DAY 11 Theories of "The Self" & "Personhood in Virginia"

DAY 11 Theories of "The Self"  & "Personhood in Virginia"

First of all THANK YOU very much for being the seniors in the school - your help in setting up the class after moving 35 desks back from the caf after the trial Literacy Test today was invaluable, thank you!

Before looking at First Class Travel, let's establish the four big theories of "Self":

Bundle Theory
Who: David Hume

• the "Bundle" refers to the collection of experiences that you carry around with you forever.
• the Bundle represents your experiences.
• It's a loose collection of PERCEPTIONS about your past experiences.

Project Theory
Who: Jean-Paul Sartre

• the "Project" refers to an ongoing, never-ending project, like the building of a bridge that never ceases.
• always evolving, your "self" is always changing, it's connected to the past (experiences) and the future.
• The exact nature of the project that Sartre refers to is connected to the soul, morals, conscious thinking.

Narrative Theory
Who: Ricoeur:

• The image of a "Book" comes to mind, somewhere to write your own story.
• The main character is created by one's experiences and present events.
• The story is related to other people too, and everyone's book intermixes.
• Your story never ends, even after death as your story continues to be written in other people's narratives (books).

Substance Theory:
Who: Descartes

• the "Substance" is a mental substance of the mind, NOT derived from material things.
• This is the opposite of the Bundle Theory.
• Experiences do NOT change the self, they only send the self in difference directions.
• This is analogous to a sail boat, e.g., "the HMS Self" - the wind are experiences that may change the boat's direction in the water but do not change the boat in any way.

Here's a link to just one of many news stories on the following topic: "Women Rally in Virginia"

The "Personhood" Bill of Virginia:

HOUSE BILL NO. 1 Offered January 11, 2012 Prefiled November 21, 2011 A BILL to construe the word "person" under Virginia law, including but not limited to § 8.01-50 of the Code of Virginia, to include unborn children. ---------- Patrons-- Marshall, R.G. and Cline; Senators: Colgan and Garrett ---------- Referred to Committee for Courts of Justice ----------

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Virginia:

1.  § 1. The life of each human being begins at conception.

§ 2. Unborn children have protectable interests in life, health, and well-being.

§ 3. The natural parents of unborn children have protectable interests in the life, health, and well-being of their unborn child.

§ 4. The laws of this Commonwealth shall be interpreted and construed to acknowledge on behalf of the unborn child at every stage of development all the rights, privileges, and immunities available to other persons, citizens, and residents of this Commonwealth, subject only to the Constitution of the United States and decisional interpretations thereof by the United States Supreme Court and specific provisions to the contrary in the statutes and constitution of this Commonwealth.

§ 5. As used in this section, the term "unborn children" or "unborn child" shall include any unborn child or children or the offspring of human beings from the moment of conception until birth at every stage of biological development.

§ 6. Nothing in this section shall be interpreted as creating a cause of action against a woman for indirectly harming her unborn child by failing to properly care for herself or by failing to follow any particular program of prenatal care.

§ 7. Nothing in this section shall be interpreted as affecting lawful assisted conception.

Some great discussion items - 

1.  Peter Singer: on personhood .....  do you agree with him?  What criteria that he provides to you agree with?
2.  The other point of view.  Do you more fully agree with this point of view?  What criteria provided to you agree with when designating a person?
3. Conclusion:  What did Virginia ultimately decide?

DAY 9 - Tuesday After Family Day.  Ontology and Such

Your job for today, in the Library, is to create good notes the information below paying particular attention to the bolded terms.  In many cases you will need to refer to the Internet beyond this blog entry.

In addition to that, you are to include in your notes the following:

Who are the main philosophers who adhere to these theories?
Can you find direct quotes linking them to these theories?
What links to your life and/or society in general are there (examples).

Three key terms in ontology are substance, individuals and universals.   Substance refers to the essential reality of something that is independent, unchanging and can exist by itself. For example, in a monist reality (one substance) most philosophers cite God or Being as that substance. In a dualist reality (two substances or more) philosophers generally focus on bodies and minds.

Individuals are distinct, independent, singular entities (for example, you, a strawberry, a train) whereas universals are separate proprieties of an individual. For example, you are tall but your friend is taller. Tallness, then, is a universal since it can be in multiple places at one time and is used to differentiate individuals. Colour too can be a universal.

Before Proceeding, take a moment to create a list of 10 other universals. This will be helpful when you begin tackling the "mind/body" problem later in this activity.

3. Existentialism (or Me, Me, Me!)

Have you ever thought:

"How did I get into the world? Why was I not asked about it and why was I not informed of the rules and regulations, but just thrust into the ranks as if I had been bought by a peddling 'shanghaier' of human beings? How did I get involved in this big enterprise called actuality? Why should I be involved? Isn't it a matter of choice? And if I am compelled to be involved, where is the manager-I have something to say about this! Is there no manager? To whom shall I make my complaint?" (Young Man in Kierkegarrd's Repetition)

If so, you might be an existentialist! Existentialism centres on the idea that "existence precedes essence", which was captured byJean-Paul Sartre. However, existentialism itself was conceived a century earlier by noted philosophers Soren Kierkegaard and Freidrich Nietzsche. .

Summarizing existentialism is easy: the individual defines reality, often within a hostile and indifferent world. But, as you know from the earlier activities, reducing existentialism to a single sentence is only the tip of the philosophical iceberg.

Fred Nietzsche

4. Nihilism

After all of that if you are feeling adrift and questioning life's purpose, fear not! In fact, fear nothing as Nietzsche might suggest...

Nihilism is the "belief" that life has no meaning whatsoever. A nihilist wouldn't argue that life doesn't exist, just that it has no purpose, meaning or universal values. Some might argue that Shakespeare's Macbeth was a nihilist when he lamented "Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player that struts and frets his hour upon the stage and then is heard no more; it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." And further evidence of nihilism in literature can be found in post-1860s Russian literature (Turgenev's Fathers and Sons Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment) and the Hollywood movies, The Big Lebowski and Fight Club.

