292: The Brain and the Battle of the Hemispheres

Image via WikipediaYou should listen to this. Don't be discouraged, if it sounds too difficult to understand immediately. I'll explain it in detail for you, but you have to read this. It is fascinating.

What you witness here is really the state of the art in philosophy of today. An example how philosophy has to become interdisciplinary to flourish. Ok…get ready and fasten seat belts….

"Traditional theories of moral psychology emphasize reasoning and “higher cognition,” while more recent work emphasizes the role of emotion. The present fMRI data support a theory of moral judgment according to which both “cognitive” and emotional processes play crucial and sometimes mutually competitive roles.

The present results indicate that brain regions associated with abstract reasoning and cognitive control (including dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and anterior cingulate cortex) are recruited to resolve difficult personal moral dilemmas

in which utilitarian values require “personal” moral violations, violations that have previously been associated with increased activity in emotion-related brain regions.

Several regions of frontal and parietal cortex predict intertrial differences in moral judgment behavior, exhibiting greater activity for utilitarian judgments. We speculate that the controversy surrounding utilitarian moral philosophy reflects an underlying tension between competing subsystems in the brain."

This is the summary of an article written by Joshua Greene and others and published in the scientific magazine Neuron in October 2004. What does it say?Basicly this:

In the brain are two regoins which are involved in moral decision making. One region is highly active when we throw in a lot of emotion to come to a moral judgement, the other is predominantly active when we use rational reasoning to arrive at a moral judgement. In certain situations these two brain regions are even in competition with each other.

To understand the backgrounds of this observation we have to read the dissertation of Greene which he presented in November 2002 at Princeton University, US. He begins chapter one with this statement:

"This essay is an attack on common sense—moral common sense, in particular. Mounting evidence suggests that our sense of right and wrong is a finely honed product of natural selection.

We think about moral matters as we do in large part because our kind of moral thinking, in the heads of our prehistoric ancestors, enabled them to reproduce more effectively than their competitors, leaving us, their descendants, to inherit their world.

But the world they left us is radically different from the world we now inhabit, and, as a result, what was biologically advantageous for them may prove disastrous for us. At the risk of being overly dramatic, I propose that the fate of humankind will turn on our ability, or inability, to transcend the common sense morality we inherited from our ancestors.

The great global problems of our time—the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, the disruption of the environment, etc.—can only be solved through cooperation and compromise among people with radically different moral outlooks. And this, I believe, is unlikely to happen so long as the people of the world hold fast to their respective versions of moral common sense."

What is meant here is this: The battle of the hemispheres, which is pointed at in the Neuron article, is due to the evolution of the brain. More precise, due to the fact that parts of the brain still use the impulses of our (prehistoric) ancestors to get to moral judgements, although these impulses no longer fit in our modern world.

An example: John and Sally love to have sex with each other. They take every precaution to prevent pregnancy. They just love the sex. However, they are brother and sister.

INCEST!!! They should be condemned! A primary (emotional) reaction."The evolutionary explanation is familiar enough. Matings between close relatives are especially likely to result in children with birth defects, making a powerful aversion to sex between close relatives an important biological advantage." (p.299)

Ok, we may feel a bit uncomfortable with their behavior given our cultural background, but nevertheless we could conclude…who are we to judge, if this is their way to spend time together? A more rational reaction.

Like Greene says: "Debunking intuitions through a better grasp of moral/evolutionary psychology will likely serve us well as we strive for moral consistency by putting some distance between us and our intuitions."

To state it in a bit simplistic way: these intuitions, or as Greene calls it, common sense morals, come from the evolutionary more primitive parts of the brain, while reasoning and logic are more recent evolutionary brain parts.

What we see here from a philosophical point of view is an argument for utilitarian ethics based on evolutionary psychology, moral psychology and neurobiological observation. And this is the approach of philosophical discourse in 2010.

Joshue Greene is assistant Professor at Harvard since 2006. He has a homepage and it is sensational, not visually but with respect to the content. You can read almost everything he has published, including his dissertation. Everything can be downloaded as PDF.
This is where you can find it: http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~jgreene/


The Discussion
(yet to be added)

253: Adam Smith (1723 – 1790)

The story begins with mercantilism, the dominating economic theory and practice in the early ages in Europe. The basic idea is that the state gains dominance and power by becoming as rich as possible.

That means that the state has to control all trade and tries to achieve to export more than to import. Therefore the own industry is promoted and financially supported while import is strongly discouraged through the use of import taxes.

Adam Smith, a Scottish philosopher, left us among other things two important books. The "Theory of Moral Sentiments", drawn from his course of lectures, was published in 1759 and "An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations". (1776)

Especially the second book had a great impact and marked the end of mercantilism. The Theory of Moral Sentiment is written in the finest tradition of the Scottish philosophers, where David Hume may be regarded as the initiator.

If fact in those days, certainly stimulated by the development of scientific method, as demonstrated by Newton, every scientist tried to understand Nature and its laws.

Also the moral philosophers tried to get hold of human nature and its "laws". This gave rise to a specific kind of philosophical anthropology. What makes human nature moral. Where does morality come from?

Hobbes had already opened the debate by pointing at the extreme selfishness of the human being. His views were not adopted by Hume, who saw the basis of morality in the "sympathy" for your fellowmen.

Adam Smith embraces the Newtonian process of scientific experimentation and explanation. Moral rules are akin to the laws of physics; they can be discovered. According to him, our sentiments give rise to approval or condemnation of a moral act.

What is most interesting is, that virtue ethics is strongly supported in those days along with an optimistic view on the nature of the human being.

The human being is intrinsically good. And according to Smith, humans have a natural love for society and can develop neither moral nor aesthetic standards in isolation.Based on this positive idea of mankind, Smith develops his ideas on economics, on how the state should be organized.

An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations is partly a description of the actual conditions of manufacture and trade in Smith’s own time, partly a history of European economics,

and partly recommendations to governments. Smith opposes the mercantilist beliefs that money is wealth and that the best economic policy for a country is the retention within its borders of as much gold and silver as possible.

"The annual labour of every nation", says Smith, " is the fund which originally supplies it with all the necessaries and conveniencies of life which it annually consumes, and which consist always either in the immediate produce of that labour, or in what is purchased with that produce from other nations."

Human society is as natural as the people in it, and, as such, Smith rejects the notion of a social contract in both of his books. There was never a time that humanity lived outside of society,

and political development is the product of evolution (not his term) rather than a radical shift in organization. The state of nature is society for Smith, and, therefore, the rules that govern the system necessitate certain outcomes.

Smith saw the state as a natural proces in which we could discover natural laws. Not all the gold which a state owns brings wealth but labor brings wealth, Smith argues. The more one labors the more one earns.

This supplies individuals and the community with their necessities, and, with enough money, it offers the means to make life more convenient and sometimes to pursue additional revenue.

Smith believes that a commercial system betters the lives for the worst off in society; all individuals should have the necessities needed to live reasonably well.

As he explains, there are only three proper roles for the sovereign: to protect a society from invasion by outside forces, to enforce justice and protect citizens from one another,

and “thirdly, the duty of erecting and maintaining certain public works and certain public institutions, which it can never be for the interest of any individual, or small number of individuals, to erect and maintain.

