PHIL 2306: ETHICS



PHILOSOPHY 2306: ETHICS (ONLINE)

CRN: 11258

DR. STEVE BEST

FALL 2018

OFFICE HOURS: WEDNESDAYS, 2-4 PM, WORRELL HALL 301

OFFICE PHONE: 915-747-5097

EMAIL: best@utep.edu

"If we believe absurdities, we shall commit atrocities." Voltaire

"He is a philosopher who tramples underfoot prejudices, tradition, antiquity, universal assent, authority, in a word, everything that overawes the mass of minds, who dares to think for himself, to go back to the clearest general principles, examine them, discuss them, admit nothing save on the testimony of his experience and reasoning." Diderot

"Why stay we on the earth unless to grow?" Robert Browning

“All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.” Edmund Burke

“Indifference elicits no response. Indifference is not a response. Indifference is not a beginning; it is an end. And, therefore, indifference is always the friend of the enemy, for it benefits the aggressor -- never his victim.” Elie Wiesel

“Cowardice asks the question, `Is it safe?’ Expediency asks the question, `Is it politic?’And Vanity comes along and asks the question, `Is it popular?’ But Conscience asks the question `Is it right?’ And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but he must do it because Conscience tells him it is right.” Martin Luther King, Jr.

"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter." Martin Luther King, Jr.

“Compassion, in which all ethics must take root, can only attain its full breadth and depth if it embraces all living creatures and does not limit itself to humankind.” Albert Schweitzer

Course Description

This course is an introduction to ethics and ethical reasoning. We will spend most of the course getting acquainted with the definition and meaning of ethics, and seek in many ways to transcend conventional views to produce a broader and deeper definition and understanding of ethics that places it at the center of a meaningful, responsible, and compassionate life. We will examine key ethical issues, explore major philosophers’ ideas, and examine a number of core ethical traditions. The course aims not only to explain what ethics is, as a historical and philosophical matter, but also how to do it, as a reasoned practice relevant to contemporary society and to the quality of one’s own existence.

After the main focus on ethical theory, we devote the last part of the course to applied ethics, specifically to the topics of animal rights, ethical veganism, and environmental ethics. These profound issues surfaced in the last four decades to become major new fields of inquiry and to pose powerful challenges to Western dogmas and humanist traditions with their violent and destructive power pathologies. I chose these issues because: (1) they strongly relate to a key course goal to produce a more comprehensive and expansive concept of ethics than given by the Western tradition; (2) they are controversial, interesting, and stimulating; (3) they advance moral evolution and ethical progress; (4) they formulate bold new ways of thinking and relating to ourselves, other animals, and the world around us; and (5) they are deeply relevant to the social, political, and ecological change humanity so desperately needs in this time of planetary crisis.

Course Purpose and Goals

Key objectives of this course are to introduce students to traditional philosophical figures, theories, and traditions, and to constantly relate these to current issues and problems in our contemporary world.

By the end of the course, ideally, I hope that each student will:

➢ Be able to identify key figures, traditions, themes, and problems in the history of philosophy

➢ Know the core themes and issues of each main branch of philosophy

➢ Identify enduring questions and topics that are perennial themes in the history of philosophy

➢ Understand the importance of philosophy in one’s daily life, whatever one’s career profession

➢ Develop a great joy for reading, learning, and thinking

➢ Comprehend and use philosophical methods and techniques of thinking

➢ Apply critical thinking skills to various texts (articles, books, videos, etc) and diverse areas of personal and social life

➢ Be more capable in debate and argumentation, and in reflecting on ethical issues as they relate to their own life and to the contemporary world

➢ Become more autonomous as a person and better decision-maker

➢ Become a citizen instead of a consumer – a concerned, informed, and active person, involved in the community and in civic life

Course Requirements and Grading

The class is 7 weeks long, and each week is a different and coherent unit unto itself, yet each also builds on and advances preceding lessons. Each module is divided into sections, which include:

➢ An italicized overview of the topics

➢ A background lecture

➢ A set of reading assignments

➢ Questions and issues for discussion, review, and self-evaluation

➢ Suggested further research for maximal learning

The discussion section provides questions and materials for students to critically reflect on in posts and conversations with one another, their groups, and myself. Students are encouraged to introduce their own perspectives, questions, and topics. The review section summarizes the key ideas you should have mastered for each section and serves as a self-examination to assess your comprehension of the material.

There are no textbooks to buy for this course; all course material is online and free, and linked in the syllabus reading assignments. It is crucial that you do all reading assignments on time and keep up with the syllabus and discussion. In addition to doing all the reading assignments, and demonstrating a good understand and ideally critical grasp of the main ideas, students are required to participate regularly and meaningfully in online discussion, engaging other students, and to write a final exam.