But don't lose all hope. Even Nietzsche noted that "I praise, I do not reproach, [nihilism's] arrival. I believe it is one of the greatest crises, a moment of the deepest self-reflection of humanity. Whether man recovers from it, whether he becomes master of this crisis, is a question of his strength!".  

 Did You Know?Evidence of nihilism in modern day Hollywood films can be found in popular movies.

The Big Lebowski (1998) is a comedy film that examines a few days in the life of a burned out, unemployed slacker, known as the Dude, who is in the process of allowing life to drift by, when he is mistakenly identified as a millionaire with the same name (Jefferey Lebowski).

The Dude, who finds himself in the middle of an elaborate kidnapping plot, must repeatedly throughout the film face down a group German nihilists modelled after the band Kraftwerk: "We believe in no-zhing, Lebowski. No-zhing."

As the movie nears its end, The Dude sums up his situation and philosophy with the phrase, "The Dude abides".

In director David Fincher's Fight Club, the film opens with a monotone narrative, as dreary as the life that Jack (the main character) lives. Jack has been taught everything the world tells him is necessary to achieve popular notions of happiness. He has a great job, an upscale apartment, sharp clothes, and an automobile. Yet Jack is not happy. In truth, deep down Jack is fading away and he is helpless to do anything about it. He cannot sleep properly, he doesn't eat, in fact Jack is just an empty shell going through the motions of life. His entire life he has been told by mainstream society what he needs to be happy. Why should he continue to accept these beliefs when they are actually killing him.

Eventually Jack meets an interesting and twisted character named Tyler Durden, who helps Jack realize that everything is wrong with his life.

Through Tyler, Jack slowly develops Jack into a nihilist, until he rejects everything he has ever been taught about what is necessary to enjoy a successful and happy life. As you watch the film try to identify the many ways Jack comes to reject pop culture (You are not your job. You are not the money in your bank account. You are not the car you drive. You are not how much money is in your wallet. You are not your clothes). Jack comes to realize all of his possessions only make his life experience empty. Jack now loathes his former 'happy' life. The numbness he once felt with life turns to anger and excitement, which is channeled within "Fight Club", a secret place where confused men meet to do battle as pit fighters. Nihilism brings life to Jack and his band of characters within Fight Club. The obstacles that once plagued him are swept away; he achieves good sleep for the first time in years. Life does not become perfect for Jack, and there are many continuing trials, but by the film's end Jack sees new hope after living a nihilistic life. Consider a trip to your local video store and viewing these acclaimed motion pictures to see how the concept of a nihilistic approach to everyday modern life, is highly feasible.

"The above images are of posters, and the copyright for them is owned by the publisher and the creator of the work depicted. The use of scaled-down, low-resolution images of movie posters to provide critical commentary on the film, event, etc. in question or of the poster itself, not solely for illustration qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law" (Wikipedia.com.).

 Resources

1. Nothingness
2. The Existential Primer
3. Jean-Paul Sartre's "Homepage"

DAY 8 - Rene Descartes

Cogito Ergo Sum (I think, therefore I am)

Right now you might feel a little doubtful about, well, everything! If so, don't worry... you aren't alone. Back in 1641 famous modernist philosopher and mathematician Rene Descartes essentially rationalized (thought without experimenting) his way to a very frightening conclusion: he might not exist! Fortunately, Descartes was able to convince himself otherwise and revolutionized the mind-body argument when he wrote his famous Meditations on First Philosophy.

How did he do this? Actually, he was sort of watching the 16th century version of reality tv; he was sitting in a chair, looking out his window at a man in a trench coat. Because he could not see the man's face, he realized that he had no real proof that the man was in fact a man. He could be something else (perhaps a robot) dressed as a man. This startling conclusion led him to begin a mammoth thought experiment centering on doubt; in essence, what can you really know for certain?

Think of all the certainties that you take for granted: the sun rises, your senses don't (usually) lie to you, family members exist, friends are fun to hang out with, etc. Descartes, however, started doubting all of that, and more. As he himself says in his "First Meditation", "Several years have now elapsed since I first became aware that I had accepted, even from my youth, many false opinions for true, and that consequently what I afterward based on such principles was highly doubtful; and from that time I was convinced of the necessity of undertaking once in my life to rid myself of all the opinions I had adopted, and of commencing anew the work of building from the foundation..." (Réné Descartes, The Method, Meditations and Philosophy of Descartes [1637]).

In the end, Descartes rationalized away everything from his bathrobe to his body. He just couldn't prove, necessarily, that he wasn't either dreaming or being tricked by some malicious evil spirit. Today we might compare his concerns to being either downloaded into a virtual reality machine (ala the Matrix) or being a brain in a jar being fed false sensory stimuli. And if you think that sounds too sci-fi, just remember the famous "I smell burnt toast!" exclamation from a surprised epilepsy patient whose brain was being electrically stimulated by Doctor Penfield back in the 1930s. Think of it this way: can you prove without any doubt that you are not dreaming, hooked into a computer or a brain in a jar?

Fortunately, Descartes' doubt was not infinite. He realized that although he could doubt everything from his friends' existence to his own senses, he could not doubt that he was thinking (otherwise, he wouldn't have had that thought). This simple realization allowed Descartes to infer the necessary and sufficient existence of himself ("I think, therefore I am") and time (since memories must be from a time that is not now). This foundation permitted him to later "prove" the existence of the body, senses and even God.

 Required Reading
For your activity you will be reading the first two Meditations from Descartes' Meditations on First Philosophy. Read an edited version of his first and second chapters below . If you want to read Descartes' entire Meditations on First Philosophy or have a helpful study guide, then check out the Resources section.

