Blog 22: Hypothetical and Real Life Ethics
DUE: Oct. 5 by midnight
"Ethics is knowing the difference between what you have the right to do and what is right to do." Potter Stewart
Behaving ethically is one thing; putting a stop to unethical behavior in others is entirely another. In fact, it is the stuff of timeless literature, film, autobiography, and school curriculum! (Think Rosa Parks, Forrest Gump, etc). Doing what is right by putting a stop to something that is wrong creates heroes.
I think to some level we would all like to believe that in the face of grave unethical behavior, we would all be able to put a stop for it. Start a Revolution! Be the Hero! Hypothetically speaking...
Easier said than done.
It's one thing to talk about it, it's another thing to actually do it.
These are things that we could say about hypothetical ethics. If an person was stealing and you saw them, would you do something about it? If you witnessed the mistreatment of a pet by its owner, would you be able to put a stop to it? If a Hellgate under-classman was being bullied by a senior, would you be willing to say something to the senior? Hypothetically, I hope you would all say yes, but when the rubber meets the road, many of us are paralyzed or turn a blind eye.
Why? What are we intimidated by? Or rather, are we okay with the status quo? Do we not want to meddle in someone else's affairs? Is it none of our business? Can the pendulum of, "Not my problem" swing too far in our society so that people simply get away with unethical behavior? What stops the people in the clip from What Would You Do? What motivates those who speak up to speak up? Are some of us simply wired to do one or the other?
A few of you pointed out in your last blog responses that the reason you believe we do the 'right' thing is because of two reasons: (1) What we get out of it (be it a pat on the back or a cash reward) and (2) That we do not receive punishment. So then, I would ask, do we not put a stop to unethical behavior because we get neither of these things? Are ethics so very relative that we don't want to impress what we believe to be ethical onto someone else?
What do you think? What would you do? Be honest!
Sunday, September 29, 2013
Sunday, September 22, 2013
Blog 21: Wading the murky waters of ethics
Blog 21: Due Saturday, Sept. 28 by Midnight
The TedTalk above is really very interesting; alongside the example of politics, Haidt takes the audience into the world of ethical "teams", moral relativism, and several other concepts in a way that is applicable to class this week.
"Sunlight is the best disinfectant."--Louis Brandeis
"In law a man is guilty when he violates the rights of others; in ethics, he is guilty if he only thinks of doing so." Immanuel Kant
"That's a central part of philosophy, of ethics. What do I owe to strangers? What do I owe to my family? What is it to live a good life? Those are questions which we face as individuals." Peter Singer
The TedTalk above is really very interesting; alongside the example of politics, Haidt takes the audience into the world of ethical "teams", moral relativism, and several other concepts in a way that is applicable to class this week.
"Sunlight is the best disinfectant."--Louis Brandeis
"In law a man is guilty when he violates the rights of others; in ethics, he is guilty if he only thinks of doing so." Immanuel Kant
"That's a central part of philosophy, of ethics. What do I owe to strangers? What do I owe to my family? What is it to live a good life? Those are questions which we face as individuals." Peter Singer
As we begin sifting through ethics as an area (or rather, philosophy) of knowledge, think about all of the varied sources we have for our ethical values and our moral actions (or rather, immoral actions!). What is our goal in behaving ethically? What motivates ethical behavior? We don't necessarily receive a material benefit for doing the right thing--treat someone kindly, get a token? It doesn't work that way. However, as we will learn this week...it might be closer than you think.
We've talked about the ethical standards that we believe should apply to the Natural Sciences and the Human Sciences. You were all able to come up with some definite ideas of what should and should not be allowed when researching, experimenting, and reporting out in these fields. You felt strongly about ideas of right and wrong when it came to these two fields. But where did you begin in order to arrive there? What elements go into your judgment of what is right and what is wrong?
Finally, I would like you to think about the human race as a kind of metaphorical 'family.' In this family, are there core values that you believe to be inherent in human beings? If possible, try to list a few that you think exist, even in the slightest or varied form. If you can't think of any, make a short list of core values that you believe should exist in this human family, exactly as you did for the sciences.
Sunday, September 15, 2013
Blog 20: Psychology and the Human Sciences
Blog 20: DUE Saturday, Sept. 21 by Midnight.