Note: this class may prove difficult: there is a fair amount of work to do in a short period of time, do not take it lightly or underestimate the challenge you will face, as well as the rewards you will gain. Immediately below and in the next section, I clarify what I expect in the 2 different areas I will evaluate your work and which will comprise your final grade:

I. Discussion Posts

I expect each student to make a minimum of 3 original INDEPENDENT discussion posts per week. These are to be responses to chosen discussion topics which I have written up in the “Discussion” section following the assignments list for each week. These same questions are reproduced in the Blackboard discussion section. Do NOT attempt to respond to all questions and topics, it is impossible to do justice to more than three.

I deem a “quality” discussion post to fulfill key criteria such as the following:

➢ It is 3-5 GOOD paragraphs in length, 4-5 sentences per paragraph

➢ It is clear and coherent in meaning, syntax, and style

➢ It reflects a full reading and accurate understanding of the course material being

➢ It displays an ability to relate the issues, themes, and problems addressed in the material to other topics, current events, or other figures, themes, and texts generally; and

➢ It demonstrates a grasp of “philosophical” thinking in its ability, for instance, to define terms, separate various issues and draw relevant distinctions, and critically analyze (rather than take at face value as true) and challenge claims made by authors, commentators, and philosophers. No argument or theory is flawless, perfect or immune to questioning)

IN ADDITION, I am looking for evidence of INTERACTIVE posts whereby you comment on others’ thoughts and they comment on yours. These need not be as carefully constructed and thought out as you primary posts, and can be improvisational and free flowing as a good discussion would be. At the same time, they must be more substantive that merely agreeing with or “liking” another’s post without saying why and saying more. You should have a minimum of THREE comments PER WEEK on posts from other students in the class, and allow an open discussion dynamic.

Thus, that is a minimum of 6 posts a week (3 independent and 3 interactive), and 42 for the entire course, 21 posts in each (independent and interactive) category. Roughly, 42 good total posts would constitute an “A,” 32 would make a “B,” and 25 would be a “C,” etc., for your discussion grade.

To summarize and clarify:

• You are to chose 3 questions to address

• Each independent post is to be substantive, thought through, and well-composed, and at least 3-5 good paragraphs in length

• The interactive posts in no way need to be as long, but nor should they be thin, one sentence replies to someone (“Really liked your point, Jose!”) without elaborating on why one agrees or disagrees with someone else

• The idea of the interactive posts is to critically dialogue with other students about philosophical issues and thus to allow free play

• Do all the required reading first, making notes; then respond to the discussion questions that most interest you

• At the same time, read what other students have posted and do the minimum responses to any post that interests you most

• Begin the reading for each module on each Monday and complete your posts by the following Sunday, try to keep up with the pace

As philosophy is no doubt new to almost everyone in this course, I expect modest evidence of critical reading and thinking skills at first, but also to see gradually improvement and real learning demonstrated as the course proceeds. See the next section below on posting etiquette; I also expect polite, civil, and respectful tones to be maintained in class discussion at all times.

II. Final Exam

The final exam is a “take-home” and is to be 6-8 pages in length, double-spaced, and using a 12 point font. The final exam is comprehensive in nature, and thus will cover the entire semester’s course material. The questions will be handed out at least a week before the due date. You may discuss the exam with other class members should that prove helpful, but you must write wholly independent of one another and in your own words, or risk plagiarism (see below).

Final Grade

The final grade for the course will be broken down as follows:

Discussion forum participation: 50%

Final Essay exam: 50%

I will provide general class feedback on performance after the first and second week, and I will provide each of you individual feedback on your posts after the third week, for weeks 1-3 only, so that you can improve in weeks 4-7 if need be.

Online Etiquette

When you log on for discussion, be prepared by having done the reading and assignments, and also be active and strive to put philosophical skills and methods into practice. Because of the controversial nature of the topics we will explore, there will naturally be differences in viewpoint, and thus arguments. But disagreements need not be disagreeable, and the clash of ideas is vital to learning, the enterprise of philosophy, and personal growth.

It is imperative that you always express yourself and interact with others with sincerity, honesty, kindness, and respect. Humility, openness, and self-questioning are cardinal virtues in philosophy, whereas dogma, arrogance, and closed-mindedness are debilitating vices. Whatever your views, don’t assume they are the best or correct ones, that they cannot or should not be modified or even abandoned, or that you cannot learn from dialogue with others. Please avoid self-righteousness, hostility, ridicule, sarcasm, or other disrespectful behaviors.

