Philosophy Educating Humanity?
ABSTRACT: Over two millennia of Western philosophy has not yet contributed much to the education of humanity. Philosophy has almost always been the exclusive domain of a small group of men. This elite character makes the assumption that philosophy could contribute to the education of human beings towards humanity — a humanity of human rights — improbable. If we want to educate human beings towards humanity, we will first have to teach them a sense of responsibility. The power of persuasion needed in order to teach such a sense of responsibility requires that we demonstrate our involvement in and co-responsibility for their concrete problems by presenting clear analyses of these problems and by setting a good example wherever possible. One of the most universal and concrete problems of life is the issue of procreation. As regards this issue, however, philosophers have failed miserably: they themselves have often exhibited irresponsible procreation and have, in fact, only recently begun to consider the issue a subject for philosophy. I will try to analyze when a decision to procreate or abort may be called responsible and whether and to what extent the applications of modern techniques such as in vitro fertilization are in line with our views of human rights.
Two and a half thousand years of Western philosophy have not yet contributed much to the education of humanity. Philosophy has always been the almost exclusive domain of a small group of men, conversing in esoteric language on the most abstract of subjects, without being much concerned about the needs of the ordinary people around them. This elitism undermines the assumption that philosophy could contribute to the education of humanity as a whole, and it makes the assumption that it could contribute to the education of human beings towards humanity — a humanity of human rights — entirely improbable.
If we want to educate human beings towards humanity we will first have to teach them a sense of responsibility: the awareness that each is responsible for his or her own actions and the consequences which can be expected to ensue, together with the awareness that a person’s rights and freedoms may not encroach upon the corresponding rights and freedoms of another. The power of persuasion needed in order to teach such a sense of responsibility requires that we demonstrate our involvement in and co-responsibility for their concrete problems, by presenting clear analyses of these problems and by setting a good example wherever possible.
In this essay I will be analysing the morality of voluntary active euthanasia (VAE). I will focus on the argument that if such an act is considered morally acceptable, it can only lead down a slippery slope in which society becomes grossly unrecognizable in terms of the value of life. This essay will examine the strengths and weaknesses of this argument and the moral principles which underpin it to determine whether or not it remains a convincing argument to VAE.
Our culture has a stringent belief that creating new life if a beautiful process which should be cherished. Most often, the birth process is without complications and the results are a healthy active child. In retrospect, many individuals feel that there are circumstances that make it morally wrong to bring a child into the world. This is most often the case when reproduction results in the existence of another human being with a considerably reduced chance at a quality life. To delve even further into the topic, there are individuals that feel they have been morally wronged by the conception in itself. Wrongful conception is a topic of debate among many who question the ethical principles involved with the sanctity of human life. This paper will analyze the ethical dilemmas of human dignity, compassion, non-malfeasance, and social justice, as well the legal issues associated with wrongful conception.
The addition of a child into a family’s home is a happy occasion. Unfortunately, some families are unable to have a child due to unforeseen problems, and they must pursue other means than natural pregnancy. Some couples adopt and other couples follow a different path; they utilize in vitro fertilization or surrogate motherhood. The process is complicated, unreliable, but ultimately can give the parents the gift of a child they otherwise could not have had. At the same time, as the process becomes more and more advanced and scientists are able to predict the outcome of the technique, the choice of what child is born is placed in the hands of the parents. Instead of waiting to see if the child had the mother’s eyes, the father’s hair or Grandma’s heart problem, the parents and doctors can select the best eggs and the best sperm to create the perfect child. Many see the rise of in vitro fertilization as the second coming of the Eugenics movement of the 19th and early 20th century. A process that is able to bring joy to so many parents is also seen as deciding who is able to reproduce and what child is worthy of birthing.