Edited "Meditations on First :Philosophy".


Pre-Assignment Practice: As you read try to identify the main points in Descartes' writings. Are Descartes' arguments valid? Why or why not? Consider how his arguments might be improved upon.

EnrichmentBefore continuing, you may want to play a web-based game called "Philosophical Health Check" where you can discover for yourself whether you accept the brain in a jar possibility. Click here to start.

 Resources

1. Necessary vs. Sufficient Conditions
2. Concepts of Necessary and Sufficient
3. Dualism
4. Aristotle's Metaphysics Summary
5. Meditations on First Philosophy 

DAY 7 - Big Questions Review & Einstein

We did some review of the Big Questions - Personhood, Supreme Being, Nature of Reality/Matter, and we ended up talking about the nature of the universe a la Einstein - see below:

Space-time curvature

Does it seem strange that Einstein keeps popping up in a philosophy course? Yet, when you are asking the question 'what is reality?', few people have contributed so much to changing our view of what reality is as he did. Indeed, Einstein's famous equation E=mc² actually expresses a big philosophical position too; basically, matter and energy are the same thing, but just perceived differently.

Likewise, Einstein's theory of relativity explains how something as accepted as time isn't always guaranteed. Gravity and velocity can cause time dilations, which means that if you are near something heavy enough or are going fast enough, time slows down for you (this might explain the feeling you get after eating a huge meal or when you're racing to get to the bathroom after a long class!). If you were travelling on a space ship going 0.999999c (where c = speed of light), the journey to Pluto from Earth would only take 42 seconds for the people on the spaceship, but back on Earth over 5 hours would have passed. In essence, you would be travelling into the future! But such concerns are not merely for science fiction; GPS device manufacturers are intimately aware of relativity since ignoring the theory would result in their satellites not functioning.

The subject of reality grows stranger yet when you consider the recent speculation into String theory. Simply, String theory suggests that the universe as we know it is merely an infinitesimally small part of a series of interwoven, vibrating strings... So, even if reality really is an illusion, the question now becomes: which illusion is it?

Resources
Animated Theory of Relativity 
Animated Time Dilation Calculator 
String Theory Website

DAY 6 - Metaphysics Videos

Today we start in the Library - your job is to find one short video (YouTube) and defines, explains, identifies or otherwise depicts your understanding of Metaphysics thus far.

Add your link to that video to this Metaphysics Video Form by filling out the form.  You will then present these in class beginning at 9:15 this morning.

Here are the links you provided - great discussion followed in all sorts of different directions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8YQE69QsL8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KcivmBojzVk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZ82ATRFVrc

http://youtu.be/ECJO0eSpBAU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWZEuv6pBIE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tbHU04RHrU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DozI0awtPyg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iO3YBQa6GHM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWZEuv6pBIE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KcivmBojzVk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iO3YBQa6GHM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peRqNZ4Tpm0

We also had a good look at that image up there - "History of the Universe".  I would think that we cannot consider fully the state of matter unless we think in terms of "all that is" and that's why we spent some time on that image today!

DAY 5 - Socrates and Reality??

• Set the standard all subsequent Western philosophy.
• We depend upon other philosophers for info about him.
• Sentenced to death for "moral corruption" of Athens' youth - could have argued his way out but chose the high moral road and drank the hemlock anyway.
• No human knowingly does evil - we always strive to do right.
• Full time philosopher - used to be a mason.
• Focused on "moral character" - to understand "virtue", via knowledge.
• Free discussion is the path to knowledge and virtue.
• Socratic dialogues - main way he taught.
• Never accepted payment from his students.

What is REALITY??  Possible answers include:
1. The actual state of matter.
2. "Verity" of a statement - conformity with "fact".
3. Indisputable truths, e.g. Mathematical principles.
4. The state of being true.
5. Honesty, integrity, truthfulness.
6. Agreement with a standard or original.
7. Accuracy, as of position or adjustment.
8. Fidelity or constancy.
9. In truth, in reality; in fact; actually: e.g. "In truth, moral decay hastened the decline of the Roman Empire."

DAY 4 - Dive into Metaphysics & Socrates!

Part 1: An Example of How History Has Helped to Shape Philosophical Trends

Welcome to the Philosophy: Questions and Theories (HZT4U).

As an introductory activity you are asked to complete an interactive quiz dealing with your knowledge of modern civilization prior to 1500. There are six multiple choice questions included, and based upon the number of correct answers you accumulate a virtual history prize will be awarded at the conclusion. Following each question you will be shown the correct answer. Pay particularly close attention to the accompanying explanation that follows each answer. It will help to describe how and why aspects of life have changed from the Middle Ages to the modern era, and how this has helped to shape philosophical trends in the modern world.

Part 2: What is Metaphysics?

"The unexamined life is not worth living."

Socrates (469 - 399 BCE)

Rodin's "The Thinker"

Each day you are inundated with information - conversations, signs, television shows, Internet blogs, dreams and more. How often do you actually contemplate this information with the intensity of Rodin's famous statue? Probably not all that often. But then, with all of the day-to-day demands, who has the time? Indeed, all of this information is sort of like eating nothing but fast food; you may feel full but are you really satisfied? Philosophy (which translates to "love of wisdom") is about taking time to consider, critique and reflect on the big questions. These answers do not come easily, nor are there many absolute answers. However, for many philosophers, the journey is more important than the destination. So grab a comfy chair and let's take that first step!

Metaphysics

So what is Metaphysics? Well, imagine you and your friends are driving in a car for a good old-fashioned road trip. One of your friends might ask, "Where are we going?", while another wonders, "When will we get there?", while yet another cries out, "Who are we meeting later?" These are important questions, especially for the driver. But imagine your friends' reactions when you suddenly state, "Is this a dream?"