While of course I encourage your active participation in class discussions, please seek the Golden Mean: speak not too little, nor too much; be neither passive, nor aggressive. Your grade for the discussion part of the course will be based on the quantity of your contribution (doing the minimum required posting) and the quality of your input, based on accuracy of understanding texts and ideas, creative application of ideas, critical thinking skills, and ability to dialogue and argue in productive, persuasive, and interesting ways.

Students are not expected or required to believe any particular viewpoint or to agree with me on any issue, in fact you may freely disagree with and challenge me when you find it productive to do so. But you are asked to be open to exploring different viewpoints and challenging ideas, and to think critically about your own assumptions, received values, and worldview. This class asks you to study new information, to understand and critically assess ideas, and to apply new ideas and skills toward your everyday life and involvement in this world in crisis.

Contacting Me and Tech Support

Students of course may freely contact me at any time they have a concern, question, or need. My email is: best@utep.edu, and phone is: 915-747-5097.

If you are new to online courses, you will want to take the Blackboard tutorials, which you can find by clicking on the “Help” link at the top right of the front page (see: ; and: ). You may also contact the Technology Support Help Desk, which lists hours of operation, phone numbers, and other relevant information here: .

Plagiarism Policy

Regarding your presentations and final exam, plagiarism will not be tolerated. Any use of material from reference works not cited, footnoted, quoted, or paraphrased in your own words, or any two student exams too closely resembling one another, is considered plagiarism. Instances of suspected plagiarism will be reported to the Dean of Students, and thereafter no questions will be asked or taken. For the UTEP plagiarism policy, see: .

Disability Statement

If you have a disability and need classroom accommodations, please contact The Center for Accommodations and Support Services (CASS) at 747-5148, or by email to cass@utep.edu, or visit their office located in UTEP Union East, Room 106. For additional information, please visit the CASS website at sa.utep.edu/cass.

*************************************************

Weekly Assignments and Modules

Week I, October 22: Introduction to Philosophy

What is Philosophy? What are the different branches and some main traditions? Why pursue philosophy in a materialist, profit-driven, consumerist society? Is philosophy relevant to my life, concerns, problems, goals, and happiness? Does it have any “practical value” in a crude utilitarian society? How can the study of philosophy enhance our lives in numerous ways?

Lecture: Introduction to Philosophy (this and all lectures for each week are uploaded to the Blackboard lecture section of the course)

Reading

Bertrand Russell, “10 Commandments of Philosophy”



The Main Branches of Philosophy



“Why Study Philosophy?” (practical implications; feel free to browse links at:)



Discussion

❖ Considering the various main branches of philosophy and their different emphases, what do they have in common? Can we usefully distinguish between the content of philosophy (the philosophy of … virtually anything) and the form of (the way or process of philosophy)? What is involved in doing philosophy of any kind?

❖ Why is philosophy such a foreign, misunderstood, largely ignored, and stereotyped discipline, when it has obvious benefits for training the mind, deepening culture and education, producing better citizens, and even benefiting career pursuits?

❖ What forces in society militate against philosophical thinking and a more prominent role for philosophy in our lives, schools, and culture? Consider, for instance, the imperatives, logic, and goals of the scientific-technological world, on the one hand, and those of the capitalist, consumerist, and mass media cultures as well.

❖ What would you propose for boosting the role and influence of philosophy in the education system and cultural life? Can philosophy help to promote better citizenship skills, and thus a more vigorous democracy?

❖ Upon viewing the film, “Philosophy: Guide to Happiness” ( [note: this film is long and divided into many sections, but well worth an entire watch; if nothing else, watching at least the first two segments on Socrates and Epicurus), what can you say about the role and relevance of philosophy to history, cultural development, and the pursuit of happiness and the good life?

Review

➢ Define philosophy and the main traits of each branch of the discipline.

➢ What are key virtues for the practice of philosophy?

➢ How is philosophy a unique discipline and pursuit knowledge as opposed to science on one side and religion on the other?

➢ What benefits does studying philosophy have for the spiritual, moral, and practical life, as well as for various career pursuits?

Further Research

• Lou Marinoff, Plato Not Prozac: Appling Eternal Wisdom to Everyday Problems (). This is a vivid, clear, and compelling example of the new (and controversial) field of “philosophical therapy.” The book makes clear that there is deep wisdom in the philosophical traditions that are directly relevant to between life management and coping skills, and to increasing meaning, happiness, and satisfaction in one’s life.

• “In the Cave: Philosophy and Addiction.” Can Plato's allegory of the cave shed light on the condition of addiction? ().

• “Western Philosophy’ (3 part documentary: ).