The government's intervention in this process of labor, production and trade should be kept small. And Smith believed as stated in The Wealth of Nations that the creation of “universal opulence which extends itself to the lowest ranks of the people”

Welcome to Liberalism…


The Discussion

[13:20] herman Bergson: So much on Adam Smith
[13:21] oola Neruda: that sounds very logical... and proper
[13:21] hope63 Shepherd: its a saddening thought that we study the ancient greeks and the greeks don't study guys like smith:)
[13:21] Gemma Cleanslate: it does but then does it work
[13:22] herman Bergson: Yes oola, what is remarkable is the positive belief in the effects of the free market on society
[13:22] Gemma Cleanslate: that premise is a bone of contention here all the time
[13:22] herman Bergson: Even the lowest in society will benefit of it, he claims
[13:22] oola Neruda: i like the maintaining of public institutions...
[13:22] Gemma Cleanslate: should
[13:22] Kiki Walpanheim: hi rodney
[13:22] Rodney Handrick: hi kiki
[13:22] Bruce Mowbray: Yo, Rod.
[13:22] herman Bergson: Hi Rodney
[13:22] Rodney Handrick: hi bruce
[13:22] Rodney Handrick: hi Herman
[13:23] oola Neruda: like the national gallery, the smithonian and the library of congress
[13:23] herman Bergson: Yes such institutions a private person could not afford, like schools , hospitals..etc
[13:23] herman Bergson: Musea..yes
[13:23] Gemma Cleanslate: :-)
[13:23] herman Bergson: But what is interesting in Europe in these days...
[13:24] Gemma Cleanslate: but they first place they take money from when they need it is those very public places
[13:24] Gemma Cleanslate: especially schools
[13:24] herman Bergson: Postal Services and Public transportation (bus, train) for instance were all owned by the state...
[13:24] Kiki Walpanheim: how much intervention is much...
[13:24] herman Bergson: and now they all have become privately owned businesses...
[13:24] oola Neruda: you are right gemma
[13:24] Gemma Cleanslate: yes
[13:24] herman Bergson: Yes Kiki...that is the point...
[13:25] Kiki Walpanheim: is postal service in the US privately owned too
[13:25] Gemma Cleanslate: yes
[13:25] Kiki Walpanheim: oh...
[13:25] hope63 Shepherd: not all.. ups....
[13:25] Gemma Cleanslate: but still connected to the government in some way
[13:25] Kiki Walpanheim: oh....
[13:25] Rodney Handrick: quasi-government
[13:26] herman Bergson: Here we have developed a firm belief in the effects of the market...
[13:26] Gemma Cleanslate: here i think it is toooooo firm
[13:26] herman Bergson: Even healthcare and hospitals have become privately owned businesses....with a disastrous effect
[13:26] oola Neruda: here also
[13:26] Gemma Cleanslate: yes
[13:27] Gemma Cleanslate: and the disaster is so so visible
[13:27] Kiki Walpanheim: like price floors, ceilings, minimum wage.... intervention preventing monopoly to ensure competition...
[13:27] herman Bergson: They say the market and competition will lower the costs...
[13:27] Rodney Handrick: you folks in Europe may have to bail us Americans out
[13:27] Gemma Cleanslate: lololo
[13:27] Kiki Walpanheim: and there are private schools too....
[13:27] Gemma Cleanslate: after we finish all out bailouts
[13:27] herman Bergson: Well.... a lot is owned by Chinese capital too
[13:28] oola Neruda: the market and competition was part of our american problem
[13:28] oola Neruda: no regulations
[13:28] oola Neruda: few
[13:28] herman Bergson: Yes..and here it doesnt work either
[13:28] herman Bergson: except for the greedy bankers
[13:28] Bruce Mowbray: So, what would Adam Smith say about cartels and monopolies?
[13:29] oola Neruda: is that supposed to be part of protecting the people from each other?
[13:29] Kiki Walpanheim: i think america has regulations on cartels , monopolies
[13:29] hope63 Shepherd: well.. didn't work in state owned services. like the old soviet union.. its a complicated and complex matter
[13:29] herman Bergson: I dont think he would approve that Bruce...
[13:29] Rodney Handrick: that's the point it's about greed!
[13:29] hope63 Shepherd: but oola is right about regulations.. key word.
[13:30] herman Bergson: Yes Hope.... and I relate that to the philosophical anthropology.....how do we define human nature...
[13:30] oola Neruda: and greed... keyword
[13:30] herman Bergson: as intrinsically bad or good...
[13:30] hope63 Shepherd: smile.. i would say neither nor:)
[13:30] herman Bergson: I think the former Soviets started with BAD...the individual is bad...greedy and selfish by nature
[13:31] herman Bergson: Where Adam Smith says...human nature is basically good
[13:31] Kiki Walpanheim: well....USSR.......even if you assume ppl are NOT greedy and run on that assumption...people still are selfish...they could find ways to get around to it..
[13:32] oola Neruda: i know some chinese from the communist point of view...
[13:32] Kiki Walpanheim: I think what adam smith tells is....taking advantage of ppls' self interest
[13:32] Bruce Mowbray: The Enlightenment - upon whose philosophical view the US was supposed founded - thought that human nature was basically good. . .
[13:32] herman Bergson: Yes Bruce....
[13:32] Rodney Handrick: this is true Bruce
[13:33] Kiki Walpanheim: or....adam smiths does NOT consider selfish interest as immoral
[13:33] oola Neruda: they felt that with assigned work.. that you would be paid for regardless... and maybe did not care to do... little chance for change or advancement
[13:33] Kiki Walpanheim: in this way, human nature is good
[13:33] hope63 Shepherd: smith you say
[13:33] oola Neruda: there was little reason to either work hard... or hope...
[13:33] Rodney Handrick: the fly in the ointment was slavery...but that was economics as well
[13:33] oola Neruda: and this made progress ... not happen like it could
[13:33] oola Neruda: the dedication was not there
[13:34] Kiki Walpanheim: communism is assume everyone works for the community....free market is amusing everyone works for their own self interest
[13:34] herman Bergson: Smith sees selfishness as a social drive eventually
[13:34] hope63 Shepherd: isn't it?
[13:34] Kiki Walpanheim: and competition is seen as a drive for promotion too
[13:34] Rodney Handrick: the governor should be ethics
[13:35] herman Bergson: Yes Kiki.....but in their ethics the Scottish philosophers saw morality based on sympathy for your fellowmen...
[13:35] Kiki Walpanheim: selfishness plus competition...which seem to be bad at first sight, could be led to the good
[13:35] Kiki Walpanheim: oh.....
[13:36] hope63 Shepherd: very christian thought-morality is love tho neighbor..
[13:36] Kiki Walpanheim: the intervention on cartels and monopoly is to prevent firms from cooperation...but competition instead...
[13:36] herman Bergson: yes...but according to Smith this selfishness functions in a society...so cant be absolute....you have to care for your fellowmen to make things work
[13:36] Gemma Cleanslate: so many cannot grasp that idea
[13:36] oola Neruda: and not build bridges to nowhere
[13:36] Bruce Mowbray: I "selfishly" create the Ford Motor Company -- and in the process, create work for millions...
[13:36] Kiki Walpanheim: or....encourage competition...and prevent too much cooperation
[13:37] herman Bergson: yes Bruce that's the way
[13:37] hope63 Shepherd: care for your fellowmen should read care for those who are in the production line..
[13:37] hope63 Shepherd: that didn't happen..
[13:37] oola Neruda: ahhh unions
[13:37] herman Bergson: No Hope....and that is the problem Marx will point at
[13:37] Bruce Mowbray: I wonder what Smith would have thought about labor unions.
[13:37] Rodney Handrick: the problem with Ford is that he thought he was a savior of the masses
[13:38] Rodney Handrick: *with
[13:38] Kiki Walpanheim: it's about...when you work....are you thinking about self interest/benefit, or ...benevolence....
[13:38] Gemma Cleanslate: well if he saw what was happening with out unions i think he would have encouraged them
