St. John’s University
Ethics
Prof. Moris Stern
Paper Assignment 2
Due: Friday, arch 29th, midnight on Canvas.
I will make announcements on Canvas about the email address and the date to which you need to email the claim you will work on and the breakdown of it into the necessity and sufficiency components. I will work with you by email during this initial process to assist you in getting it right.
In this paper, you will articulate, defend, and evaluate a claim.
Format: double-spaced, 12 point font, 1.25 inch margins, no specified length.
Penalty for lateness: each 24 hours of lateness after the deadline is a reduction in the grade by one notch (from A to A-, for example). Sorry, but I have to be and will be firm about this.
Here are some claims you must use: choose one
*** The claims and counterexamples should include and demonstrate mastery of what we studied with Sandel to generate justification for the claim and the counterexamples. Do not respond to these questions just using common sense without employing Sandel’s thought. ****
Ch. 6
1) Difference principle is required for justice
X = Difference principle
Y = justice
Need to use the original position and the veil of ignorance in 6 and 7
– need an example of inequality in the number 8
– need to use Libertarianism or Utilitarianism – for the criticism of necessity
– need to use the problems of incentives or effort or deserving – in the criticism of sufficiency
– need to use Rawlsian responses given by Sandel in 24 and 25
2) Overcoming moral arbitrariness is required for justice
X = Overcoming moral arbitrariness
Y = justice
Need to use the difference principle and Liberal Egalitarianism in your example in number 8
need to use 1) free market with formal equality of opportunity, i.e., formal meritocracy based on Libertarianism, or 2) free market with fair equality of opportunity, of air meritocracy, or 3) Utilitarianism – for the criticism of necessity
need to use the problems of incentives or effort or deserving – in the criticism of sufficiency
Choose ONE claim and use it in question 4) of the paper.
Instructions: write a 6-part (but responding to 28 questions) paper. In Part One, you introduce the topic – What is the topic? Part Two consists of you articulating a claim relevant to the topic (from the list above, readings, exam, or review questions), that you want to spend time thinking about in this assignment. In part Three, you defend that claim, or offer reasons why it makes sense. In part Four, you offer a criticism of the claim from Part Two – you offer reasons why the claim is not likely to be true. In Part Five, you evaluate your claim in light of the criticism – you state, after the consideration of the criticism, the reasons why the claim is or is not likely to be true. In Part Six, you reflect on what you have done: a conclusion about what you have learned and what you think about the topic in light of your consideration of the claim and its criticism.
Do not just sit down and write “from your head” without cracking open your books and notes. I would set apart some time during at least three days to write the paper.
IMPORTANT: There must be twenty-eight labeled questions/tasks in your paper. Do not hand in a text that is not divided into sections. You will receive four points for the successful completion of each section.
START BY WRITING PARTS II, III, IV, AND V FIRST – AND THEN DO THE INTRODUCTION AND THE CONCLUSION. But the parts should be in their natural order (I-VI) in the final version that you submit. And you should consider revising your paper after you have written the introduction – you may think of something in the introduction that you have not thought of while writing the other parts and revise your paper accordingly (especially, perhaps, the conclusion).
The Paper (Do the following 28 tasks)
Part I: Introduction
Introduce the topic and briefly discuss what it involves. What is the puzzle with regard to this topic? [For example: ““The topic is that of the purpose of life for human beings and it involves how one lives and how one ought to live and how one should change how one lives so that one is more aligned with how one ought to live. The puzzle here is that this question is not easy to answer because it does not involve anything objective that is clearly observable through the senses of perception that we all share. We can not settle this question like we can settle questions about what is clearly observable and objectively answerable, like, for example, the question of how many cars are in the parking lot outside our window right now. Yet, there is no question more important than that of the purpose of life for human beings and the conseqent answer that it is to the question of what it means to live a good life. The quick response that there is no such purpose or that it is whatever I make it is not much help in answering the question of the highest good, of that for the sake of which I should choose everything in my life. If I have some specific cues, unlike the refusal to give any cues by saying that the purpose of life is whatever I make it,n I can answer this question in a more intelligent and informed way – and I think it is wise to consult the work of classic philosophers to locate such cues, even if by way of thinking of criticisms of their arguments.”]