• Numerous satirical films and videos attack widespread ignorance and apathy in a soulless society dominated by corporations, government, media monopoly, and apathy. For a few of these, see: (1) Being There (starring Peter Sellers as an illiterate gardener who is mistaken for a genius and then elected President of the United States) () ; (2) Processed People (which critiques a gullible, naïve, ignorant, and easily manipulated American public) ( ); (3) Idiocracy (in which a man wakes up 500 years in the future to discover a society so stupid he is easily the most intelligent person on earth, and (4) The Age of Stupid (a future archivist tries to understand why humans in the 20th and 21st centuries so stupidly, callously, and complacently ignored the signs of impending climate change and ecological disaster)

• For classic literary and philosophical critiques of conformist societies devoid of critical thinking, see Aldous Huxley, Brave New World, and Herbert Marcuse, One-Dimensional Man.

• For a compelling call for a new way of thinking that is distinctly philosophical and ethical in nature, see “Why We Need New Ways of Thinking”

().

Week II, October 29: Introduction to Ethics and the Ethical Life

The standard definitions of ethics are too narrow, and allow us to ignore the substantive duties we have to other humans, as well as forgoing responsibilities we have to the millions of other species with whom we share this planet, and to the earth itself. In this week’s section, we discuss what it is to be ethical, how far our duties extend, and why we should be ethical. On this last point, contemporary philosopher Peter Singer’s essays about poverty and famine provide provocative arguments that out duties to others are far more extensive than we ordinarily believe. We also discuss the central role ethics plays in the “good life.”A skeptical question inevitably arises here: If ethics entails concern for the other, and often acting against one’s own (at least immediate or short-range) interests, how can it be beneficial to act for the good of others rather than focusing exclusive on advancing one’s own interests? Doesn’t rational self-interest demand that we maximize our own good? How can we possibly benefit from altruism and advancing the good of others? Why – beyond the obvious problem of being caught and punished – should we not just lie, cheat, and steal as it benefits us? If you had the fabled Ring of Gyges (discussed in Plato’s Republic) that endows you with powers such as invisibility, would you use it for your gain despite violations of the law and codes of ethical decency? Or, as Socrates argues, are happiness and the good life inseparable from the ethical life?

Lecture: Introduction to Ethics and the Ethical Life

Reading

“Ethics”



Plato, “The Ring of Gyges”



Peter Singer, “Famine, Affluence, and Morality”



Peter Singer, “The Singer Solution to World Poverty”



Peter Singer, “A Meaningful Life”



Discussion

❖ Define the nature of ethics, drawing salient distinctions and touching on fundamental issues. Distinguish ethical from non-ethical issues (where this distinction can be made) to clarify the meaning of ethics and nature of bona fide ethical choices, actions, and contexts.

❖ Discuss the meaning of the parable of the ring of Gyges and its implications for ethics. If you had such a ring in your possession, what would you do or not do with it, and why?

❖ In his powerful speech, "The Perils of Indifference" (), Elie Wiesel argues that “neutrality,” passivity, and indifference in the face of injustice and evil is morally corrupt and contemptible as actively doing harm. What do you make of this argument and what are the implications for assessing human moral character and our duties to others?

❖ What central messages does the documentary, The Examined Life (see sample clips at: ) make about society and the role of philosophy in modern life? Critically evaluate the claims of the film and state whether or not you think it made a persuasive case for the role of philosophy in education and everyday life, and state why or why not.

❖ What is Singer’s “solution” to world poverty and famine? What is he asking of us ethically and is or is it not too much to ask? Why?

❖ Reflect on Peter Singer’s essay, “10 Ways to Make a Difference” (), with an emphasis on (1) his argument that ethics is sterile without activism and concrete involvement in movements for progressive change, and (2) the ways in which you are, can, or ought to be making a difference in the world. How does this activism relate to his concept of the “good” or “meaningful” life?

Review

➢ Be able to provide your own definition of ethics. How narrow or wide, exclusive or inclusive would you make it? Do you believe it is important to expand the moral circle to other sentient beings and the natural world, or should ethics only concern itself with human-to-human relations?

➢ What arguments does Singer use to support his claim we have substantive duties to those in poverty and need?

➢ What are some of the relations one could identify among the ethical life, the meaningful life, and the good life? How does Singer frame the issue? Provide some examples of your own. How does society work to impede, rather than encourage, the ethical life in its values, ideologies, mass media and advertising systems, and its various institutions (legal, political, and economic)? Can you link Singer’s concept of the meaningful life with that advanced by Socrates and Epicurus in the first two segments of the film, “Philosophy: Guide to Happiness”?

Further Research

• Peter Singer, “Ethics”



• Ethics Resources and Applied Ethics



• For a remarkable documentary about a New York construction worker who had a series of epiphanies that awakened a dormant compassion for animals and inspired him to lead an ethical life as an animal rights activist, see “The Witness” ().