[13:38] herman Bergson: Yes Kiki
[13:38] Kiki Walpanheim: i think communism is to assume ppl work for benevolence....
[13:39] Kiki Walpanheim: perhaps...
[13:39] hope63 Shepherd: no kiki..
[13:39] herman Bergson: Smith pleaded for educationn in virtue....among them benevolence
[13:39] oola Neruda: i agree kiki
[13:39] Rodney Handrick: yes, education is paramount
[13:39] hope63 Shepherd: benevolence is possible if you could first fulfill your basic needs..
[13:39] herman Bergson: Yes Kiki and in that respect the human being is a bit overestimated, I guess
[13:39] oola Neruda: in all societies...education is paramount… agreed... in ALL
[13:40] Kiki Walpanheim: nods
[13:40] hope63 Shepherd: yes oola.. but what should one teach the kids..
[13:40] oola Neruda: ahhh you hit the hot spot hope
[13:40] herman Bergson: So...now we have started with Adam Smith and his ideas...we might look into Liberalism as such the next time
[13:40] Rodney Handrick: case in point…finance should be taught from the elementary grades
[13:40] hope63 Shepherd: smile-- you noticed i'm back:)
[13:41] oola Neruda: and no child left behind is not hitting those abstract NECESSARY hot spots
[13:41] herman Bergson: well...they learn counting Rodney.. ㋡
[13:41] hope63 Shepherd: and spending lol
[13:41] Rodney Handrick: I don't think it was meant too oola
[13:41] herman Bergson: and arithmatics
[13:42] hope63 Shepherd: to keep the economy going:)$
[13:42] oola Neruda: smiles... to rodney... bunch of businessmen meddling and making schools into factories
[13:42] Bruce Mowbray: Public TV stations (PBS) in America are teaching business to children -- I love to watch their afternoon programs.
[13:42] Kiki Walpanheim: wonders what adam smiths thinks about protectionism too
[13:42] Gemma Cleanslate: lol oola
[13:43] Rodney Handrick: I don't think the world would be in the financial pickle it's in now if people had a basic knowledge of finance
[13:43] herman Bergson: He is against protectionism...
[13:43] Kiki Walpanheim: oh....
[13:43] herman Bergson: mercantilism is a kind of protectionism too
[13:43] Kiki Walpanheim: oh...
[13:43] herman Bergson: The labor creates the necessities...and all that is produced more is good for free trade
[13:44] Bruce Mowbray: Sure -- those taxes on imports "protect" the domestic production.
[13:44] Bruce Mowbray: Mercantilism.
[13:44] herman Bergson: exactly...
[13:44] oola Neruda: the industrial revolution was the first step toward schools as factories... at that time, the organization was helpful... but now it is destructive by it's being OVERDONE
[13:44] Gemma Cleanslate: never thought of that oola
[13:44] Rodney Handrick: I agree oola
[13:44] oola Neruda: misapplied or misunderstood
[13:44] Gemma Cleanslate: yes
[13:45] hope63 Shepherd: schools as factories' explain
[13:45] herman Bergson: you mean schools are now like factories oola?
[13:45] oola Neruda: you would not pay dentists in an affluent neighborhood and a challenged neighborhood by the number of fillings they don't have to do...
[13:45] Rodney Handrick: yes...still in the elementary grades
[13:46] oola Neruda: they want to pay teachers by how many students get certain grades
[13:46] oola Neruda: while charter schools skim off many of the students who would be getting those grades
[13:46] Bruce Mowbray: Passing the state-required tests is "our most important product."
[13:46] herman Bergson: Has been debated here in the NEtherlands too oola
[13:46] Gemma Cleanslate: called merit pay
[13:46] herman Bergson: education delivered a product
[13:46] oola Neruda: they teach to the tests ... not to the actual needs of the child or society
[13:46] Rodney Handrick: doesn't work unless the parents do their part
[13:47] Bruce Mowbray: agreed, oola.
[13:47] Gemma Cleanslate: forced to teach to the test
[13:47] herman Bergson: yes....very questionable ideas
[13:47] Bruce Mowbray: They have to in order to get funded.
[13:47] oola Neruda: right... but teachers are to blame if they don't learn... not conditions in the neighborhood/home
[13:47] oola Neruda: according to them
[13:48] Gemma Cleanslate: and each group ... each year there is a very different composition
[13:48] oola Neruda: know a fourth grade child who had hangovers and missed a lot of what was going on in class
[13:48] Rodney Handrick: this is what is being overlooked oola
[13:48] Kiki Walpanheim: i think the prestige of an institution should not be too much related to the final test.....the achievement of alumni in the long run is far more important e.g.
[13:48] herman Bergson: I guess we are loosing our focus on the subject of today...
[13:48] oola Neruda: can the teacher be called to task for that
[13:48] hope63 Shepherd: education is a key problem in all the western countries..not just third world..
[13:48] oola Neruda: sorry ... prof
[13:48] herman Bergson smiles
[13:48] Gemma Cleanslate: i guess so lol
[13:48] Bruce Mowbray: Did Scotland/Europe have mass education in Smith's day?
[13:49] hope63 Shepherd: they try to find solutions butt don't seem to get the right one..
[13:49] Rodney Handrick: for example due to racial strife a high school recently spent one million ($) on security equipment
[13:49] herman Bergson: Education was an upperclass issue Bruce
[13:49] Bruce Mowbray: Perhaps Smith was assuming that everyone would be 'properly' educated.
[13:49] herman Bergson: yes...that was definitely an assumption....
[13:50] Kiki Walpanheim: i think how the state stardard test is defined is a noticable issue too
[13:50] hope63 Shepherd: could we call adam as the grandfather of global markets with his idea of the equalizing factor in the exchange with other states?
[13:50] Kiki Walpanheim: if the test result is only used as a reference....not highly correlated with college entrance/careers
[13:50] oola Neruda: yes... does not take learning styles into account
[13:51] herman Bergson: Back to Liberalism.....
[13:51] Kiki Walpanheim: and if the test only encourages kids to learn to read/write, and math...rather than shaping the kids into some model....then
[13:51] Kiki Walpanheim: then the test is not too bad
[13:51] oola Neruda: can you define liberalism professor
[13:51] Bruce Mowbray: ;-)
[13:51] Kiki Walpanheim: i spent too many years for the national college entrance exam....i hate it...
[13:51] herman Bergson: and the question to what extend it is acceptable that the state interferes with social processes like education, healthcare, free market etc.
[13:52] Rodney Handrick: "liberalism" a dirty word
[13:52] Kiki Walpanheim: tho it finished in the end...loads of years were spent with heavy study load....
[13:52] Gemma Cleanslate: lol yes
[13:52] hope63 Shepherd: kiki relax.. you made it:)
[13:52] Kiki Walpanheim: ;)
[13:52] Gemma Cleanslate: interferes or guides Herman
[13:52] Gemma Cleanslate: or regulates
[13:52] herman Bergson: Right Hope..she made it...also to the Philosophy Class ^_^
[13:52] Rodney Handrick: lol
[13:52] Kiki Walpanheim: ;-)
[13:53] Bruce Mowbray: haha
[13:53] herman Bergson: That is what we will investigate Gemma...
[13:53] Gemma Cleanslate: ok
[13:53] herman Bergson: So next lecture will be an elaborated view on liberalism in general..... does it hold or doesnt it...
[13:54] Gemma Cleanslate: ok
[13:54] herman Bergson: So may I thank you for you participation again ㋡
[13:54] Gemma Cleanslate: ♥ Thank Youuuuuuuuuu!! ♥
[13:54] Bruce Mowbray: THANK YOU, everyone!
[13:54] Qwark Allen: you welcome
[13:54] Kiki Walpanheim: Thank you professor and everyone
[13:54] Qwark Allen: ******* Herman *******
[13:54] Qwark Allen: and thank you
[13:54] Rodney Handrick: Thanks Herman
[13:54] Gemma Cleanslate: see you tuesday then
[13:54] Bruce Mowbray: See you all on Tuesday.
[13:54] herman Bergson: Till Tuesday!
[13:54] Qwark Allen: AAHH!!!
[13:54] Qwark Allen: ok
[13:54] herman Bergson: Class dismissed ㋡
[13:55] oola Neruda: thank you... have a great day/night class
[13:55] hope63 Shepherd: thanks herman.. nice lecture.. hope i can be back soon