Assuming they didn't turn the car around, your friends' answers would be metaphysical. That is because Metaphysics asks the really  Big Questions:

• What is real?
• What is the meaning of life?
• What is our place in the universe (if, indeed, there is one)?
• Does the world exist?
• What are things really made of?
• Do we have free will?
• Does God exist?

and, importantly,

• Does any of this matter, and if so, how so?

As you can see, Metaphysics seeks answer to the same question satirical novelist Douglas Adams answered: what is the answer to life, the universe and everything? However, unlike Adams' tongue-in-cheek answer of

42: the answer to life, the universe and everything, according to novelist Douglas Adams, few philosophers would agree that the answer is so easy.

I distributed a short history of Socrates and you all made a "top 10 list" of things everyone should know about Socrates.

Day 3 Philosophy in Pictures

Day 3  Philosophy in Pictures

Please use this link to get to your first assignment, Philosophy in Pictures.  I will also hand out a paper copy.

We are in the Library Lab to complete this assignment.

A good source for information about Philosophy is the Stanford University Encyclopedia of   Philosophy.  Check these links out (don't read the entire things, they're involved, just scan and get a feeling for the three areas of Philosophy that we have already discussed in class).

Metaphysics

Epistemology

Ethics

Day 2: Questions Asked and Answered

Day 2: Questions Asked and Answered

1.  Review of yesterday's Dennett video and the big questions it raises.  Below here is a sample answer to the question, "Comment on the video."  See?  Simple question, complex answer.
2.  We continue with the next two videos (see yesterday's post) and addressed the main points of them.

Some of the discussion that the "Epistemology" video elicited included these ideas:
1. We are sometimes willing to lie to ourselves (ignore the actual truth)  to make ourselves feel better (raise our self-esteem).
2. The only honest job is the magician's - she/he tell you that they will deceive you and they do!

Some of the discussion that the "Ethics" video elicited included these ideas:
1. The Greater Good Principle" - when deciding upon the Ethics of an issue, does it matter that a greater number of people will benefit?
2. Although we all agree that generally it is not right to lie, there just might be situations where lying is the ethical thing to do (would you tell the axe-murder where your parents were enabling him to go an hack them?)
3. Do ethics apply to other living creatures like genetically modified lab animals, animals used for product testing, etc.?

Video #1: Dan Dennett: Responding to Pastor Rick Warren

Dan Dennett’s ideas concerning religion and how we must collectively use the study of it to further societal progress are extremely interesting. He states that instating universal education of world religions is the only suitable practice in an advanced, democratic society that will promote generations with an approach to all faucets of life sans religious intolerance and thus, the skepticism and prejudices nurtured by growing up ardently following one religion. In fact, he suggests that what we know as democracy cannot function properly without such an institution.

Universal education of world religion is indeed an exciting idea. To me, however, it is less plausible of an idea to instate than is presented in the video. I’m not saying Dennett’s idea is bad, in fact, I agree that in all areas of education, children should receive as much unbiased, factual information as they can. This includes math and English and second/third/fourth languages, in history, geography, current events, law, business, etc. The basis of Dennett’s proposal is to provide student s with FACTS about world religions. But on topics so broad and so very polluted with matters of opinion and contradiction, how is it possible to teach general religious lessons on just the facts? And, how is it possible to mediate a respectful discussion where fact versus interpretation within religion can be dissected without offending anyone, or causing serious ideological conflict?

Not only is there a huge grey space between what is a fact and what is interpretation when looking at religions, today it is an incredible challenge to make any statements concerning the nature of any one religion without risking the anger of its followers. For an international example, Islamic religion dictates that women should be treated differently men in many ways, such as where each gender is allowed to pray in a mosque (for women it is in the back or basement, out of sight) or how a woman is allowed to present herself in public. When international organizations look into primarily Islamic countries and see gender inequalities it is virtually impossible to help women living in unjust and potentially dangerous situations because the issue at hand involves denouncing the morality of another’s religion. In my mind, the terrible abuse women in many Arab countries live with is not a question of religion at all, but of sexism and misogyny. But what rights do I have which allow me to state what is and is not a fact or an unfair interpretation within Islamic tradition… what right does anyone have to do so?  This argument is firmly established around the world and stands between anyone calling on the morality of religion and the validity of their point, regardless of whether it is something concerning human rights, or another cause.  Even in Canada, our unyielding acceptance for multiculturalism has created such a strong vehemence against anyone that disrupts the principal of universal acceptance and tolerance that debating the ethics of someone’s theological beliefs paints the inquisitor as racist, judgmental and hostile. Thus, in our country, it will be the teachers who administer these lessons Dan Dennett calls for that will face ostracism for presenting certain “facts” about religion and that will certainly make enemies while doing so.

Regardless, Dennett’s point concerning the function of democracy is valid. Our governmental philosophy cannot work properly if our population is not as educated as is possible. Where religion is concerned, many current events occurring within our own borders could perhaps be understood better by Canadians with a formal, multicultural religious education. With this, when public discussion is raised around issues such as abortion and civil rights such as gay rights, less absolute ideologies would bash against one another and more tolerant discussion and debate could be held – and progress reached. Today when one of these issues is raised, the choice you have is to fall in behind one side or the other – with vigor – or to be labeled as an uncaring or uneducated individual. Dennett’s model proposes that the majority of people religiously educated would be able to see for themselves both sides of the argument and then jump right into problem solving. If we could get rid of the challenges surrounding public discussion and debate over the ethics involved with individual religions and positively educate students on the history and practices of these ancient and revered institutions, then our democratic system would certainly have new potential to flourish and progress.

DAY 1 Welcome to Philosophy!!

Day 1: Welcome!