Week III: November 5: The Specters of Relativism and Egoism

Is there such a thing as “the right” or “the good,” as some kind of real or objective qualities, acts, or things in the world, or is everything hopelessly relative and subject to individual, cultural, and historical conditioning without objective, substantive, and enduring weight and meaning? How be ethical? How distinguish good/bad and right/wrong at all? Also, is there really an ethical core to human behavior, one that truly and irreducibly seeks the good of others, or are all altruistic acts ultimately done for selfish reasons, such as to make people feel good about themselves?

Lecture: The Challenges of Ethical Relativism and Egoism

Reading

“Moral Relativism”



Jesse Prinz, “Morality is a Culturally Conditioned Response”



“Psychological Egoism”



Peter Singer, “The Biological Basis of Ethics”



Peter Singer, “My Better Nature”



Peter Singer, “The Escalator of Reason”



Discussion

❖ Clearly define the concepts of egoism and altruism, giving them some nuance. How does engaging the biological dimension of human nature, as does Singer, help to frame these issues?

❖ Is altruism really reducible to (psychological) egoism, as cynics and skeptics like to say? Can you think of examples of actions that clearly were selfless and meant to benefit others?

❖ Does the fact that humans are animals with a long biological past mean that they are violent and egoistic? Do animals have a sense of care and mutual aid that might have shaped our moral life? Describe Singer’s effort to ground ethics in evolution, and provide a critical assessment of it.

❖ What are some of the main implications for ethics, the notion of “rational man,” and strict rational accounts of ethics (such as given by Kant) if they have evolved from other animals and over millions of years of time? What roles do both feeling and reason play in ethics and moral judgments? Is it true, as David Hume argues, that “reason is the slave to the passions,” or does reason play an important role in ethical life (through deliberation, justification, and so on)?

❖ Watch some of the vignettes from CNN’s inspiring show, Heroes, which honors the extraordinary achievements of “ordinary” people (see the archives for the show at: ). What pattern do you see throughout the various examples? How do all these people represent the “ethical life”? Does the argument that humans are egoistic and selfish stand in the face of these real-life examples of people leading an ethical life?

Review

➢ What is absolutism? What is relativism? What are the problems with each position? How is emotivism a form of relativism?

➢ Is there a way beyond the impasse of relativism, toward factual and ethical judgments that are not arbitrary and purely subjective, yet not “absolute truth” either?

➢ Define psychological egoism and describe some of the main arguments for and against it.

➢ Define altruism, and discuss the meaning and significance of the concepts of “kin” and “group” altruism.

Further Research

• Peter Singer, “Ethics and Sociobiology”



• “Emotivism



Week IV, November 12: The Art of Thinking and Reasoning

If ethical judgments are not merely arbitrary, subjective, or capricious, and there is something called “the better argument,” then clearly ethical argument and debate depends on logic and reasoning, and indeed these are foundational skills for ethics, for philosophy in general, and for a rational life. It is therefore imperative that we learn some basic concepts and skills in logic and reasoning.

Lecture: Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking

Reading

Paul Gregory, “A Brief Introduction to Logic”

“Logical Fallacies and Practical Logic”



“Logical Fallacies”



Roger Darlington, “How to Think Critically”



Discussion

➢ Explain the difference between deductive and inductive logic, and give an original example of each. Explain why it is one argument or the other, and what the different criteria are for evaluating it as a good argument.

➢ Identify some of the main principles of critical thinking and apply them to an analysis of a media text, news story, or editorial of your own choice. Identify at least three fallacies, and explain why they are such types of logical errors.

➢ The documentary, “Outfoxed,” is a powerful critique of the willful manipulation of fallacies and propaganda methods by the “FOX News” network (the same critique, albeit it a bit more nuanced, could be made of any corporate media outlet, “conservative” or “liberal”). What fallacies and propaganda techniques can you detect being used by the network and its executives and owner, Rupert Murdoch? (You can instant download the video on Netflix or view it free online at: ).

➢ What do you think is a good example of the type of scams and hoaxes that Roger Darlington warns us against in his article, “How to Think Critically”?

➢ Comment on this short video clip in terms of critical thinking themes: “The Majority is Always Wrong” ().

➢ If you read and especially liked one of the articles in the “further research” section for this unit below, share your thoughts about it.

➢ How do social media forms, such as YouTube and Facebook, affect critical thinking abilities today?

