Ethics Question

You have six views of ethics as quickly summarized below: 

1) Kantian:                   There are "solid" absolute rights and wrongs.  Everything leads to the
    (Deontology)          categorical imperative (Kant's golden rule). 

2) Nietzsche                We are no rights and wrongs, other than what we create, but make it worthwhile
    (Existential)              and grand - because we "paint our own picture"  of morality.

3)  Plato                       Figure out what's "right" and create "balance" among those things......such as
     (Charecter)             Truth, Justice, Equity, Integrity, Honesty 
                     
4) Utiltarian                  Morality needs to be practical, maximize the positive, minimize the negative.
     (Practical)               Ethics should/"ought" to create standards for health, safety, protection.  We need to
                                   get the "most good" out of every action, and focus on the "community".

5) Noddings                 Intuition is sometimes greater than rationality, Relationship is sometimes
    (Femanist)                greater than truth

6) Objectionist/
    (Rational Selfishness)   Looking out for number one, might not be all that bad.  Ethics should reward the
                                      motivated, the designers, and the risk-takers, while leaving the "leaches and the
                                      moochers" to fend for themselves, rather than enable them.


QUESTION:       So considering these above views that vary heavilly: 
                           "How should we then therefore live?"




Remember:
           -Ethics Test this Friday:  April 26th
           -Readings assigned have been:  282-289, 292-296; 297-315, 308-318, 320-326,331-343,
             347-353. 




        

Rest of the Chapter Two Required Readings

New Readings

69-72,   and bottom of 74-78 (ending with section on Scientific Determinism)
82-88:   Hedonism and Epicureanism
97-105: Buddhism

(feel free to read everything in-between as well if you want, but the above it what you "NEED" to read)!

We will cover these in class next week, so have them read by Monday.  There will be questions on the first test about these pages - lots of questions.  I will discuss these topics which will better help you understand them, so don't worry if you don't "get it" all right away.  

The Paper Cutter and Sartre'

After reading Sartre' on the bottom of page 72 - 74, and considering the actiivity in class with the paper cutter, discuss some or all of the following:

-Does a paper cutter only become a paper cutter when you can see it, or does it first exist as a form?
-Does a paper cutter's esistence come before or after its essence, and why?
-What is the essence of a paper cutter?
-How is the essence of a paper cutter different or similar to that of a whale?
-What is the essence of a person?  Does existence precede essence, or does essence precede existence,and
  what does that even mean?
-What doe you think existentialism is, and how does it fit into this discussion?

Please feel free to and do comment on each other's comments. Humor is appreciated, but keep it all in good taste, be appropriate, and consider each other's feelings. 

 

Assignments for Philosohy 101

Assignments: 

For Friday March 21st:
         -Read  pages 5-12 and do the self-test on page 7
         -Pages 21-25 section called "Fields of Philosophy"
         -Page 33-36  on Bertrand Russell

There will be a quizz on Friday over the above readings.  I want you to think about what Bertrand Russell feels the aim or purpose of philosophy is.


For Monday March 25th
     -48-49 section called "Stoicism's Cynical Origins"
     -50-51 section called "The Stoic Universe"
     -52-53 section called "Purpose of Life"
     -55-56 "Emotions in Life, and "How to Progress Morally".

Also:  -You should bring both 'self-tests" you took on Thursday with Mr. Simon.
          -You need to tune into the blog - of course if you're reading this you are :), AND I'd like you to
             comment on the first question I posted about fate vs. free will.   
 

Philosophy 101
March - May 2013

So.......... you took the survey in the book to see if you have any traits of Existentialism, Stoicism, Buddhism, and Hedonism.  I bet you found that you have some of each.  One reason might be because Americans are actually a blend of many cultures................We often practice many (sometimes conflicting) philosophical systems at the same time  (whether we know it or not). 

You will also find that many philosophies have different "levels" or "degrees".  Like at a game sometimes you might be really decked out in Blue and Gold, while others might just wear a blue t-shirt. Both are practicing their colors, but at different levels.

An extreme Existentialist practices a system that EVERYTHING is free will.  An extreme Stoic practices a system where NOTHING is free will and EVERYTHING is fate/ and determined ahead-of-time.  What do you think about fate and free will?