Kantian ethics

let's look at this video,

here are my notes on Kant's categorical imperative,
my notes on Kant's second formulation,

what is self-respect?

First drafts guidelines. Observe them!

1- Times New Roman p. 12
2- Heading, left-hand side:

Doe, John 
Final Paper First Draft 
Phi 2010 Honors 

3- Title, centered, bold,
4- Draft body: double-spaced,
5- Indent each new paragraph,
6- "Works cited" or "Bibliography" on a separate page, following MLA protocols (with last day of revision for digital sources),
7- All drafts must be STAPLED,

My notes on Utilitarianism

click here for more information,

Ethics, Homework #14

 Pincha aquí.

Hedonism and Ethical Egoism

Here are my notes on Hedonism.

Here are my notes on Ethical Egoism.

Homework #7 (CHAPTER 3, ETHICS)

Questions 1-4 are taken from this post.

1. Is there moral knowledge? Explain with one example from your daily life. Think of a good/or bad action coming from a friend (no less than 50 words). 

2. What are moral facts? (in your own words, avoid copying my text).

3. In what sense is Delacroix's Liberty Leading the People a masterpiece? Is this moral knowledge?

4. Why is it that Best Consensus cannot be produced overnight? Is Best Consensus infallible? Explain your answer. 

Questions 5-7 are based on this lecture. 

5. a) What is the difference between morality and etiquette. 

b) Provide an example of each from your own life based on the definitions.  

c) Why is etiquette (LI) so important for Confucius?

6. Morality and law are not the same, in what manner? Again, from your personal experience, bring up an instance when there's a law you consider immoral and wish it would change (or else, something immoral in need of a law.   

7. Why is slavery wrong now in 2024? Why was it not wrong in, say, 424 B.C.?

Defensible moral judgments, moral values, etiquette, law, cultural relativism

click here for more information,

If you can make it...

 

How to conquer mathphobia

 Click this link. 

How do you know an argument is good?

 

El secreto está en encontrar un principio fuerte. Por ejemplo, la regla de oro.

Haz con otros lo que quisieras que te hicieran a ti. 

¿Cómo sabemos que el principio es fuerte? 

1. Es claro (es decir, no es contradictorio)  

2. Es proporcional. 

3. Es justo (aplica a uno y a todos).

Apliquemos ahora el principio en el caso de ejemplos particulares de los pecados llamados veniales: adulterio, falso testimonio, hurto, robo, malversación, perjurio, chisme, schadenfreude, la gula, la pereza. 

Por ejemplo, la gula y la pereza son pecados que me tocamn a mí y nadie más. ¿Cómo aplicar la ley de oro? Es muy sencillo. Yo = Yo. 

Volvamos a la regla. Lo que me aplica a mí me aplica porque es universal y reversible. Siendo universal me aplica por igual. Si aplico la regla de oro a mi mismo, no debo tratarme meramente como medio para un fin. 

Ahí tienen la respuesta a asuntos más polémicos, como la guerra, la pena de muerte, el aborto, etc.

philosophy paper second assignment (how to start the discussion, 4 paragraphs)

This second assignment takes care of four paragraphs.

This is an example. Please, do not copy, and do not submit anything underlined in color. I do it just to make a point. 

The first two paragraphs are the most important in your paper.  These are theses paragraphs. 

These two paragraphs are YOUR PROGRAM. Thesis and a counter-thesis: Each thesis and counter-thesis contains two points. You present the point and explain it. When you explain, you give reasons for holding the point. One paragraph each. 

ORDER OF PARAGRAPHS:

FIRST PARAGRAPH: EXPOSITION OF THESIS AND COUNTERTHESIS

SECOND PARAGRAH: THESIS FIRST ARGUMENT.

THIRD PARAGRAPH: COUNTER'S FIRST ARGUMENT.

FOURTH PARAGRAPH: THESIS SECOND ARGUMENT.

FIFTH PARAGRAPH: COUNTER'S SECOND ARGUMENT.

SIXTH PARAGRAPH: THESIS REBUTTAL OF COUNTER'S REBUTTAL.

LAST PARAGRAPH: A SHORT CONCLUSION 

whatever is in this color are either thesis or counter,
whatever is in this color is the first point, with an explanation,
whatever is in this color is the second point with an explanation,
_______________________________________

FISRT PARAGRAPH

                  In this paper I argue against the prohibition of marijuana. First, marijuana prohibition must be weighed against the loss of personal freedom. The point is that our laws should take into account citizens' right to self-determination. Second, the War on Drugs has only served the immediate interests of politicians. By taking a moral stand against recreational drugs or fighting the evils caused by the illegal drug trade, they have only increased their popularity among constituents. 

(You should add relevant data supporting each point and properly cite it as END NOTE).

SECOND PARAGRAPH

    Prohibitionists disagree. They believe that marijuana is an addictive drug, which increases consumption and dependency. According to Dr. John Dickens, citing a 10 year study from Stanford University, "addiction is a result of marijuana's power to induce dependency" (New York Times, 2004).  In addition, marijuana is a gateway to other illicit and more harmful substances, thus increasing the possibility of committing crimes. It is a fact that addiction is generally sustained within a social network linked to organized crime (Center for Drug Studies, Catalog A, 2010). 

_______

Now comes the discussion. In paragraph 3, you go back to your thesis. You flesh out the first point, bringing in outside experts and relevant data. In paragraph 4, you take the counterthesis and do the same thing you did in paragraph 3. 
_______ 

THIRD PARAGRAPH

Abolitionists believe that prohibition must be weighed against our loss of personal freedoms. They argue that citizens should be able to choose what they want with their bodies, including the recreational use of drugs, as long as they do not harm others. Such arguments often cite British philosopher John Stuart Mill's harm principle, which states that "the state had no right to intervene to prevent individuals from doing something that harmed them if no harm was thereby done to the rest of society." (Mill, Liberty, 75). Mill's harm principle is designed to restrict the scope of government restrictions on personal liberty. Legal theorist Ronald Dworkin states that social disapproval or dislike for a person's actions isn't enough to justify intervention by the government unless they actually harm someone (New York Times, 2013).

FOURTHT PARAGRAPH

Prohibitionists reject this idea. They bring relevant statistics: According to recent data, marijuana remains addictive, with 25% of recurrence among people ages 16 to 25 (Buck-Norris, 17). Marijuana remains intractable not because it's more addictive than other drugs but because addicts are more reluctant to let it go (Casas & Weimer, 33). Marijuana happens to be affordable and available in our inner cities. Dr. John Samaras, a professor of psychology at Penn Sate University, argues that parental substance dependence and abuse can have profound effects on children, including child abuse and neglect. (Samaras, Drug Addiction in America, 44).