Review

➢ You should be able to:

Define logical, critical thinking, and fallacies

Distinguish an argument from an assertion or explanation

Define "validity" and "soundness" and distinguish between them

Define "deductive" and "inductive" arguments and distinguish between them

Define "critical thinking" and know some attributes of it and barriers to it

Reconstruct an argument, locate implied premises and conclusions, and begin to evaluate it

➢ You should also know and be able to recognize the following fallacies:

Begging the question

Circular reasoning

Vagueness

Ambiguity

Equivocation

Slippery slope

Ad hominem

Appeal to authority

Appeal to ignorance

Appeal to pity

Appeal to popularity

Straw man

Hasty generalization

Confusing cause and effect

Disanalogy

False dichotomy (also known as: black and white, or either/or fallacy)

Non sequitur

Further Research

• “Questioning the Lecture Format”

• assets/img/PubThoughtAndAction/TAA_05_05.pdf

• “Critical Thinking on the Web” (a rich and long site with lots of interesting things to peruse)

•

• “A Guide to Non-Mainstream Media”

•

• “14 Propaganda Techniques Fox `News’ Uses to Brainwash Americans”

•

• “Everything Is A Lie: The Deliberate Intent To Deceive People Is At An All Time High”

•

Week V, November 19: Key Ethical Traditions

Since the ancient Greeks, philosophers have developed a few major ethical traditions, yet each is rich and complex enough to shed light on numerous problems and keep philosophers endlessly debating the pros and cons of each, of interminably arguing over correct interpretations of figures and ideas, and applying then to various ethical and social problems. These traditions include the Aristotelian virtue ethics, Biblical Divine Command theory, Kantian deontological (or duty-based) ethics, and Utilitarian ethics. In this section we examine these traditions, compare and contrast some of them, inquire into their relevance for personal, social and political issues, and think critically about their insights and limitations.

Lecture: Four Major Western Ethical Traditions

Reading

“Aristotle: Ethics”



“Life of Excellence: Living and Doing Well” (read the first two links in the “Table of Contents” on the Nicomachean Ethics)



“Divine Command Theory”



“Utilitarianism”





“Jeremy Bentham”



“John Stuart Mill: Ethics”



“Kant’s Moral Philosophy”



Discussion

❖ Using Aristotle’s definition of a virtue as a character trait that lies between two extremes (“excess” on one side and “deficiency” on the other, choose a couple of character traits (such as courage, sociality, etc.) and identify what you think is the golden mean that falls between the vices of excess and deficiency.

❖ Describe some specific ways in which you could incorporate Aristotle’s virtue ethics into your life in a way that would promote ethical character, balance, and happiness.

❖ What is happiness for Aristotle, and what according to him are some key necessary ingredients for a happy life? What is the relationship between ethics and happiness?

❖ Give some examples in which the utilitarian focus on consequences is a better approach than the ethics of duty, and vice versa.

❖ Fans of the Fox TV series, 24, starring Keifer Southerland, know that his character was obsessed with getting results and capturing “terrorists,” no matter how violent or illegal the means. Describe some examples of this in the show, and assess whether in such cases his violation of laws, protocol, the Constitution, and torturing and killing unsavory characters was ethically justifiable.

❖ Suppose you had a virtual reality machine that could simulate any pleasure or experience you wanted, whether being a celebrity, star athlete, or experience the pure pleasure of powerful drugs or having all your sexual fantasies fulfilled. Once you plugged in, you wouldn’t know it was all simulation, you would believe it was real and it would be as real as real can get. You would be lying in a bed or floating in a tank, thinking everything was actually happening and experiencing the pleasure of it as though it really were. Would you plug into the machine? Why or why not?

❖ What role does reason play in ethics for Aristotle, Bentham or Mill, and Kant?

❖ The 1999 film, The Insider (), dramatized the true story of Jeffrey Wigand, a former tobacco executive who turned whistleblower and revealed that, the tobacco industry was fully aware of the addictive and harmful nature of cigarettes and, moreover, deliberately worked on increasing their addictiveness. Similarly, the documentary, The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers (2009; ), describes how Ellsberg, pained by conscience, exposed government lies and cover-up in the Vietnam at the risk of a sentence of life in prison, publishing the documents in his book, The Pentagon Papers. Discuss the struggles and actions of Wigand and Ellsberg from a deontological perspective in which he elevated truth and duty over all else, including money and career.

❖ Increasingly, philosophers and textbooks list recent feminist “ethics of care” as a bona fide new major ethical tradition; for information, see: “Care Ethics” (). What new and critical perspectives does this ethics bring to Western ethical traditions, which often could be justly criticized as patriarchal, hierarchical, and obsesses with using and controlling animals and nature for human purposes?

Review

➢ What is a “virtue” for Aristotle and how does it apply to moderating one’s life in an ethical manner and creating oneself as a flourishing life form?

➢ What are the main arguments of Divine Command Theory? Is it still viable and plausible in the 21st century? Does ethics require God and religion or are these alien and corrupting of the principles of rationality, humanism, and autonomy often associated with ethics?