Discuss your relation to the topic. Do you have a position on the topic? Do you have a history of engaging the topic in any way? How are you affected by what happens with regard to what is thought on this topic? [For example: “I have a position on this topic, insofar as I think that an informed judgment is better than one that is not informed, and that I think classic philosophers, to whom later philosophers refer to as the foundations for what they are doing, is an excellent way to make our judgment more informed. More specifically, I do think that some answers and cues with regard to this question are better than others and that they apply to all human beings. Obviously, there are those respects in which individual human beings in different settings are different, but there are also those aspects that are the common basis that we all share as human beings and that should be the starting point of our thinking about ourselves and even about ourselves as different and individuated human beings. More specifically yet, I think that there is much we can learn from Aristotle’s suggestion that the highest good is happiness, and that we can evaluate which conceptions of happiness are hit the mark or the target closer to the bull’s eye and which are further away.”]
What is the importance of the claim that you bring up in part II with regard to the topic? Why is examining this claim important – in order to make sense of the topic? Is it a controversial issue – what are the reasons for each of the sides? Does it run counter to common sense? What does the common sense say? You will have to complete 4) before you can complete 3) here. [For example: “The specific claim by which we will broach the topic is that the highest good is pleasure. This claim conforms to the common sense and is championed by some important philosophers as well. It is a good starting point for thinking about the highest good and the kind of insights and cues that Aristotle can offer us with regard to the highest good and with regard to how to think rigorously and philosophically in general.”]
Part II: The claim
Choose a philosophical claim either from the list above, your own thinking, reading, review questions, or the exam – addressing the work of the authors that we read. State the claim – in one sentence. (A claim is a statement that judges, claims or asserts something to be true.) The form here is: X is responsible for Y. [For example: “Life devoted to pleasure as the highest good is required for happiness.”]
Provide the page number or the section from the book or the name of the article or the number of the question from the quiz, from which you got the claim. [For example: “Aristotle, Book I, Section 5.”]
Part III: IN DEFENSE OF THE CLAIM
Provide support for the claim in 4). What is it about the first half of the claim that connects it to the second half of the claim. Identify what it is about X that makes it connected to Y. Use Sandel’s actual reasons for this conclusion – if appropriate. The form here is: identify xCy by which X is connected to Y. The answer should be one sentence only. [For example: “Pleasure is something that is enjoyed in itself, regardless of whether it leads to anything or not, and enjoyment is itself something appreciated all in itself; and pleasure is self-reinforcing (experiencing it makes us want to experience more of it.”]
Define or explain what it is about the first half of the claim that connects it to the second half of the claim (as you identified it in 6)). The form here is: Define or explain what xCy is – so that it is clear how it connects X to Y.
[For example: “That which is appreciated in itself, without having to lead to anything, seems to be the mark of something that is truly good and it is that for the sake of which we would do everything. Aristotle argues that happiness is something we seek for the sake of itself, that we do everything for the sake of it, and it is not something we seek for the sake of anything else. Pleasure seems to be like that. I think that most people would also agree that pleasure is what happiness is – they just about never feel as good as when they are undergoing some pleasure (they would say).”
Provide a specific example that demonstrates what you wrote in 4), 6) and 7) – an example that illustrates the truth of the claim in 4) and its explanation in 6) and 7). [For example: “I find reading and watching films to give me lots of pleasure. Others find that playing video games gives them lots of pleasure. I would say that I am happy when I read or watch good books or movies, and I think others would say the same when they play video games or do whatever it is that they enjoy.” ]
Explain in what way the xCy factor you identified in 6) and explained in 7) is present in your example in 8). [For example: “I read and watch films, even if those activities do not lead to anything else, and I just want to continue reading and watching films once I start, and it seems like there is never enough time to engage in enough reading and watching films – and both of those activities are really pleasant and I structure my days so that I have as much time for those activities as possible.”]
Part IV: CRITICISM OF THE CLAIM
Rephrase the claim in terms of necessity. This must be just one sentence. The form here is: X is necessary for Y [For example: “Life devoted to pleasure as the highest good is necessary for happiness.”]
Construct the simple negation of 10) – that is the initial step on your way to produce the refutation to it. This must be just one sentence. The form here is: X is not necessary for Y. [For example: “Life devoted to pleasure as the highest good is not necessary for happiness.”]