In your last blog responses, most of you referred in some way to the idea of human beings being isolated within the walls of their own, often limited, frameworks of understanding the world. This idea is applicable to people all over the world, as the speaker of the TedTalk made clear. We base our understanding of other places and people on very limited (often controlled) exposure--snippets of news or other media, snapshots that capture seconds instead of entire lifetimes. Is there a way out of this isolation?
I would argue that, yes, there is and it involves something that all of you actively pursue in your daily lives, and will continue to pursue for the next few years: your education. Trite and cliche as it may sound, taking your education by the proverbial horns, instead of just letting it be something you have to do or are expected to do, will open so many doors and knock down so many walls that leave many as blind as Plato's puppets for their entire lives. Embracing the possibilities that exposure, learning, questioning, and inquiring can provide, however uncomfortable will make you one of the few who base your conclusions (however brief they might actually be conclusive) on more than just what you are fed.
This is the last of the Human Sciences blogs before we launch into Ethics. As a student of the world, we've talked about the importance of also being a student of yourself. When I asked you about your human sciences profile, many of you had a hard time saying who you were psychologically--perhaps because the breadth and depth of your own psychological make-up is more expansive than we often realize. After the Myers Briggs test, we know part of our preferences, but how far does that take us?
In this blog, you can either respond to the TedTalk, or some/all of the questions below:
In our country, psychology is a lucrative profession and many people visit a psychologist, psychiatrist, therapist, etc, on a regular basis. Is this a symptom of our affluence--that we are able to spend money on learning about ourselves? Does it signify how advanced and enlightened we are? Do other countries consider "knowing thyself" as a pathway to happiness?
There are some times in our lives that we can actually sense our psychology shifting or changing. Often, this is in the wake of something significant happening in our lives. Sometimes you know beforehand that you will never again be the same; sometimes it's only in hindsight that you realize such a change has occurred. Write about (either in general or in specific reference to something you've experienced) this psychological growth (or regression). Use examples. How do changes like this contribute to the collective knowledge and wisdom? Or...is this purely gains in personal knowledge?
In your last blog responses, most of you referred in some way to the idea of human beings being isolated within the walls of their own, often limited, frameworks of understanding the world. This idea is applicable to people all over the world, as the speaker of the TedTalk made clear. We base our understanding of other places and people on very limited (often controlled) exposure--snippets of news or other media, snapshots that capture seconds instead of entire lifetimes. Is there a way out of this isolation?
I would argue that, yes, there is and it involves something that all of you actively pursue in your daily lives, and will continue to pursue for the next few years: your education. Trite and cliche as it may sound, taking your education by the proverbial horns, instead of just letting it be something you have to do or are expected to do, will open so many doors and knock down so many walls that leave many as blind as Plato's puppets for their entire lives. Embracing the possibilities that exposure, learning, questioning, and inquiring can provide, however uncomfortable will make you one of the few who base your conclusions (however brief they might actually be conclusive) on more than just what you are fed.
This is the last of the Human Sciences blogs before we launch into Ethics. As a student of the world, we've talked about the importance of also being a student of yourself. When I asked you about your human sciences profile, many of you had a hard time saying who you were psychologically--perhaps because the breadth and depth of your own psychological make-up is more expansive than we often realize. After the Myers Briggs test, we know part of our preferences, but how far does that take us?
In this blog, you can either respond to the TedTalk, or some/all of the questions below:
In our country, psychology is a lucrative profession and many people visit a psychologist, psychiatrist, therapist, etc, on a regular basis. Is this a symptom of our affluence--that we are able to spend money on learning about ourselves? Does it signify how advanced and enlightened we are? Do other countries consider "knowing thyself" as a pathway to happiness?
There are some times in our lives that we can actually sense our psychology shifting or changing. Often, this is in the wake of something significant happening in our lives. Sometimes you know beforehand that you will never again be the same; sometimes it's only in hindsight that you realize such a change has occurred. Write about (either in general or in specific reference to something you've experienced) this psychological growth (or regression). Use examples. How do changes like this contribute to the collective knowledge and wisdom? Or...is this purely gains in personal knowledge?