➢ How do the utilitarian and deontological traditions differ? What position would utilitarians likely take toward issues such as capital punishment, the war on drugs, and the economic inequalities inherent in the capitalist system? How did Mill expand on Bentham’s ethics? Do you find rule utilitarianism to be a necessary and consistent modification in act utilitarian ethics, or is it ultimately a different ethical approach inconsistent with the basic principles of utilitarianism?

➢ How attractive and plausible is a law and duty-based deontological ethic that seems to remove pleasure and happiness from ethics in favor of strict rational obedience to law, duty, and what moral imperatives demand? Are pleasure and happiness antithetical to rational, duty-based ethics or are feelings and satisfaction for doing the right thing essential for ethic action?

Further Research:

• “Aristotle”



• “Aristotle’s Ethics”



• “Virtue Ethics”



• Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics (complete primary text)



• “Consequentialism”



• John Stuart Mill, Utilitarianism (complete primary text)



• “The History of Utilitarianism”



• “John Stuart Mill”



• “Kant”



• “Deontological Ethics”



• Immanuel Kant, Grounding of the Metaphysics of Morals (complete primary text)



• “Care Ethics”



• “Feminist Ethics”



Week VI: November 26: Animal Rights, Veganism, and the Critique of Speciesism

The next great leap in moral evolution is to abolish the last form of acceptable slavery that subjugates the vast majority of species on this planet to the violent whim of one. This leap involves sending human supremacy to the same moral discard bin as we sent male supremacy and white supremacy. Animal rights is not an alien idea to our culture, rather it builds on the most progressive ethical and political values human beings have devised in the last two hundred years --those of equality, democracy, and rights – as it carries them to their logical conclusions. Animal rights is the culmination of a vast historical learning process where human beings realize that arguments for any kind of hierarchy and discrimination are prejudiced, biased, ignorant, and wrong. As society continues this learning process, it will realize that species boundaries are as arbitrary as those of race and sex. Consequently, it will move the moral bar from reason and language to sentience – the capacity to feel pleasure and pain. When is it right to inflict pain on another sentient being? The short answer is – virtually never.

Lecture: Animal Rights, Moral Progress, and the New Enlightenment

Reading

John Feldman, “Free Me” (video [note: graphic language and images])



“Animals and Ethics”



Peter Singer, “Equality for Animals?”



Tom Regan, “The Animal Rights Position”



Tom Regan, “The Case for Animal Rights”



Discussion

❖ How morally significant are the differences in human and nonhuman animals? Is possession of rationality, abstract thinking, and language sufficient to subordinate nonhuman animals to human animal purposes, including practices such as vivisection and meat, dairy, and egg consumption which kill 60 billion land animals and 2.7 trillion aquatic animals a year (according to USDA statistics)? Are rather are the similarities human and nonhuman animals share –such as sentience, but also (different kinds of) rationality and language – far more important than the alleged differences between human ad nonhuman anmals?

❖ Describe how, in the case of vivisection, Peter Singer, a utilitarian, and Tom Regan, a deontologist wood take very different positions. What characteristics does a being need to possess to have rights in this society, and what function do rights play. If people typically argue that anmals lack rights because they do not have reason and language, then do fetuses, small infants, severely “brain damaged,” “senile,” and comatose people also lack rights to their own bodies and lives? If a chimpanzee or more intelligent that a 3 or 4 year old child, and certainly than an elderly person suffering the last stages of Alzheimer’s disease, why don’t we experiment on them instead of animals?

❖ Given the arguments people typically use to confine, torture and kill billions of animals every year, how could we defend ourselves against a super-intelligent alien species that came to earth to vivisect and kill humans for food? If they saw us as unevolved as we see most animals, would they not be justified in exploiting and killing the entire human species if they so desired for their "scientific” experiments and palette preferences?

❖ Watch and critically assess this powerful video of vegan educator, Gary Yourofsky, as he makes the case for ethical veganism (). What impact did it have on you? What do you think were his strongest points and where, if at all, did you find his argument weak and problematic? If you found the video compelling and forceful, as so many do, have you made the commitment to give up consuming meat, dairy, and eggs (given that they kill you, slaughter the animals, and devastate the environment)? If not, provide the reasons you still find it justifiable to kill animals (or rather, have someone else do the job for you), and are these really strong enough for you to help perpetuate the animal holocaust because you like how animals taste?

• Is there, as Tom Regan argues (), a strong “moral basis of vegetarianism”? Read and respond to his argument. Or, read and respond to Bruce Friedrich’s argument, “Resolved: Eating Animals is Indefensible” ().