Construct the concrete possibility negation of 10) – this is the next step in your production of the refutation. This must be just one sentence. The form here is: Y is possible without any at all connection to X. [For example: “Happiness is possible without the life devoted to pleasure as the highest good.”]
Provide an example in which there is Y but without any presence of X. [For example: “A soldier in the army serving their country or an entrepreneur developing the design and production of a new car or a scientist researching the cure for cancer or a dancer perfecting a new performance are sacrificing pleasure and are not doing these things for pleasure and believe that happiness is not about pleasure but is rather about service to society and/or being creative.”]
Identify another factor (W) due to connection with which Y is not connected to the original factor X in 4) . This must be just one sentence. The form here is: the factor due to which Y can take place without any X is the following: W. [For example: “The factor due to which happiness is realized, and that is something other than pleasure, is: honor and reputation.”]
Explain that due to which the other factor W produces Y. The form here must be: Clarify the wCy – how and why the W is connected to Y. [For example: “The life here on this alternative conception of happhiness and the highest good is that of action, rather than that of enjoyment. Great actions are frequently done by cooperating with others on projects that one cannot complete by oneself, and in order for one to engage in life together with others and in the company of others. Others praise and acknowledge and honor and reward us when we do something great together with them and for them. And so it would make sense that happiness, on this approach, seems to be action for the sake of reputation and being honored by others – and so happiness just is this being recongized and honored by others.”]
Explain in what way the W factor you identified in 14) and explained in 15) is present in your example in 13). [For example: “The work and products of soldier, entrepreneurs, scientists, and dancers and other artists and crafts persons are recognized, praised and honored by other persons and we can say that these agents act for the sake of that service, recognition, and being honored by others who appreciate their work.”]
Rephrase the claim in terms of sufficiency. This must be just one sentence. The form here is: X is sufficient for Y [For example: “Life devoted to pleasure as the highest good is sufficient for happiness.”]
Construct the simple negation of 17) – this is the next step in your production of the refutation. This must be just one sentence. The form here is: X is not sufficient for Y [For example: “Life devoted to pleasure as the highest good is not sufficient for happiness.”]
Construct the concrete possibility negation of 17) – this is the next step in your production of the refutation. This must be just one sentence. The form here is: X is possible without any at all connection to Y. [For example: “Life devoted to pleasure as the highest good is possible without happiness as a consequence.”]
Provide an example in which there is X but without any presence of or connection to or production of Y. [For example: “Someone may not leave their room or house and is undergoing pleasure all of their wakeful hours, or someone may even be asleep all the time and dreaming beautiful and pleasant dreams – but we would not say that that is a happy life.”]
Identify, what else is needed in addition to X so that X is connected to Y. In other words, identify Z in (x+z)Cy. This must be two sentences. The form here is: X, all by itself, is not sufficient to bring about Y, if the following is missing in addition to X: Z. [For example: “Pleasure, all by itself, is not sufficient to produce happiness if the following is missing in addition to pleasure: action.”]
Explain what you identified in 21. Why is Z needed in addition to X produce Y? Explain (x+z)Cy. The form here is: Explain why X, all by itself, in the absence of Z, does not result in Y. [For example: “We are active beings by our nature. We have bodies for the purpose of action and we have minds for the purpose of embodying our ideas in world. Pleasure and enjoyment are very passive – if we could skip action required to obtain pleasure and go right on to pleasure then we would if pleasure is the highest good. But we understand that to be human is to act and to externalize ourselves in the world and to belong in the world and to recognize ourselves in the world by acting and making in it and that doing that really well is a necessary component of happiness. Pleasure may be complete (need not lead to anything) but it is not self-sufficient for a good and happy human life. We must also act, and act well, in order to be happy. A life in which there is nothing but pleasure is missing something important: action.”]
Explain in what way the Z factor you identified in 21) and explained in 22) is present in your example in 20). [For example: “Action is missing from the life of pure pleasure, such as in the case of a person that never leaves their house and does not do anything or in the case of a person who is asleep and dreams really beautiful and pleasant dreams. We can even say that this not leaving the house and dreaming beautiful dreams refers to reading and watching movies that were previously mentioned in support of the claim that pleasure is the highest good.”]