1.  Why study philosophy?  Matt Groening, creator of the Simpsons, explains.
2.  You will need to think outside of the box
3.  Aristotle in Three Minutes!!
3.  Ideas, people, events, etc ... the A-Z guide to philosophy.
4.  Your big questions.

For tonight and tomorrow at school . . . first of all you will NEED a Gmail account for this course - go and make one for yourself if you don't already have one.  Please make it as close to your first and last name as possible - mine is marktkovich@gmail.com.

Some assignments will be completed using googledocs (presentation, forms etc).

Everything else will be submitted through D2L (Desire to Learn) - more on that later.

HOMEWORK:

1.  Complete this Contact Information Form .

2.  Watch these three videos (you can see the text of these talks (subtitles) by clicking the button directly below the video indicating "27 Languages"):

Metaphysics 
Epistemology
Ethics

Write your impressions of each video; what you agreed with, what you question, how the main idea(s) fit in your life.  Be prepared to share and hand in your ideas tomorrow.

Review

Spiderman's Allegory of the Cave: Youtube
Review Chart (this is a closed document, cannot edit)
Review Chart for collaborative learning and editing (this one you can add to and edit)

Day 76: Epistemology

A) Sudoku

1.  List 10 actions that are wrong.
What makes them all wrong? (what is the common element).
How do we know something is wrong?

Agree?  Disagree?

With a partner/group of three answer the question "What makes something wrong?"

2.  What is the moral law?  How do you know?

3.  Philosophy in Prison
Why is this important?

4.  How the brain work?  Repeated knowledge.

Why does the brain do this?  Need to do this?

5.  Wag the Dog: review.

Day 72: Wag the Dog

1.  Movie Assignment
2.  Movie evaluation

Notes from text

Day 71

1.  Document to edit as a class: Re: Philosophers and their theories

Day 64: Seminar prep

Seminar

Day 61 & 62

1.  Watch the movie Never Let Me Go and continue creating your questions and responding to them for the seminars next week.

Here is the seminar schedule:
Monday:
Neil
Morgan
Megan
Caitlin
Bree
Rachel
Katie
Dayna
Amelia

Tuesday:
Ashlynne
Shannon
Barbara
Brandi
Nathaniel
Christian
Alex
Blake
Carrie

Day 57: Practice Test

Practice Test

Day 55: Finish Ethics

1.  Finish the work from last week.

Plan for the next two weeks:
Tuesday Nov. 27: Test Prep
Wed Nov. 28: Test
Thurs. Nov 29: Seminar hand out - prep questions
Fri. Nov. 30: seminar prep
Monday Dec. 3: Movie for seminar
Tues. Dec. 4: movie for seminar
Wed. Dec. 5: seminar prep/unit review
Thurs. Dec. 6: Seminar group 1
Fri. Dec 7: Seminar group 2

Day 54: Test prep and finish videos

see title

Day 53: Faking?

1.  Finish the video from yesterday and continue with the discussions.

Day 52: Ethics in Photos and Videos

1.  Lying, Cheating, Stealing: Kid Rock
1b.  Faking the Grade
2.  Freedom of Expression and Censorship: Twitter 
3.  War  Gaza Strip   Obama
4.  Euthanasia  Tony Nicklinson
                         His death
                         Michele
5.  What should we do?  Agree?  Disagree?

Day 51: Chapter 14

Thank you to Morgan who found this video about the morality of babies.

1.  Read chapter 14 and complete question #1 on page 304.

Day 46-50: Yes/No

Shannon
Morgan
Katie   Document
Dayna
Carrie

Day 45: Ethics Review

Ethics Ideas

Day 41-44

Class time in the library to work on Yes/No presentations.

Yes/No Project Presentation

1.  My examples
2.  Student example  Presentation    Document
Example 2   Document 2
3.  Evaluation

Day 39: Ethics

YES/NO presentation.

Day 35: Text

1.  Text work while I work with individual students.

Day 33: Intro to Ethics

1.  Is there such a thing as a selfless act?  Phoebe

2.  Small group discussions:
  Are Moral Choices Possible?
  Why Do the Right Thing?
  Can People Be Good Without a Common Idea of Good?
  How Should the Rightness or Wrongness of Actions Be Determined?

3.  Ethics Vocab List:
Vocabulary for Ethics

Humanism
An approach that emphasizes the human or secular (non-religious)realm over the religious or spiritual realm.

Theories of action
Theories that deal with how people should act.

Theories of character (virtue theories)
Theories that deal with questions about character traits that are morally good and morally bad.

Theories of value
Theories that deal with questions about the things people value.

Moral Agent
Someone who is capable of thinking about a moral problem, making a decision how to act, and taking responsibility for this action.

Divine Command Theory
Right and wrong are defined by the commands of the supreme being.

Divine Command Ethicists
A person whose actions are defined by the commands of the supreme being.

Utilitarianism (Developed by John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham)
Morally good choices are those that result in the greatest good (amount of happiness) for the greatest number of people.

Kantian Ethicists
Believe that moral choices must be judged, not by their consequences, but by the good will of the moral agent. 

Egoists
Believe that people should act in their own interest.

Intuitionists
Believe that truths, and therefore morals, are understood by intuition (an experience that is independent of reasoning).

Objective
Knowledge that is supported by evidence.

Subjective
Opinions that depend on personal feelings, experience, or thought.


5.  Read and take notes on pp. 242 - 259 of the text.

Day 32: Gwynne Dyer

Guest speaker Gwynne Dyer.

Day 31: work period

Please continue to work on ALFQ. 
Closure and due date is Monday October 22 at 1:00 pm.

You must sign in your work with me.

Days 28-30: Seminars 1,2 and 3

Seminars

Day 27: Seminar prep

1.  Seminar prep

Here is the plan for next week.  On the day of your seminar your 3 questions and answers are DUE at the END OF THE CLASS.  Please remember that you will not be able to go and print them off, add to them etc.  You will need to have your Qs and As during the seminar so that you may use them.