Review

➢ What is speciesism? How is it analogous to racism and sexism, and other forms discrimination? The evils of racism and sexism have been accompanied by a moral blindness by many in society as to the injustice these terms identified. Is the same the case for speciesism?

➢ What are key arguments against animal rights?

➢ What are key arguments for animal rights?

➢ Does one have an ethical obligation to be a vegetarian? Why or why not?

Further Research

• “Animal Rights” (Pro and Con)

•

• Roger Scruton, “Animal Rights” (contra animal rights)

•

• Iamblichus, “On the Pythagorean Life”

•

• Plutarch, “On the Eating of Flesh”

•

• Porphyry, “On Abstinence from Animal Food”

•

• Jim Mason, “The Animal Question”

•

• Tom Regan, “The Philosophy of Animal Rights”

•

• Steven Best, “Animal Rights and Moral Progress: The Struggle for Human Evolution” ( (for a video talk based on this text, see: )

• Meet Your Meat (video, graphic images)

•

• “Modern Meat” (video, graphic images)

•

For those wanting to shift toward a vegetarian or vegan diet, here are just a few of the rich resources online I recommend:

PETA Vegetarian Resource Guide



Vegsource



Vegan



The Vegetarian Resource Group







Week VII, December 3: Environmental Ethics: Anthropocentrism, Biocentrism, and Beyond

Environmental ethics is an attempt to offer a comprehensive account of the moral relations between human beings and their natural environment; it assumes that our relation to nature can and should be governed by moral norms. Just as social ethics governs moral our relation to other human beings, environmental ethics governs our relation to plants, animals, ecosystems, and the earth itself. In the process, environmental ethics raises fundamental philosophical questions, such as: What is the full range of our moral obligations? Wow are we related to the world around us? How does the social world evolve out of the natural world and how does our survival depend up the integrity and sustainability of the natural environment? Should we value nature only insofar as it provides value for us, or for its own sake? Environmental ethics is a new ethical framework which holds that we must consider moral evaluations from a larger perspective that includes the impact of human actions on the environment, and the impact of the environment on us.

Lecture: Environmental Ethics, Politics, and Sustainability

Reading

“Environmental Ethics”



Aldo Leopold, “The Land Ethic”



“Rachel Carson’s Environmental Ethic”



“Deep Ecology”



Murray Bookchin, “Social Ecology versus Deep Ecology”



Discussion

❖ Define “environmental ethics.” Is it an extension of existing ethics (such as the golden rule or rights claims) or is it an altogether new ethic, such as involves a biocentric perspective?

❖ What is biocentrism, as opposed to anthropocentrism? How can a biocentric perspective be found in Aldo Leopold’s argument for a “land ethic”? What is a “land ethic” and why might it be important to our future survival?

❖ Answer all the following questions on this survey, designed to measure your own personal “ecological footprint” (see: , , or ). Were you surprised at the results? In what areas do you most need to improve to reduce your impact on the earth? Now watch the film “The Human Footprint” (), and describe your reactions to this film and additional important facts you learned and found interesting.

❖ Describe your reaction to the film, “No Impact Man” (). Do you find it inspiring and that he makes excellent points, or feel he is unreasonable or too extreme?

❖ Discuss: “The Age of Stupid,” () (for background on the movie see: ).

❖ What are some of the well-documented negative consequences a meat-based diet has on the environment? Given these facts, why do vegans and animal rights advocates not get along with environmentalists?

Review

➢ How would you define “environmental ethics” and how does this shift change various areas of philosophy in profound ways?

➢ How does Leopold define the land ethic, and why does he think it must be incorporated into ethical theory and practice?

➢ What is the ethical basis of Carson’s thought?

➢ What are the most significant differences between social ecology and deep ecology?

➢ What are the main lines of difference between deep ecology and social ecology?

➢ What are the profound differences between the anthropocentric and biocentric perspectives?

➢ What connection does veganism have to environmentalism?

Further Research

• “Environmental Ethics”



• “Aldo Leopold’s Land Ethic”

's_Land_Ethic

• “Green Fire: Aldo Leopold and a Land Ethic for Our Time” (Video)



• Bob Traer, “Moral Consideration of Nature”



• “Biocentrism”



• “Revolutionary Ecology: A Working Definition”



• Judi Bari, “Revolutionary Ecology”



• Dale Jamieson, “Animal Liberation is an Environmental Ethic”



• Peter Wenz, “An Ecological Argument for Vegetarianism”



• Cowspiracy (documentary on the environmental impact of meat consumption)

(available on Netflix at: )

Your final exams ARE DUE TO ME BY midnight, Friday December 14; please send them to me at: best@utep.edu. Do NOT post them on Blackboard email. Keep a copy of your exam should there be a problem. The deadline for dropping the course is November 2.

[pic]

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download