234: The Ideal State, an intruduction

A new project! This time not as technical and abstract as epistemology, but nearer to home. Our project on Modern Theories of Ethics focused on the individual and his responsibilities as a social being.

A next step will be to look how all these individuals in their social setting and with their individual ideas of ethics try to live together in a group, a society, a nation. And so we enter the field of political philosophy.

We can define political philosophy as philosophical reflection on how best to arrange our collective life - our political institutions and our social practices, such as our economic system, related to the concept of property for instance.

The title of this project is THE IDEAL STATE, but we must be careful, because the state is already a well defined concept, while we also could focus on a more general term than we use in our title: the collective life of mankind.

Well…. here we are already in the middle of a debate, if we ask whether the collectivity of mankind is necessarily divided into states. Some areas are for instance divided into tribes for instance.

This immediate jump into a debate points at another aspect of political philosophy. Some political philosophers seek to establish basic principles.

Principles that will, for instance, justify a particular form of state, show that individuals have certain inalienable rights, or tell us how a society's material resources should be shared among its members.

This usually involves analysing and interpreting ideas like freedom, justice, authority and democracy and then applying them in a critical way to the social and political institutions that currently exist.

Others chose a completely different approach. They ignored the actual state of affairs and have painted pictures of an ideal state or an ideal social world that is very different from anything we have so far experienced.

Especially this second group of philosophers demands a normative or prescriptive status for political philosophy, but like their theories were often utopian, this claimed status certainly is.

This leads immediately to the question whether the principles that political philosophers establish are to be regarded as having universal validity, or whether they should be seen as expressing the assumptions and the values of a particular political community.

And this leads us back to the the question about human nature. In order to justify a set of collective arrangements, a political philosophy must say something about the nature of human beings, about their needs, their capacities, about whether they are mainly selfish or mainly altruistic, and so forth,

which leads us back to the fundamental questions of ethics, which directly relate to our theory of knowledge, which at its turn presupposes an ontology.

This course on Political Philosophy will integrate all these elements of philosophy. The backbone will be the historical route from Plato to Popper.

And while en route we may stop and dwell at some conceptual places, enjoying the view of an analysis of concepts like justice, democracy, freedom and so on.

So, as the captain of this ship I would say to you ….

ENGAGE!