ALFQ:  Due on THURSDAY October 18
CLOSURE:  Friday October 19

Seminar: Monday:
Morgan
Carrie-Ann
Ashlynne
Barbara
Amelia
Shannon
Neil

Tuesday:
Katie
Blacke
Nick
Caitlin
Teri
Connor
Rachel
Bree

Wednesday:
Fabiola
Dayna
Christian
Alex
Nathaniel
Maghan
Brandi

Day 25 and 26

1.  Seminar Prep

I will work with anyone who would like some feedback on their societal links and theory links on Friday.  We will also decide seminar groups on Friday.

A reminder that ALFQ is due next Thursday October 18.  Closure date is October 19.

Seminar questions and answers are due at the end of the period, before you leave class, on the day you participate in the seminar.

Day 24: Seminar information

1.  Seminar: what is it?  How does it work?
2.  Seminar  
Documents

Day 23: review

1.  Review theories and main ideas about supreme being(s). 

Day 22: Popcorn cont ...

Finish Life is Beautiful.

Day 21: Popcorn anyone?

Movie: Life is Beautiful

Day 20: SSHHhhhhhhh

Reading period for ALFQ.

Day 19: University Fair

Enjoy the university fair!

For those people in class this will be a reading period.

Day 18: Text Work

1.  Chapter 8: Notes

Day 17: My absence and questions

1.  Discussion questions regarding Hitchens on Studio Q.
2.  Number 4 from day 15.

Day 16: Hitchens

1.  Numbers 2- 4 from yesterday.

Day 15: Supreme Being

1.  3 corners: I believe in a Supreme Being, I question the existence of a Supreme Being, I do not believe in a Supreme Being.  Think, move, pair, share.
2.  10 Commandments ... other sacred documents.  How do religious/spiritual texts shape our lives?
3.  Are you free to believe:  two sides YES vs. NO
4.  Hitchens in Studio Q
His thoughts on a Supreme Being

Your thoughts?  What part of Hitchens' writings do you believe/agree with?

Day 14: Work Period

1.  See above

Day 13: Work Period

1.  See above

Day 12: Personhood, Animals as Persons and Metaphysics CTQ

1.  Complete text work from yesterday. Personhood Theories

2.  Today is an in-class work period to complete your first Metaphysics Critical Thinking Question (it's due next Tuesday).
Evaluation

A few thoughts about CTQs:

What your work should address:

Clarity: Could you elaborate further on that point? Could you express that point in another way? Could you give an illustration? Could you give me an example? (From our point of view, if a statement of yours is unclear we cannot determine whether it is accurate or relevant. In fact we cannot tell anything about it because we don't yet know what it is saying).

Accuracy: Is that really true? How could we check that? How could we find out if that is true?

Precision: Could you give me more details? Could you be more specific?

Relevance: How is that connected to the question? How does that bear on the issue?

Depth: How well does your answer address the complexities in the question? How are you taking into account the problems in the question? Is that dealing with the most significant factors?

Breadth: Do you need to consider another point of view? Do you need to question your own assumptions? Is there another way to look at this question? What would this look like from a conservative standpoint? What would this look like from a more liberal standpoint?  What would it look like from the point of view of someone who’s opinion on the matter is the polar opposite of yours?

Logic and Reasoning: Does this really make sense? Does it follow logically from what you are saying? If yes, can you explain how it follows logically?  (When we think, we bring a variety of thoughts together into some order. When the combinations of thoughts are mutually supporting and make sense in combination, the thinking is considered to be "logical".

Comprehension and Understanding: Is your work in your own words?  Are you also relying on your own ideas? Do you demonstrate that you know what you are talking about? Can you discuss what you are talking about with some degree of authority? Have you covered all the bases?



The issue of dolphins and other cetaceans being given the status of "persons" and thus being granted human rights that we (people) all enjoy is highlighted in the BBC article.  The issue is, of course, also raised in the textbook and we have discussed it in class often - also, have another look at the Bonobo Monkey video of a couple of days ago.

Day 11: Personhood Notes

1.  Complete yesterday's work.
2.  Text reading:
Read pp. 133 - 139. Takes notes on the THEORIES and CRITERIA that each of these philosophers sets out.

John Locke
Daniel Dennett
Mary Anne Warren
Annette Baier
(Personal Identity)
Derek Parfit

Day 10: Personhood in Virginia

1. Numbers 5-8 from Day 9.
2.  Peter Singer: on personhood .....  do you agree with him?  What criteria that he provides to you agree with?
3.  The other point of view.  Do you more fully agree with this point of view?  What criteria provided to you agree with when designating a person?
4.  Text of Virginia Personhood Bill:  Think, Pair, Share
5.  Conclusion:  What did Virginia ultimately decide?

Day 9: Theories of Reality and Self

1.  Review theories of reality from yesterday's text work.
2.  Theories of self: groups to present and explain.
3.  What is a person?  Define and present.
4.  Continuum of personhood: where do these animals fit on the continuum?
5.  Video: Orangutan  Redefine a person?
6.  Video: Susan Savage-Rumbaugh Redefine a person?
7.  What is more important to personhood; mind (consciousness) or matter (brain and body)?  Discuss and respond.
8.  List your 5 criteria for personhood.

Day 8: Metaphysics

1.  Questions
2.  Text work from yesterday.

Day 7: Metaphysics

1.  Big Questions review.
2.  See yesterday.

Day 6: Videos and Meta intro

1.  Complete the video presentations from yesterday.

2.  Intro to metaphysics: Dr. Frances Gray      Descartes

3.  Watch this Survivor video .  What is reality and what is perception in this television show?

4.  Read Plato's Allegory of the Cave (pp. 8-9 of the text).  Write one question a captive may ask and one question the escapee may ask.  Put your post it note on the appropriate chart paper.