Part V: EVALUATION OF THE DEFENSE AGAINST THE CRITICISM OF THE CLAIM
Explain the problems you see with the refutation of necessity in 13)-16). [For example: “Honor does not seem to be the goal that is happiness – it is too dependent on the whims and opinions of others. We think that happiness is more stable than that and is more up to us. Still, there is something profoundly right about that the highest good is to be found in the life of successful actions – the mistake is to think that honor is the goal and happiness in this life. Rather, virtue is a more fitting goal and what happiness really is in action – the source of happiness in the life of action is virtue (the capability, or the source in the person, and the growth of that capability and the source in the person, that are responsible for successful actions. Growth and exercise of virtue, as something that is one’s own and does not depend on the opinions of others, and is something stable and something to be proud of and to feel dignified about in a person – it is the true idea of happiness in the life of action.”]
Explain the problems you see with the refutation of sufficiency in 20)-23). [For example: “Action is indeed key to the happy life, and we can say that a life of pleasure, but without action, is not sufficient for happiness. But could we not say that there is still another component in the good life that is sought for the sake of itself. Aristotle even suggests it when he discusses life that is devoted to pleasure and life that is devoted to action. And that is contemplation. Contemplation is an act of the mind that is not for the sake of knowledge that is needed for actions but is knowledge for the sake of knowlege. Are we not, as beings of the mind, to use our minds not only for the sake of action and pleasure but also for the sake of itself? Is it not the case that we find knowledge itself to be good and a component of a truly human life – whether it leads to pleasure and action and virtue or not? Do we not also simply seek to know, not for the sake of pleasure, honor, virtue, or action? Just knowing, all by itself seems to be rewarding – such as when we go exploring a new hike in the wildernessor a new section of a town or city.”]
In light of the defense and criticism of the claim in 4, do you now think that the claim in 4 is correct, incorrect, or that it is correct in some modified form? Explain why. [For example: “The claim that life devoted to pleasure as the highest good does not seem to be correct. It seems that the life of action – and virtue as the goal of that life – attains a more significant portion of the totality that is happiness. It is closer to our nature to be active rather than to be passive. The presupposition behind that correction to the original claim is that we are first and foremost beings of action. t is closer to our nature to be active rather than to be passive. And, so, it would seem that we should say that life devoted to virtue, as the aim of action, as the highest good is required for happiness. But, of course, such a life is more happy and self-sufficient if there is pleasure in it, and even contemplation, as other significant aspects of what is happening in a happy life.”]
Part VI: REFLECTION/CONCLUSION
Discuss how your thinking about the topic (what you discussed in Part I) has been affected by what you did in Parts II through V. Has it strengthened your support of a position on the topic? Has it strengthened your opposition to a position on the topic? Etc. How and why? [For example: “I have not changed my mind. I still think that it is deeply right to say that happiness is the highest good. Although I would have said that changed my mind if the claim examined in the paper – that pleasure is the highest good – was so close to my heart that I thought that happiness was pleasure. But, as important as that claim is, I did not think that it was most important, as much as I enjoy reading books and watching films.”]
Discuss what have you learned – that you did not know before – from doing this paper. Address the content of your paper here – not only its form. [For example: “I have learned to articulate more precisely and explicitly why pleasure is not the highest good – it is lacking in activity and action and we are by nature beings of activity and action.”]
Grading criteria: in addition to evaluating how adequately you have fulfilled the task of each part of the paper, you will be graded on the depth of your writing. What you write must not be overly simplistic and obvious, but must show an effort to explore the topic. Depth means that you discuss what you are writing about in detail and with explanation that is made possible by what we learn in this class. Your paper should show mastery of what we learn (such as applying concepts and arguments that we learn in a way that shows comprehension of those concepts and arguments.). The paper should not be such that it could have been written by an intelligent person who never took this class – but must be such that is written by an intelligent person who applies what is learned in this class with some depth. The paper must be informed by what we learned. If a response to what you are writing has been addressed by one of the authors we read, you need to address that author’s response to you.
Note: “everybody is different”, “everyone thinks differently”, “who is to say …”, “that’s just how I feel or think” or other versions of the same are not acceptable reasons for or against any position in a philosophy class and do not earn any credit. You have to give a specific reason due to which a position makes sense or not. In other words, what is it exactly about a person that would make that person into a special case – and is it relevant to the general truth of the claim?
The post St. John’s University Ethics Prof. Moris Stern Paper Assignment 2 Due: Friday, appeared first on essayfab.