The Discussion

[13:16] Gemma Cleanslate: oh oh
[13:16] Abraxas Nagy: yar
[13:16] Justine Rhapsody: lol
[13:16] ZANICIA Chau: hehehe
[13:16] Repose Lionheart: ad astra
[13:16] Abraxas Nagy: mr Sulu warp 4
[13:16] Repose Lionheart: hehe
[13:16] herman Bergson: yes Repose but it is Per aspera ad astra
[13:16] Repose Lionheart: oh
[13:16] Repose Lionheart: hehe
[13:17] herman Bergson: which means …to the stars through difficulties
[13:17] ZANICIA Chau: Surely the appraisal cannot pos be just universal-that would encompass too much as generalisation
[13:17] Repose Lionheart: starts?
[13:18] herman Bergson: stars...sorry
[13:18] herman Bergson: which appraisal Zanicia?
[13:18] ZANICIA Chau: Evaluation in general terms.
[13:19] herman Bergson: About political systems you mean?
[13:19] ZANICIA Chau: Help me out , people!
[13:19] ZANICIA Chau: Yes
[13:19] Gemma Cleanslate: i am not sure what you mean tho
[13:19] Gemma Cleanslate: zanicia
[13:19] herman Bergson: Well when I understand you correctly you refer to the problem we already ran into several times
[13:20] ZANICIA Chau: Well you referred initially to the collective
[13:20] herman Bergson: It concerns the validity of theories
[13:20] herman Bergson: yes..
[13:20] herman Bergson: In ethic we had the same problem..
[13:20] ZANICIA Chau: yes are we just treading old ground or did I puty it badly?
[13:21] ZANICIA Chau: put
[13:21] herman Bergson: are ethical rules and theories universal, or only related to a culture
[13:21] Qwark Allen: ;-)
[13:21] Gemma Cleanslate: ah yes
[13:21] ZANICIA Chau: Indeed
[13:21] Repose Lionheart: they need to claim universality to be internally consistent, perhaps
[13:21] herman Bergson: In political philosophy we have to deal with the same problem
[13:21] Gemma Cleanslate: i think that problem occurs in every project we have been through
[13:22] Gemma Cleanslate: from the beginning
[13:22] herman Bergson: Are the ideas of Plato related to the greek culture only or can they be applied universally?
[13:22] ZANICIA Chau: true
[13:22] herman Bergson: Yes Gemmma, well observed..
[13:22] herman Bergson: and it boils down to a fundamental problem of our days..
[13:23] Repose Lionheart: he claims they can be applied universally, but so does everyone else with a universal
[13:23] herman Bergson: the balance between relativism and skepticism and more objective knowledge
[13:23] ZANICIA Chau: skepticism?
[13:24] herman Bergson: YEs Zanicia...the idea that there is absolutely nothing certain
[13:24] ZANICIA Chau: oh I see
[13:25] herman Bergson: while relativism would claim that certain things are at least certain relative to a given context
[13:25] Gemma Cleanslate: I think all the philosophers we will discuss will admit that too
[13:25] herman Bergson: I think that in our Ethics project we succeeded in putting a real distance between our ideas an the relativist/skeptic view
[13:26] herman Bergson: Well Gemma, there always is that drive to find at least an indicaiton of some universality
[13:27] Gemma Cleanslate: yes
[13:27] herman Bergson: And since we just had the Darwin year, we are more aware of some universality from an evolutionary point of view
[13:28] herman Bergson: An interesting research project is in this context forinstance the DNA research
[13:28] herman Bergson: an attempt to trace our roots back to where we came from
[13:28] herman Bergson: as a species
[13:29] herman Bergson: so while this DNA is at the bottom of all of it, the collective life we life may be called on top of everything
[13:30] ZANICIA Chau: Why is there growing concern ,do you think, professor, that DNA research is fundamentally flawed?
[13:30] herman Bergson: Is that so?
[13:30] ZANICIA Chau: Sorry, meant to say that last time!
[13:31] ZANICIA Chau: A growing concern
[13:31] Gemma Cleanslate: i read it is not as perfect as they thought
[13:31] Gemma Cleanslate: so far
[13:31] herman Bergson whispers: In what sense?
[13:31] ZANICIA Chau: generally ha ha
[13:31] herman Bergson: I see...then we have to look into that
[13:32] herman Bergson: well...the collective life will not depend on our knowledge of DNA fortunately
[13:32] ZANICIA Chau: yes
[13:32] herman Bergson: We'll start a journey through history and see how philosophers thought about the collectivity
[13:32] Repose Lionheart: interesting that it doesn't
[13:33] herman Bergson: and it will be interesting to keep the question in mind: in what respects do all these philosophers agree
[13:33] herman Bergson: or mdid not agree at all...
[13:34] herman Bergson: We'll look fromour perspective at their ideas and can wonder how valid they (still) are
[13:34] herman Bergson: So Plato will be as always our first guest
[13:35] herman Bergson: Check him out...his book Politeia, often translated as Teh Republic
[13:35] Gemma Cleanslate: oh yes
[13:35] herman Bergson: Your homework for next Thursday ^_^
[13:35] Repose Lionheart:
[13:35] Zinzi Serevi: :)
[13:35] Zinzi's translator: :)
[13:35] Abraxas Nagy: \o/
[13:35] CONNIE Eichel: :)
[13:36] herman Bergson: There is tons of info on this subject on the Internet
[13:36] Repose Lionheart: good
[13:36] Gemma Cleanslate: yes there is
[13:36] Gemma Cleanslate: wiki has alot
[13:36] herman Bergson: Oh yes... the complete text of the Politeia is available too
[[13:37] herman Bergson: two good sources are http:// www. gutenberg.org
[13:37] Gemma Cleanslate: yep
[13:37] herman Bergson: and the other one I know is Adeleide university Australia
[13:38] herman Bergson: Adelaide it is I think
[13:38] herman Bergson: You have to google the name..easy to find
[13:38] herman Bergson: A lot of the philosophers we'll discuss have their texts online ^_^
[13:39] Gemma Cleanslate: good
[13:39] herman Bergson: Any questions left unanswered?
[13:39] Gemma Cleanslate: now all we need is the time to read it all
[13:39] Gemma Cleanslate: lol
[13:39] CONNIE Eichel: nope
[13:40] herman Bergson: Well ,,,then I hope to see you next Thursday when we'll discuss Plato's ideas about the ideal state
[13:40] Gemma Cleanslate: ♥ Thank Youuuuuuuuuu!! ♥
[13:40] Repose Lionheart: Thank you, Professor
[13:40] herman Bergson: Thank you for your attention
[13:40] Jeb Larkham: thanks Herman see you Thursday
[13:40] Abraxas Nagy: ty professor
[13:40] Gemma Cleanslate: bye
[13:40] CONNIE Eichel: thanks professor :)
[13:40] herman Bergson: Sorry Jeb....no Plato today..:)
[13:40] ZANICIA Chau: Enlightening and stimulating as always, thankyou
[13:40] Zinzi Serevi: dank u
[13:40] Zinzi's translator: merci
[13:40] Adriana Jinn: thank you all
[13:41] Abraxas Nagy: see you guys next time :D
[13:41] Adriana Jinn: see you on thursday
[13:41] ZANICIA Chau: Bye
[13:41] herman Bergson: Bye all
[13:42] Adriana Jinn: it was really interesting even if i dont discuss
[13:42] herman Bergson: I hope you will enjoy it Adriana
[13:42] Adriana Jinn: it is really difficult for me but i want to go on to learn and listen
[13:42] CONNIE Eichel: bye all :)
[13:42] Adriana Jinn: surely i will
[13:42] Adriana Jinn: no pb
[13:42] Adriana Jinn: bye bye for now
[13:43] herman Bergson: dont forget the blog
[13:43] Qwark Allen: ******* Herman *******
[13:43] Qwark Allen: thank you
[13:43] Adriana Jinn: yes i will
[13:43] Qwark Allen: yes
[13:43] herman Bergson: you always can review the texts
[13:43] Qwark Allen: ;-)))
[13:43] oola Neruda: Adriana.. that is where i am at
[13:44] herman Bergson: we still have to play chess Qwark
[13:44] Qwark Allen: ah
[13:44] Qwark Allen: yes
[13:44] Qwark Allen: will be fun

24 Ethics and Pragmatism: a conclusion

Let me position myself as a philosophical naturalist, one for whom the human journey is constitutive of its own meaning and is not to be rescued by any transcendent explanations, principles of accountability, or posthumous salvation.

Like Dewey stay close to nature and interpret knowledge as the product of the interaction between organism and environment, and knowledge as having practical instrumentality in the guidance and control of that interaction.

The organism interacts with the world through self-guided activity that coordinates and integrates sensory and motor responses.

The implication for the theory of knowledge is clear: the world is not passively perceived and thereby known; active manipulation of the environment is involved integrally in the process of learning from the start.

This means that knowledge is not a static given but a process and that any proposition accepted as an item of knowledge has this status only provisionally, in other worlds...just a coincidence that it works. It soon can be replaced by an better proposition.

These fundamental ideas we can also apply to moral behavior. In order to understand Dewey’s moral philosophy, we must again focus on his concept of the situation.

Man is a creature who by nature has values. There are things,states of affairs, and activities that he directly enjoys, prizes, or values.

Moral choices and decisions arise only in those situations in which there are competing desires or a conflict of values.

The problem that a man then confronts is to decide what he really wants and what course of action he ought to pursue. He cannot appeal to his immediate values to resolve the situation;

he must evaluate or appraise the situation and the different courses of action open to him. This process of deliberation that culminates in a decision to act is what Dewey calls “valuation.” But how do we engage in this process of valuation?

For this we need to accept a few basic assumptions. The first one is that as a species humans are basically the same all world with regard to physiology and neurobiology.

The second assumption is that the quality of life is achieved by reason and intelligence, These qualities give us the power of rationality, which means that education is essential and learning a lifetime activity.

The third assumption is what we find in virtue ethics which presupposes reasonable , positive qualities in man based on finding the mean between extremes, the virtue, or what Dewey would describe as the interaction of the organism with his environment.

In this interaction, which has an evolutionary origin, we learn to live together and are able to realize all virtues in ourselves.

I don't mean to say that we eventually will become all Saints, but this interaction with our environment began when man discovered himself.

And I think that we are maybe still at the beginning of this process, but if we are willing to accept that the human being is a learning and adaptive organism we will follow our virtues, guided by reason more and more to improve the human condition.


