philosophy discussions 1-12

.docx

School

Wilfrid Laurier University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

110

Subject

Philosophy

Date

Dec 6, 2023

Type

docx

Pages

7

Uploaded by CountMeerkatPerson329

Report
LESSON 1 DISCUSSION: PART A: Introduce yourself to the class. What is your name and major? Where did you grow up? Are you on-campus or at a distance? Why did you sign up for Social and Political Philosophy? Which issues related to the subject do you most want to explore? Hi my name is Megan and I’m a general science major! I’m currently off campus and doing everything online. I took this class because philosophy is something that has always interested me, and I always have fun in classes like this! I like to see and consider different thought processes and points of view. PART B: 2. Define philosophy in a way that is most relevant for you. Then elaborate on or criticize 3 of the quotes below. I think philosophy is about understanding the different points of view and considering new ways to look at the world and evolve through different thought processes. a. “At most, philosophy can be the love of wisdom, the will to truth, a mere quest but never the actual possession of truth. Educators, therefore, ought to clear the field of old conventions, of fossilized ideas that parade as truths and free their students from prejudices.” I think this statement is true because when you really step back and think about it there’s no REAL truth. Everyone has a different definition and unique perspective on what they think is true. I’ve always said this about what people think is right and wrong as well. We know what we think to be true but that doesn’t mean the people around us and general society believe the same. e) Moral argument is a “dialect between our judgements about particular situations and the principles we affirm on reflection.” (Michael Sandel, Justice, p.28) I agree with this statement. It all has to do with what I said above about how everyone has a different concept of right and wrong. Even though we are given a social construct / set of ‘norms’ that are supposedly ‘right and wrong’ it all comes down to an individual’s thought processes, experience and cognitive function. d) “Philosophy and history of philosophy are one. You cannot do the first without also doing the second.” – Charles Taylor This statement reminds me of another statement, “I only know my ideas, of other people’s ideas.” – Bo Burnham Philosophy and the history of philosophy are 100% part of the same whole. New philosophies emerge because of new ideas that come from either the agreeance or the distaste of past philosophies.
LESSON 2 DISCUSSION: Democracy (2.4) 1a. What are the best and worst things about Democracy? The best thing about democracy is that people feel like they have a say about what happens to them and how their country is run. They get to vote for what they think is best for them. But democracy comes with its fair share of problems. As much as we as a populace don’t like to admit it, we have a problem with changing our minds and getting angry at the people that we vote into office very VERY easily. We sometimes feel that maybe we’d be better off if we didn’t get to pick the people in charge… but, it’s obvious that that kind of society in our country would also not turn out very well. Just as we get mad at the people, we elect to lead us we would be equally if not more so unhappy with the decision we have no say in. 1b. Would you prefer to live in a Liberal Dictatorship (protects individual rights) or an Illiberal Democracy ? (Authoritarian or theocratic policies enacted by majority vote) I would rather live in a liberal dictatorship because a society where authoritarianism reigns supreme usually comes with a severe decrease in quality of life. Throughout history there have been multiple examples of societies and cultures collapsing underneath authoritarian and theocratic government systems. LESSON 3 DISCUSSION: 1a. How might Hobbes criticize Plato’s Republic? Hobbes would look at Plato’s Republic and feel like Plato was naïve and unrealistically optimistic. Plato was someone who was more of a glass half full rather than half empty type of person. Believing that people were inherently good and that they will always do things that result in good outcomes and actions. Hobbes is seen as more pessimistic. Thinking that people are more drawn to doing what is good for them and only them and believing that human nature is inherently egotistical. 1b. What would be Locke’s main criticism of Hobbes? Locke would think that Hobbes was too obsessed with government control and argue that the government shouldn’t have complete control over the populace. Locke was more a believer in partial control over the populace rather than a monarchy. He would be concerned for the populace’s individual rights and freedoms and also feel that Hobbes is underestimating people with his pessimistic view on human nature because if he thought more like Plato the need he had for an absolutist government would be virtually non- existent. LESSON 4 DISCUSSION: 1a. Should Dudley and Stephens be hanged for killing and eating Parker? Or should their act of desperation be partially or fully excused due to the extreme circumstances? (p.31-33) I don’t believe that Dudley and Stephens should be hanged for killing and eating Parker. This is because I believe that they did this purely out of necessity. Dudley and Stephens saw that Parker was going to die anyway
because he was already sick and going to eventually die a slow death. I think that under any other circumstance that they wouldn’t consider any malicious acts towards other individuals, this was just an extenuating circumstance where options were limited, and time was valuable. 1b A Utilitarian would agree that normal society should have rules against murder and cannibalism because such prohibitions serve utility and overall happiness. However, in this special case, such rules are contrary to utility. Does morality require everyone to starve? This question is very hard to answer because when visualizing this answer, I can’t effectively imagine my own self being in a situation like this. But I think that morality doesn’t apply here as something that can keep them from making the decision to eat Parker. Again, they did this purely out of necessity and desperate times call for desperate measures. I feel like when put in situations like this logic and reasoning / thinking about right and wrong/ potential consequences flies out the window and is essentially null and void. 1c. What sort of rules should govern such situations? For example, is killing and cannibalism okay if everyone agrees to draw lots? Or is it better to kill and eat someone who is dying anyway? I think in this situation there should be extensive thought processes and conversations that go into making these decisions rather than the ‘I say we do this so, we do it.’ Type of mentality that comes from Dudley and Stephens making the decision on their own based on opinion on human life value. I don’t necessarily think that they are justified in their actions because of the way they decided to make their decision. I would be more open to the decision if the only deciding factor was that Parker was ill and close to death instead of them perceiving him as less than and thinking of him as someone who was worth nothing because they believe that they are more important. LESSON 5 DISCUSSION: 7a. Do you agree with Sandel that there are some things money shouldn’t be able to buy? Yes, I agree that there are things money shouldn’t be able to buy. I think this is because there are limits to what anyone should be able to buy and sell. Unfortunately, in some parts of the world money can be spent to acquire just about anything you could think of... good or bad. There are moral limits that are sometimes not universally recognized and enforced. 7b. What are the best candidates for such status, and by what criteria? The main things that I believe should not be bought and sold are human lives. In the past the human race has had a lot of turmoil around the subject of slavery, and ownership of property. A human should not be allowed to spend their money to possess another individual in any context. 7c. Should prostitution/sex work be legal? Or rich donors “buying” Ivy league college admission for their kids?
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help