friday, September 26th. You will have about 25 minutes to take it. There will be a section on evaluating arguments, and 4 short answer questions on the topic of ethical relativism (the Herodotus, Ruth Benedict, and Thomas Nagel readings). The quiz is worth 7.5% of your overall grade.

Feel free to insult me in the comments for putting you through the terrible ordeal of taking a quiz on a Friday.

Relative to You, But Not to Me

Here are some links on ethical relativism.

• an advanced overview of various versions of moral relativism (from a free online philosophy encyclopedia)
• Ruth Benedict and Herodotus
• The Kwakiutl from Northwest America [Google Kwakiutl!]
• The Dobu of Melanesia
• Cannibalism!
• An interview with a moral psychologist who supports a sophisticated version of ethical relativism
• An argument against the DIVERSITY THESIS: cultures morally agree more than they disagree
• A webcam dialogue on morality, psychology, and religion

Evaluating Args

Here are the answers to the handout on evaluating arguments that we went over in class. Perhaps I should have titled the handout "So Many Bad Args!"

1) All bats are mammals.
All mammals live on earth.
All bats live on earth.

Overall Good (good structure and true premises)

2) All students in here are mammals.
All humans are mammals.
All students in here are humans.

Bad Structure (what if a dog were a student in our class?), so Overall Bad (even though the premises are true)

3) (from Stephen Colbert)
Bush is either a great prez or the greatest prez.
Bush isn’t a great prez.
Bush is the greatest prez.

Questionable Premises, so Overall Bad (even though it has a good structure)

4) All BCC students are humans.
Most humans are shorter than 7 feet tall.
Most BCC students are shorter than 7 feet tall.

Bad Structure (there could be a lot of tall BCC students even if most humans aren't tall), so Overall Bad (even though the premises are true)

5) Some people are funny.
Sean is a person.
Sean is funny.

Bad Structure (only some are funny, so I don't have to be funny), so Overall Bad (even though the premises are true)

6) If Sean sings, then students cringe.
Sean is singing right now.
Students are cringing right now.

False 2nd Premise (and questionable 1st premise), so Overall Bad (even though the structure is good)

7) All email forwards are annoying.
Some email forwards are false.
Some annoying things are false.

Questionable 1st Premise, so Overall Bad (even though the structure is good)

8) If Sean sings, then students cringe.
Sean isn't singing right now.
Students aren't cringing right now.

Bad Structure (students could cringe for a different reason) (and questionable 1st premise), so Overall Bad

9) All bats are mammals.
All bats have wings.
All mammals have wings.

Bad Structure, so Overall Bad (even though the premises are true)

10) If Sean sings, then students cringe.
Students aren't cringing right now.
Sean isn't singing right now.

Questionable 1st premise, so Overall Bad (even though the structure is good)

11) Some dads have beards.
All bearded people are mean.
Some dads are mean.

Questionable 2nd premise, so Overall Bad (even though the structure is good)

12) If Sean sings, then students cringe.
Students are cringing right now.
Sean is singing right now.

Bad Structure (I don't have to sing for students to cringe) and False 2nd premise (and questionable 1st premise), so Overall Bad

13) This class is boring.
All boring things are taught by Sean
This class is taught by Sean.

Questionable 1st Premise and False 2nd Premise, so Overall Bad (even though the structure is good)

(More on Sisyphus)

Understanding Args

Here are the answers to the extra credit assignment on understanding arguments.

1. (P1) Fairdale has the best team.
(C) Fairdale will win the championship

2. (P1) The housing market is depressed.
(P2) Interest rates are low.
(C) It's a good time to buy a home.

3. (P1) China is guilty of extreme human rights abuses.
(P2) China refuses to implement democratic reforms.
(C) The U.S. should refuse to deal with the present Chinese government.

4. (P1) The results of the Persian Gulf War were obviously successful for the U.S. military.
(C) The U. S. military is both capable and competent.

5. (P1) Scientific discoveries are continually debunking religious myths.
(P2) Science provides the only hope for solving the many problems faced by humankind.
(C) Science provides a more accurate view of human life than does religion.

6. (P1) Freedom of speech and expressions are essential to a democratic form of government.
(P2) As soon as we allow some censorship, it won't be long before censorship will be used to silence the opinions critical of the government.
(P3) Once we allow some censorship, we will have no more freedom than the Germans did under Hitler.
(C) We must resist all effort to allow the government to censor entertainment.

7. (P1) I'm very good at my job.
(C) I deserve a raise.

8. (P1) Jesse is one year old.
(P2) Most one-year-olds can walk.
(C) Jesse can walk.

9 (P1) The revocation of the 55 mph speed limit has resulted in an increased number of auto fatalities.
(C) we must alleviate this problem with stricter speed limit enforcement.

10. (P1) The last person we hired from Bayview Tech turned out to be a bad employee.
(C) I'm not willing to hire anybody else from that school again.

11. (P1) Maebe didn't show up for work today.
(P2) Maebe has never missed work unless she was sick.
(C) Maebe is probably sick today.

11. (P1) The United States, as the most powerful nation in the world, has a moral obligation to give assistance to people who are subjected to inhumane treatment.
(P2) The ethnic Albanians were being persecuted in Kosovo.
(C) It was proper for the U.S. to become involved in the air campaign against Kosovo.

----------------
Hat tip: I took some of the examples (with some revisions) from Beth Rosdatter's website, and some (with some revisions) from Jon Young's website.