The Discussion

[13:22] herman Bergson: Thus I conclude the project on Modern Theories of Ethics
[13:22] Gemma Cleanslate: very good some of it was very tough
[13:23] herman Bergson: I can hear you think..
[13:23] Repose Lionheart: hehe
[13:23] Repose Lionheart: i agree
[13:23] ZANICIA Chau: hehe
[13:23] Iboya Cortes: Can we comment?
[13:23] Gemma Cleanslate: the cat chasing its tail
[13:23] herman Bergson: Yes please feel free.
[13:23] Iboya Cortes: or ask?
[13:23] herman Bergson: sure
[13:24] herman Bergson smiles
[13:24] CONNIE Eichel: thanks :)
[13:24] herman Bergson: wb CONNIE
[13:24] CONNIE Eichel: :)
[13:24] herman Bergson: feel free to ask or make comments
[13:25] Gemma Cleanslate: :_)
[13:25] ZANICIA Chau: I so thoroughly agree that it is difficult to add anything
[13:25] Repose Lionheart: yes, me too
[13:25] Iboya Cortes: well, im reading it again smiles
[13:25] herman Bergson: yes...that can happen
[13:25] Iboya Cortes: because during this I did wonder bout a few things
[13:26] Repose Lionheart: i have a different take on "nature" maybe, but that's beside the point here
[13:26] herman Bergson: When I started the project I didnt have a clear view on the outcome
[13:26] Repose Lionheart: it was amazingly productive
[13:26] oola Neruda: within the context of all this... is there a justification for war
[13:26] herman Bergson: I agree Repose
[13:26] Abraxas Nagy: never
[13:26] herman Bergson: That is the best answer I guess
[13:27] Gemma Cleanslate: i agree but there are those who can justify it
[13:27] Gemma Cleanslate: by their own insight
[13:27] Gemma Cleanslate: to their ethics
[13:27] Iboya Cortes: For this we need to accept a few basic assumptions. The first one is that as a species humans are basically the same all world with regard to physiology and neurobiology.
[13:27] Iboya Cortes: this part
[13:27] herman Bergson: Oh it is a special chapter in political philosophy.... the Justied war....nice for our next project!
[13:27] Gemma Cleanslate: ah yes
[13:27] Iboya Cortes: in the world people seem to evolve at a different pase
[13:27] Gemma Cleanslate: :_)
[13:27] herman Bergson: good question oola
[13:27] Iboya Cortes: different speed almost
[13:28] Iboya Cortes: why is that?
[13:28] Abraxas Nagy: are they?
[13:28] Repose Lionheart: oh, yes, just war is next....cool
[13:28] herman Bergson: There are differences indeed...
[13:28] herman Bergson: But I think they mainly are caused by nutrition…
[13:28] Gemma Cleanslate: and education
[13:29] herman Bergson: Japanese are not tall, but that isnt a fixed fact...
[13:29] Repose Lionheart: and culture
[13:29] Repose Lionheart: true
[13:29] herman Bergson: in the middle ages average length in Europe was 1.50 or 1.60m
[13:29] Repose Lionheart: oh
[13:29] Abraxas Nagy: that big?
[13:29] herman Bergson: better food changes the population
[13:29] oola Neruda: i can see a lot of individuals having their values... in a case like war, how can a political entity justifiably impose a set of values
[13:30] Repose Lionheart: that's why the doors always look so small in photos „ã°
[13:30] Abraxas Nagy: ha-bloody-ha
[13:30] herman Bergson: yes Repose...we bump our head there
[13:30] Abraxas Nagy: oops
[13:30] Repose Lionheart: hehe
[13:30] CONNIE Eichel: :)
[13:30] ZANICIA Chau: others retard their own growth
[13:31] herman Bergson: I think you are running ahead of us already in the next project oola
[13:31] oola Neruda: smiles... well i will consider it a carrot for myself to follow then until you begin
[13:31] herman Bergson: Your question contains a lot of other questions which have to answered first
[13:31] herman Bergson smiles
[13:32] Repose Lionheart: carrots are tasty
[13:32] herman Bergson: and healthy too
[13:32] herman Bergson: Well it is somewhat amazing that a whole group more or less agrees with me
[13:32] oola Neruda: micro / macro
[13:32] Abraxas Nagy: o.O Alarice crashed
[13:32] Repose Lionheart: yes
[13:33] Gemma Cleanslate: yes
[13:33] Repose Lionheart: seems to be the case, though
[13:33] Gemma Cleanslate: still some problems
[13:33] Abraxas Nagy: yep
[13:33] Abraxas Nagy: what else is new
[13:33] Abraxas Nagy: lol
[13:33] Christianadreetje Dench: :)
[13:33] ZANICIA Chau: perhaps- as you mentioned- the word 'nature' may be questionable
[13:33] Repose Lionheart: yes
[13:33] herman Bergson: My idea of nature...human nature is very basic
[13:34] herman Bergson: I see human nature as the functioning of the organism caused by the central nervous system
[13:34] herman Bergson: in that respect we dont differ from other primates for instance
[13:35] ZANICIA Chau: why do you think it seems that people do not wish to refine or reavaulate themselves these days?
[13:35] herman Bergson: However, we must conclude that we differ from other primates yet
[13:35] herman Bergson: do you think that that is the case Zanicia?
[13:36] ZANICIA Chau: certainly
[13:36] herman Bergson: You mean that people do not want to get educated and civilized?
[13:36] ZANICIA Chau: it seems to be worldwide as well
[13:36] ZANICIA Chau: yes
[13:37] oola Neruda: or cannot ... cannot is different from not wanting to
[13:37] ZANICIA Chau: there is so much complacency
[13:37] herman Bergson: The problem with such observations is that these are generalisations...you could call them even hypotheses
[13:38] herman Bergson: The difficulty is ...how did this generalisation came into existence
[13:38] ZANICIA Chau: we see- we naturally judge
[13:38] herman Bergson: what data confirm the hypothesis
[13:38] Iboya Cortes: but that was a good point - not wanting to or cannot
[13:38] Christianadreetje Dench: thank you all, sorry have to leave early ! Cu **
[13:38] ZANICIA Chau: if the evidence was not there -we would not see
[13:38] Abraxas Nagy: bye Chris
[13:39] Repose Lionheart: Bye, Christian
[13:39] herman Bergson: Thnx for coming Christi
[13:39] herman Bergson: Well Zanicia this is a difficult subject.....
[13:40] oola Neruda: many people have lost hope that there is a good future
[13:40] Iboya Cortes: As Herman said, we keep evolving, that includes values too
[13:40] herman Bergson: You could say it is the tension between general public observation and scientific research and data gathering
[13:40] oola Neruda: some other people somehow find a way to believe and strive for their future
[13:40] herman Bergson: yes oola....
[13:40] herman Bergson: Just look at our behavior....
[13:41] Repose Lionheart: it is reasoned
[13:41] herman Bergson: many of use at least in the Netherlands dont dump garbage in one trashcan... anymore
[13:41] Iboya Cortes: accepting a virtual world is shifting values, just a small example
[13:41] Repose Lionheart: oh, here too
[13:41] herman Bergson: we seperate paper, plastic, graden trash and the remainder in our homes before it is collected
[13:42] Repose Lionheart: yes, sl does shift values!
[13:42] Gemma Cleanslate: yes
[13:42] Gemma Cleanslate: here too
[13:42] herman Bergson: This means, that if it shows that we are willing to do so, we have learnt to care for our environment
[13:42] Repose Lionheart: yes
[13:42] herman Bergson: in a way we deal better with our world in this respect than 50 years ago for instance
[13:43] herman Bergson: We still litter the world with our trash but nevertheless
[13:43] herman Bergson: the way we think about plants, rain forests , animals has changed into respect for nature
[13:44] herman Bergson: the insight of our mutual dependency
[13:44] herman Bergson: We also make better bombs and rockets and tanks...true
[13:44] ZANICIA Chau: better?
[13:44] herman Bergson: But if it is about human nature....this conflict is quintessential , part of human nature
[13:45] Gemma Cleanslate: :-)
[13:45] herman Bergson: oh yes Zanicia...much more effective bombs
[13:45] herman Bergson: Not that I am happy with that, but we do
[13:46] ZANICIA Chau: that entirely depends on one's viewpoint
[13:46] herman Bergson: smiles
[13:46] herman Bergson: of course
[13:46] herman Bergson: but in Aristotelian sense...if it is the function of a bomb to kill human beings , Aristotle would agree that we now have better bombs
[13:47] herman Bergson: in the sense of more effective
[13:47] ZANICIA Chau: -which brings us back to 'valuation'
[13:47] Gemma Cleanslate: yes lol
[13:47] herman Bergson: yes....
[13:47] oola Neruda: and circumstances and opportunity
[13:47] herman Bergson: it brings us back to our interaction with our environment
[13:48] ZANICIA Chau: yes
[13:48] herman Bergson: and creating bombs is not contribution to the improvement of human wellfare
[13:48] ZANICIA Chau: -concur!
[13:48] Repose Lionheart: for sure
[13:48] herman Bergson: But as I said....
[13:49] herman Bergson: we tend to look at ourselves as completed products of evolution....we are complete....full grown
[13:49] Iboya Cortes: and we are not you say?
[13:50] ZANICIA Chau: people need to understand that we are yet babies
[13:50] herman Bergson: But how much time has past in this evolution in respect to the 4 billion years earth exists
[13:50] Iboya Cortes: I agree yes
[13:50] herman Bergson: Yes , maybe we are
[13:50] Gemma Cleanslate: slo going
[13:50] Repose Lionheart: yes
[13:50] herman Bergson: At least we often stell tend to play with the wrong toys for instance „ã°
[13:51] Repose Lionheart: hehe
[13:51] Abraxas Nagy: haaaahaaaahaaaahaaaahaaa
[13:51] herman Bergson: So if you look at mankind from a time perspective.... we are babies indeed
[13:52] Repose Lionheart: yes
[13:52] herman Bergson: When you look at science....hardly a day old in relation to earth history...
[13:52] Iboya Cortes: I think evaluation will never stop in us humans, in the same sense we might be wiped out within a splitsecond
[13:52] herman Bergson: irt only began iaround 1650
[13:52] Gemma Cleanslate: yes
[13:52] Repose Lionheart: yes, lots to discover
[13:52] herman Bergson: I would never have believed it of myself, but I dare to say there still is hope for mankind ^_^
[13:52] Repose Lionheart: :-)
[13:53] Repose Lionheart: agree!
[13:53] Iboya Cortes: I:-)
[13:53] Gemma Cleanslate: have to get going
[13:53] Gemma Cleanslate: ‚ô• Thank Youuuuuuuuuu!! ‚ô•
[13:53] Repose Lionheart: Bye, Gemma „ã°
[13:53] Gemma Cleanslate: class tuesday?
[13:53] Iboya Cortes: yes, im gonna let this sink in for a bit too :-)
[13:53] herman Bergson: Yesterday I watch Startrek...in the 24th century....
[13:53] Abraxas Nagy: sure
[13:53] herman Bergson: I can tell you things looked a little better there
[13:53] Iboya Cortes: Thank you everyone, Herman
[13:54] CONNIE Eichel: great class :)
[13:54] herman Bergson: One announcement left: NEXT WEEK I AM ON VACATION IN RL!!!
[13:54] Iboya Cortes: yes it was great
[13:54] Iboya Cortes: hahahhaaa
[13:54] Gemma Cleanslate: ahhhhhhaaaa glad i waited!!!!!
[13:54] Repose Lionheart: oh, nice „ã°
[13:54] Iboya Cortes: carnaval in holland
[13:54] CONNIE Eichel: woo hooo, proferssor
[13:54] Gemma Cleanslate: good
[13:54] herman Bergson: Thank you CONNIE, Iboya
[13:54] Gemma Cleanslate: enjoy
[13:54] Abraxas Nagy: dat is waar
[13:54] ZANICIA Chau: thank you for today, professor
[13:55] Iboya Cortes: :-)))
[13:55] herman Bergson: My pleasure Zanicia
[13:55] Iboya Cortes: bye for now take care all :-)
[13:55] Justine Rhapsody: Thanks Professor :)
[13:55] Abraxas Nagy: I am going to friends.... thanks again herman
[13:55] ZANICIA Chau: have good holiday!!!!
[13:55] herman Bergson: After the vacation the new project!!
[13:55] Repose Lionheart: good
[13:55] Abraxas Nagy: w0oh0o!
[13:55] herman Bergson: Then oola gets all her questions aswered „ã°
[13:55] oola Neruda: :-)
[13:55] Repose Lionheart: Thank you, Professor!
[13:56] Hello: bergfrau Apfelbaum donated L$50. Thank you very much, it is much appreciated!
[13:56] CONNIE Eichel: jazz time for me, have a nice holidays professor :)
[13:56] CONNIE Eichel: bye everyone :)
[13:56] herman Bergson: And an applause for Bergie who became today manager of 13 sims ...
[13:56] herman Bergson: /////// APPLAUSE /////[13:56] Repose Lionheart: oh, wow
[13:56] CONNIE Eichel: wow, hard work, hehe
[13:56] Repose Lionheart: applause!!!!
[13:56] CONNIE Eichel: :)
[13:56] bergfrau Apfelbaum: danke herman!! für deine tolle arbeit!! es war wieder interessant und tiefgr√ºndig:-) sch√∂nes thema
[13:57] oola Neruda: wow bergie
[13:57] ZANICIA Chau: weel done
[13:57] bergfrau Apfelbaum: oola :-))
[13:57] CONNIE Eichel: :)