5. Text reading: chap. 6 pg. 112-119, and pg. 122 & 125.  Take notes on the following:

• idealism
• realism
• materialism
• monoism
• dualism
• determinism
• ontology
• subtance theory
• bundle theory
• narrative structure
• project theory

Day 5: Your videos

1.  Let's watch the following videos and hear from your peers as they explain under which discipline (Metaphysics, Epistemology, Ethics) their video applies.

Barbara
Caitlin
Ashlynne
Amelia   (watch 1:43 - 4:16)
Blake
Teri
Connor
Neil
Brandi
Rachel
Christian
Shannon
Nick
Fabiola
Megan
Katie
Morgan
Dayna
Carrie
Carolyn
Bree
Nathaniel

Day 4: Room 211

1.  Work on assignments from Day 3.

Philosophy is Pictures is due on Tuesday.

Closure date (with - 5% a day) is Friday.

Day 3: Your videos

1.  In the comm tech lab, room 211, find a YouTube video and explain it's connection to one of the three Philosophy disciplines above.  Paste the url and write your explanation using this link.

2.  Read the textbook pp. 2-9 (in Chapter 1) and take notes on the following
•    Descartes
•    Aristotle
•    Plato
•    Jaspers
•    Materialists
•    Autonomy

A note about notes: it is in your very best interest to take thorough and organized notes for all aspects of this course.  It's a 12U course and it's challenging - you will need to continually refer to your notes to get ideas, theories and quotes from different philosophers for all of your marked work and for the exam.  Start good notes now and you will thank yourself later, honest!


3.  Please read pp. 18-19 of the text (the sections on Metaphysics, Epistemology and Ethics only).  To demonstrate your understanding of these three topics complete your first marked assignment, "Philosophy in Pictures." 

Day 2: Questions asked and Answered

1.  Big Ideas in Metaphysics, Epistemology, Ethics; share your ideas and thoughts from the videos yesterday.  Watch videos.
2.  A-Z's of Philosophy ... your guide.
3.  Your questions ... think, pair, share. Under which of the three units do they fall?

Day 1: Welcome!

1.  Why study philosophy?  Matt Groening, creator of the Simpsons, explain.
2.  You will need to think outside of the box
3.  Ideas, people, events, etc ... the A-Z guide to philosophy.
4.  Your big questions.

For tonight and tomorrow at school . . . first of all you will NEED a Gmail account for this course - go and make one for yourself if you don't already have one.  Please make it as close to your first and last name as possible - mine is amykovich@gmail.com.

Assignments will be completed using googledocs (presentation, forms etc).

HOMEWORK:

1.  Complete this form .

2.  Watch these three videos (you can see the text of these talks (subtitles) by clicking the button directly below the video indicating "27 Languages"):

Metaphysics
Epistemology
Ethics

Write your impressions of each video; what you agreed with, what you question, how the main idea(s) fit in your life.  Be prepared to share and hand in your ideas tomorrow.

DAY 79 Practice Performance Task 2 and Review Stuff

Same as yesterday with a new Practice Performance Task.

First, of course, we "took up" yesterday's work and you all made suggestions as to important elements from Philosophy to include in your work.  We'll do the same on Monday.

Also, I distributed review information and an old exam so if you want to start studying (your exam is exactly 17 days away) this weekend you can!

Practice Performance Task 2

Exam Review Materials

DAY 78 Practice Performance Task 1

Today you did the first of three Practice Performance Tasks.  Your real one will be done next week, probably Tuesday and Wednesday, and it will be the same format with different articles to interpret

Practice Performance Task 1

DAY 77 Continue with Lives Lived

Continue with yesterday's work.

DAY 76 A Life Worth Living

Today we continued our study of Ethics and the ideas of the Life Worth Living and A Good Life.

Here is a copy of Lives Lived: the Story of the Life of Nick Sacuto.

Here is a copy of your personal Lives Lived assignment.

DAY 75 - Immanuel Kant and Questions that Matter

At the same time as Mill/Bentham's Greatest Good for the Greatest Number of People school of thought arose, so did an equally important idea emerge: ethics should consider the INTENTION of the action, not the outcome.

Immanuel Kant - similar to Descartes, he suggested that the only intrinsically good thing in existence is a Good Will.

Kant said, "Good Will accords with Duty."  And duty is, "That which is rational."  Matches up with Aristotle and Descartes.

The idea that the only good is a good will is called, Categorical Imperative ("Absolute Command").

"Act only according to that rule whereby you can at the same time WILL that it should become a universal law of nature."

He meant that when faced with making a moral choice, people with a good will MUST choose the course of action that they would want EVERYONE to choose all of the time.  e.g. if, in a certain circumstance a good person would tell the truth, then you must ask whether telling the truth should become a universal law.  Or lying - in a different situation when telling a lie is a better choice, that it's ok for everyone to lie all the time.

"Act in such a way that you treat humanity always as an END and never as a MEANS."  (Opposite of Mill/Bentham).  He means here that people must respect one another and not use others.  When people respect one another, lying is morally wrong because it denies other people's autonomy - their ability to freely make rational decisions on the basis of a good will.  Someone who has been lied to does not have accurate information on which to base moral choices.  Lying also uses other people as a means of achieving the liar's end or purpose, and it ignores the purpose of the person who is being lied to.

Kant believed that we can make NO exceptions to the categorical imperative.  e.g. we must tell the truth under all circumstances, even if it leads to bad consequences.  This is a duty to tell the truth.  He also called this the "Deontological Theory" from the Greek "deon" = duty & "logos" = reason.

Strengths in this theory are impartiality and good intent.  If one acts with good intention then they should be judged morally right even if there are bad consequences.