Monday, September 9, 2013
Blog 19: The Paradox of Cartography, Revisited
Blog 19
DUE: Saturday, September 14, 2013 by Midnight
First, let me say how much I loved all of your responses to Blog 18. You are all reflective and articulate and I love how each of you sheds light on different ideas. It was so interesting to read about how you all relate to collective and personal knowledge differently and also how much you all value self-awareness, but how it is something at which you continue to work (we all do, trust me!) However, you were able to write so well about these things and bring up ideas I'd never considered. Thank you! I am a lucky teacher to learn so much from you!
Now, for this week's blog:
Early in your TOK experience, we talked about the Paradox of Cartography. Among the points that are important to recall are the following:
-There is no such thing as a perfect map
-There is no such thing as a flawlessly accurate map
-There are different ways of looking at a map (which way is up? what country or territory is at center?)
-Maps must constantly change due to many variables: changes in power, borders, boundary, or geographical landscape.
-And most importantly, in its entirety, the Paradox of Cartography and all of the points in this list are metaphors for knowledge, concepts, ideas, frameworks, and paradigms.
It's mind-blowing! Right?
Think specifically about the Human Sciences we've discussed briefly in class (anthropology, sociology, psychology, economics, etc). Extend this metaphor to one of these sub-categories of the Human Sciences by bringing our attention to an example in which the Paradox of Cartography applies. Does it help or hinder this area of the soft-sciences? Is it broadly applicable or just to your specific example? How can a metaphor like this (and trust me, the Human Sciences is chalk-full of metaphors!!) help us comprehend something conceptually abstract in the Human Sciences? Think about R. Abel's Man is the Measure and his explanation of Verstehen. Does this metaphor apply even to this broadly applicable philosophy?
DUE: Saturday, September 14, 2013 by Midnight
First, let me say how much I loved all of your responses to Blog 18. You are all reflective and articulate and I love how each of you sheds light on different ideas. It was so interesting to read about how you all relate to collective and personal knowledge differently and also how much you all value self-awareness, but how it is something at which you continue to work (we all do, trust me!) However, you were able to write so well about these things and bring up ideas I'd never considered. Thank you! I am a lucky teacher to learn so much from you!
Now, for this week's blog:
Early in your TOK experience, we talked about the Paradox of Cartography. Among the points that are important to recall are the following:
-There is no such thing as a perfect map
-There is no such thing as a flawlessly accurate map
-There are different ways of looking at a map (which way is up? what country or territory is at center?)
-Maps must constantly change due to many variables: changes in power, borders, boundary, or geographical landscape.
-And most importantly, in its entirety, the Paradox of Cartography and all of the points in this list are metaphors for knowledge, concepts, ideas, frameworks, and paradigms.
It's mind-blowing! Right?
Think specifically about the Human Sciences we've discussed briefly in class (anthropology, sociology, psychology, economics, etc). Extend this metaphor to one of these sub-categories of the Human Sciences by bringing our attention to an example in which the Paradox of Cartography applies. Does it help or hinder this area of the soft-sciences? Is it broadly applicable or just to your specific example? How can a metaphor like this (and trust me, the Human Sciences is chalk-full of metaphors!!) help us comprehend something conceptually abstract in the Human Sciences? Think about R. Abel's Man is the Measure and his explanation of Verstehen. Does this metaphor apply even to this broadly applicable philosophy?
Thursday, September 5, 2013
Blog 18: Human Sciences and Knowledge
Blog 18: Due Sunday, Sept. 8 by midnight.
The TEDtalk above by Margaret Heffernan delves into many aspects of the human sciences: free will, regret, collective knowledge, and shared vs. unshared values. If you watch it and feel like commenting, please do so! Please also respond to the prompt below.
“Know then thyself, presume not God to scan/The proper study
of mankind is man.” –Alexander Pope
“We make our own surroundings and then they make us.”
–Winston Churchill
We began talking this week about how our own personalities
and our own way of being in the world
contribute the ways in which we gain both personal and collective
knowledge. In this week’s blog, discuss
how being self-aware is an important piece of the knowledge puzzle. How do you relate to other knowers? Do you
ever feel like you connect to or contribute to collective knowledge in a way
that is different or unique from others? If so, try to explain. Also, discuss whether you think (in terms of
Human Sciences) whether collective or personal knowledge is more valuable. Feel
free to work in one of the quotes above or something you wrote about in your
comp book for this unit.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)