23 Virtue Ethics continued

In the former lecture I said : The big difference of approach in theories of ethics here is clear: “What is the right action?” is a significantly different question to ask from “How should I live?

What kind of person should I be?” , referring to consequentialist and deontological theories on the on hand, and virtue ethics on the other hand.

Such a question presupposes an explicit philosophy of psychology, an answer to the question: how is the inner person "constructed".

You only can do psychological research in moral behavior if you for instance assume that a person has a knowledge of good and evil.

Although Aristotle In the first book of the Ethica Nicomachea warns us that the study of ethics is imprecise, he has a clear and precise idea about the base of our ability to moral behavior.

He assumed, that the function of man is reason and the life that is distinctive of humans is the life in accordance with reason. If the function of man is reason, then the good man is the man who reasons well.

Reason is the human quality that shows us how true virtue requires choice, understanding, and knowledge. Virtue is a settled and purposive disposition.

So when someone has the virtue of compassionate it means, that he will act accordingly, since having the virtuous inner dispositions will also involve being moved to act in accordance with them.

Moral education and development are a major part of virtue ethics. There are a number of factors that may affect one’s character development,

such as one’s parents, teachers, peer group, role-models, the degree of encouragement and attention one receives, and exposure to different situations.

Our natural tendencies, the raw material we are born with, are shaped and developed through a long and gradual process of education and habituation.

Thus moral standards by education. Yet moral relativism one could say. However these standards are related to our natural tendencies. Compassion could be regarded as a general human trait, but the resulting moral action will depend on the given cultural context.

But if the morality of a person is so closely connected with his education of character, we have to face a serious problem, for not everyone is in the lucky position of receiving a good education, for instance.

Do we then have to conclude that not everyone is equally morally responsible for his actions? That is counterintuitive.

When you have killed someone on purpose, you are a murderer, even though your moral education wasn't that good.