Weakness in this theory is that it relies on reason and follows strict rules without consideration for compromise and making connections with others.

e.g. You are dying of a disease that can be cured but you have no money for the cure - should you steal it?  Kant would say no.  Mill/Bentham and many others would say yes.

Repeat of Kant in 3 Minutes - watch from the 30 second mark, not before.



Some BIG Questions on Ethics include areas such as:
 - Lying
 - Cheating
 - Stealing
 - Censorship
 - Freedom of Expression
 - War
 - Euthanasia
 - Genetic Engineering
 - The Environment
 - Conservation
 - Preservation
 - Treatment of non-human Animals
 - Intellectual Property
 - Business Practices
 - Advertising
 - Gender and Sexuality

Complete the Handout on Ethical Issues.

DAY 74 Existentialism and Utilitarianism

In continuing to address different Ethics Schools of Thought, let's look at Existentialism.

This is a modern idea wherein a person must make individual moral choices and take full responsibility for those choices.  The belief is that absolute moral values do NOT exist (Virtue Ethicists say they do exist).

For Existentialists, AUTHENTICITY (being true to oneself when making moral choices) is the only true virtue worth striving for.

Soren Kierkegaard (19thC Danish Philosopher).  Said that people must make and judge their own moral choices.  People must move beyond judging their actions according to reason or the standards of society and must be accountable only to God.  To achieve this one must be authentic.

Authentic choices are CONSISTENT in:
1. Perception
2. Thought
3. Action

One who is inauthentic will not create him/herself and does not live independently.  For example, if you are attending school, this year or next, because it's the right thing to do in your parents' eyes, is INAUTHENTIC.  But if it's your choice to be in school, then that is an authentic idea.

Existentialism comes from Kierk's focus on individual existence - thus the term, "Existentialism."

Quick Video on Kierkegaard.

Friedrich Nietzsche urged people to make their own moral choices rather than to accept, unthinkingly, the values of the majority or other influential people in their lives (e.g. parents, peers).   He said that people should NOT think that they are accountable to God ("God is Dead" - mentioned several times in different writings by Nietzsche - he did not mean the literal death of an existing god, rather he meant the death of the shared cultural belief in the existence of God in Europe).  Rather, he said that because universal belief in God was fading, and with it, the universal values provided by that faith, people must determine their own values.

Jean-Paul Sartre is the most well-known Existentialist - he lived through WWII in Europe and because of that experience he believed that there was, in fact, no higher purpose for our life.  He said that there is no grand master plan and that human existence is a random occurrence.  Because of this, Sartre declared that existence precedes essence.  By this he meant that:

People exist first (bodily form) and then we make are own essence by defining ourselves, determining what we will be and choosing our own values.


For existentialists, everything is a matter of choice - feelings, beliefs, actions, attitudes.  But there are no moral guidelines that are universally accepted to guide you along the way.  This provides great freedom but also great responsibility.  In other words you have no one to blame but yourself!

This raised the German term, "angst", meaning "anxiety".  Under existentialism, where you are responsible for your own choices, you may feel much anxiety and pressure as you weigh the consequences of your moral choices.  Raises the pradox, "We are condemned to be free."

Existentialists believe that a good person recognizes their own personal freedom AND responsibility and thus makes authentic choices.

Robert Holmes (modern thinker) wrote:
"Adolescence brings an unsettling awareness that the comforting framework of values taken for granted as children is not fixed and unchanging.   This moment is crucial.  If people refuse to accept their freedom as they grow out of their childhood faith, they choose a life of self-deception."




Divine Command Ethics
Throughout history we have linked moral choices to religious beliefs, everywhere.  The idea that the supreme being defines right and wrong is - Divine Command Theory.

The belief is that there is a god or gods and that their commands are written in sacred texts.

Throughout history ethicists have grappled with the question, "Is something right because it is favoured by the gods, or do the gods favour it because it is right?"

A great Bible story is Abraham's following God's command to kill his son, Isaac.  Abraham was stopped at the last second by god and was rewarded for his faith in God's command, violating community ethics for God's command, the higher power.  Was Abraham's faith in God justified?

Aquinas argued that we must follow God's law through reason.

Unfortunately throughout history some religious extremists have viewed their own holy texts as the only correct ones and have interpreted them to justify political or other community actions.

Utilitarianism:    Quick video on utilitarianism
Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) and John Stewart Mill (1806 -  ) - consequences of moral acts are the focus here.  Utility or usefulness is the base for the word, Utilitarianism.

Greatest Good for the Greatest # of People is the ultimate goal for Utilitarians.  Good things are pleasure, good, happiness and the prevention of mischief, pain, evil and unhappiness.

Bentham's Hedonistic Calculus:
1. Intensity - How strong will the pain or pleasure be?
2. Duration - How long will the pleasure or pain last?
3. Certainty - How likely is it that the expected pain or pleasure will occur?
4. Propinquity (nearness) - How soon will the pleasure or pain be experienced?
5. Fecundity (productivity) - How likely is the pleasure or pain to generate similar pleasure or pain?
6. Purity - How much pain is mixed with the pleasure and vice versa?
7. Extent - How many people will be affected?

This raises some interesting questions - is it OK for children to work in sweatshops so that we can buy cheap clothes? - more of us than those children.

One big benefit of Utilitarianism is that it forces people to seek alternatives.

For example, a Divine Command Ethicist would say, "Give to that charity because it's the right thing to do".  

A Utilitarian would have to consider how best to enrich the lives of those the charity supports.

Act Utilitarianism - measure the greatest good principle of a single act.
Rule Utilitarianism - measure the greatest good principle among everyone, particularly measure the act as something you would be ok with if done to you (Golden Rulish).

For You to Do . . . .
OK, choose a personal ethical dilemma - how choose three ethical schools of thought/philosophers and explain how they would approach you dilemma.











Jean-Paul S