Thus we can get trapped between intuition and fact. The intuition is that luck must not make moral differences. Whether you studied at a university or only 'graduated' from primary school can not affect what a person is morally responsible of.

However, the fact is that luck does seem to make moral differences. You were lucky to be born in a wealthy and educated family. The other person wasn't and that was out of his control.

I won't resolve this problem here, but just refer to what we can experience very day and then ask yourself what you would decide.

It is a fact that verdicts in Court often take into account the background (-lack of- education e.g) to decide on the punishment. Just think about it.

This is the present landscape of modern theories of ethics: deontology, consequentialism and virtue ethics. Virtue ethics is closest to the psychology of the person.

As it was clear from the beginning, there is no such thing as THE definite theory of ethics. Each of us has to find his way through this landscape and weigh all arguments.

Final lecture of this project will be on Ethics and Pragmatism. Will it bring us new insights?


The Discussion

[13:18] herman Bergson: thank you
[13:18] herman Bergson: if you have a question or remark..feel free...
[13:18] Gemma Cleanslate: i am glad to hear it is closest to our psychology
[13:19] herman Bergson: yes...
[13:19] Gemma Cleanslate: rather then the other two
[13:19] Gemma Cleanslate: sounds better too lol
[13:19] herman Bergson: the other theories do hardly take the person into account
[13:19] oola Neruda: i have been amazed in this world how sometimes the poorest of people can be the most moral... unlike what Weil and Brecht emphasize
[13:19] herman Bergson: there are just rules...
[13:19] Repose Lionheart: yes
[13:19] herman Bergson: or consequences...whether we are machines, robots or human beings
[13:20] Repose Lionheart: agree, oola
[13:20] herman Bergson: If the apply to us they apply to us
[13:20] oola Neruda: adversity often results in learning compassion
[13:20] herman Bergson: Well...that is a point...
[13:21] herman Bergson: morality is based on character acoording to virtue ethics..
[13:21] herman Bergson: doesnt matter what or who you are
[13:21] oola Neruda: right
[13:21] Alarice Beaumont: yes
[13:21] herman Bergson: you need the insight and the wisdom and experience of life
[13:22] Repose Lionheart: wonder if adversity is necessary for full moral development
[13:22] herman Bergson: these are closely connected with this theory of ethics
[13:22] Alarice Beaumont: what about a person to look up to?
[13:22] herman Bergson: adversity?
[13:22] Repose Lionheart: oh, what oola said above got me thinking
[13:22] herman Bergson: a role model Alarice?
[13:23] Alarice Beaumont: that would be something..
[13:23] herman Bergson: ah...adversoity...bad times...
[13:23] herman Bergson: well...as I child I sometimes heard adults say, when they observed immoral behavior, it should be wartime again...
[13:24] Repose Lionheart: oh!
[13:24] Alarice Beaumont: i rather meant a person who really is - in most eyes - good.. and little one try to be like this one
[13:24] Repose Lionheart: hmmmm....
[13:24] Alarice Beaumont: oh
[13:24] herman Bergson: yes..the idea that adversity brings a man back to his basics
[13:25] herman Bergson: yes Alarice...that is one of the learning ideas of virtue ethics
[13:25] herman Bergson: To say something more...
[13:25] herman Bergson: Margaret Anscombe was a zealous defender of catholicism
[13:26] herman Bergson: and a christian idea is that the perosn of Jesus is THE role model of a virtuous man
[13:26] herman Bergson: so there is not only the link with Aristotelian thinking
[13:26] Repose Lionheart: interesting, yes, an ax to grind
[13:27] herman Bergson: for what do you want to use that ax Repose?
[13:27] Repose Lionheart: hehe
[13:27] Repose Lionheart: not sure, Prof
[13:27] herman Bergson smiles
[13:27] herman Bergson: I already got a bit nervous
[13:27] Abraxas Nagy: haaaahaaaahaaaahaaaahaaa
[13:28] Repose Lionheart: oh, I'm harmless
[13:28] Repose Lionheart: really
[13:28] Abraxas Nagy: ah but an ax is not
[13:28] herman Bergson: ah...good
[13:28] Alarice Beaumont: ^^
[13:28] herman Bergson: anyway....
[13:28] Repose Lionheart: she started a revolution in ethics, sounds like
[13:28] herman Bergson: Next lecture I want to look into Pragmatism....
[13:29] Repose Lionheart: people like that often have strong commitments
[13:29] herman Bergson: and I still have an intuition that we should look up Frankena too again
[13:29] herman Bergson: pieces of a puzzle
[13:29] herman Bergson: You find the lecture on Frankena in the blog
[13:30] Gemma Cleanslate: ok
[13:30] Zinzi Serevi: ok
[13:30] Repose Lionheart: yes
[13:30] Repose Lionheart: !
[13:30] herman Bergson: I have a feeling that a combination of Frankena, virtue ethics and pragmatism might lead to some coherent theory
[13:30] Gemma Cleanslate: :-)
[13:31] Repose Lionheart: oh, be interesting to see...
[13:31] herman Bergson: Dont know what you all think about it, but that is my feeling
[13:31] herman Bergson: You are rather quiet today
[13:31] Zinzi Serevi: its new for me
[13:32] herman Bergson: Ah Gemma found my present
[13:32] Gemma Cleanslate: ♥ Thank Youuuuuuuuuu!! ♥
[13:32] Gemma Cleanslate: very nice
[13:32] Zinzi Serevi: so i want to listen the first time..:)
[13:32] herman Bergson: Outside you can see it in action...
[13:32] Gemma Cleanslate: yes lol
[13:32] Gemma Cleanslate: it is lovely
[13:32] herman Bergson: you are free to take a copy....and cheer up your place with spring flowers
[13:33] Zinzi Serevi: thanks
[13:33] : Repose Lionheart raises hand
[13:33] herman Bergson: when you rezz it...just put it in edit mode and follow the instructions of the blue menu
[13:34] Gemma Cleanslate: ok
[13:34] Gemma Cleanslate: is it many prims?
[13:34] herman Bergson: keepin mind that you have no greater distance between pooint than 10m
[[13:34] herman Bergson: one little prim Gemma
[13:34] Abraxas Nagy: yep
[13:34] Abraxas Nagy: wow
[13:34] Gemma Cleanslate: oh good
[13:35] herman Bergson: the llSetPos() instruction only supports movements shorter than 10m
[13:35] Alarice Beaumont: thanks very much Herman :-))
[13:35] Abraxas Nagy: ah yes it does
[13:35] herman Bergson: My pleasure
[13:35] herman Bergson: Repose?
[13:35] Repose Lionheart: ummm...no idea why my hand is up
[13:35] herman Bergson: A question?
[13:35] Zinzi Serevi: lol
[13:35] Abraxas Nagy: lol
[13:35] Repose Lionheart: good thing it's not the one with the ax init
[13:35] herman Bergson: press shift arrow
[13:35] Abraxas Nagy: shift arrow
[13:35] Repose Lionheart: oh
[13:36] herman Bergson: instructions are on the wall behind you
[13:36] herman Bergson: shift right arrow
[13:36] Abraxas Nagy: o A o!
[13:36] herman Bergson: Thank you all for your participation again
[13:36] Qwark Allen: thank you herman´
[13:36] Abraxas Nagy: thank YOU professor
[13:37] Gemma Cleanslate: ♥ Thank Youuuuuuuuuu!! ♥
[13:37] Zinzi Serevi: thanks Herman
[13:37] Gemma Cleanslate: see you thursday then