Books are banned for many reasons but more times than not it is because of the sensitive information found within the novel that agitates the reader. As long as people have been able to develop their own opinions, others have sought to prevent them from sharing. At some point in time, every idea has ultimately become objectionable to someone. The most frequently challenged and most visible targets of such objection are the very books found in classrooms and public libraries. These controversial novels teach lessons that sometimes can be very sensitive to some but there is much more to challenged books than a controversial topic. What lies within these pages is a wealth of knowledge, such as new perspectives for readers, twisting plots, and expressions that are found nowhere else. For example, To Kill A Mockingbird, contains references to rape, racial content, and profanity that have caused many to challenge the novel in the first place. The book was banned from countless
One popular objection is: if it is immoral to deprive someone of a future, or a “future-like-ours”, then it is immoral to deprive a sperm or egg of a “future-like-ours”. Because it is immoral to deprive someone of a future, one must conclude that it is immoral to deprive a sperm or egg of a “future-like-ours”. This objection is in reference to different modes of contraception, such as condoms and birth control. Nevertheless, the biggest problem with Marquis’ argument that allowed for this objection was its indecisiveness and improbability to draw a definitive line. Marquis criticized the pro-lifers and pro-choicers for being unable to have a definitive definition and made the same mistake in his own argument. One could object to his argument by merely questioning where the decision would end; are we to believe that one is depriving a sperm or an egg a future when we use contraception? Another important note is the idea that a “future-like-ours” is even an even more ambiguous term than a “person” or “human being”. It is impossible for the average individual to know which of his sperm or her eggs carries a genetic abnormality that may cause their child to not have a
Maya Angelou’s I Know Why The Caged Bird Sings is oftentimes banned for depicting rape, as well as being “anti-white.” John Steinbeck’s Of Mice and Men is discriminated against for containing too much profanity. The anonymously-written Go Ask Alice has been shunned for portraying drug use, sexual situations, and profanity. (Kelly) Other than being banned, though, these books all have something more in common; they are classic works that have timeless, moralistic value. They each tell a message. Their messages couldn’t possibly be conveyed in their original, meaningful essences if the contents of the books were to be altered or removed from society all together. Therefore, children and adults alike would miss out on countless opportunities to expand their enlightenment.
The following essay will examine the morality of abortion with specific reference to the writings of Don Marquis, Judith Jarvis Thompson, Peter Singer and Mary Anne Warren. I will begin by assessing the strength of the argument provided by Marquis which claims that abortion is impermissible because it deprives a being of a potential “future like ours,” and then go on to consider the writings of Singer, Thomson and Warren to both refute Marquis claims and support my assertion that abortion is morally permissible primarily because of the threat to the freedom and bodily autonomy of women extending the right to life to a foetus in utero would pose.
Rich, B., Lepine, J., & Crawford, E. (2010). Job engagement: Antecedents and effects on job performance. Academy Of Management Journal, 53(3), 617-635. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Boonin, David. A Defense of Abortion. Cambridge Studies in Philosophy and Public Policy. Boulder: University of Colorado, 2003. Print.
Reproduction is the ability of a species to perpetuate and in the human species it is looked upon as a right in today's society. Males and females alike feel pressure that in order to be fully male or fully female they must procreate (Conrad, 1997). While this is not true of all men and women, for many married couples the ability to have children is important. It is only recently that infertile couples have been provided with options that would allow them to conceive a child. These options include the various forms of reproductive technology that have been developed over the past 20-25 years. While these technological advances have brought joy and hope to many infertile couples, the advances have also brought along a myriad of moral and ethical dilemmas as well. It is necessary for everyone to become educated about reproductive technology in order to be better equipped to deal with the moral and ethical issues that this new technology brings to today's world.
Mulligan, P., Hall, O., Nanni Jr, A. J., Hall, L., & Ansari, S. (2006). Hammond Cards, Inc: The Creative Acquisition. Inc: The Creative Acquisition (July 31, 2006).
Employee engagement, a term devised by Gallup research group, is viewed as an important management tool for any company who wants to be an effective and productive organization. Researches have shown that employee can contribute positively to the organization vision and goal when a company engage them effectively. The employee will also feel more passionate about their work and have a sense of belonging.
Here are some figures that display how Employee engagement practices have bolstered up the efficiency and productivity of the employees and in return have augmented the profits of the companies. According to a new meta-analysis that was conducted by the Gallup organisation amongst 1.4 million employees, the organisations that focus on employee engagement practices to a large extent have reported 22% increase in productivity. These practices even impr...
With the start of human life unclear, relying on our intuition becomes ineffective; thus leaving that obligation up for debate. Should we grant a full set of moral rights to a fetus on their first trimester as we do a fully developed person of moral standing? The answer is yes. In accordance to Emmanuel Kant’s ethical theory, the act of abortion, in direct violation to the first and second formulation to the categorical imperative, is morally wrong. I defend the human value of a fetus from the moment of conception upon the following Kantian grounds: denying or removing another person’s future of a life cannot be (1) universalized nor (2) is it acting in a way that treats others as ends in themselves.
The ethics of abortion is a topic that establishes arguments that attempt to argue if abortion is morally justified or not. Philosopher Judith Jarvis Thomson wrote a pro- choice piece called “A Defense of Abortion.” In this paper, she presents various arguments that attempt to defend abortion by relating it to the woman carrying the fetus and her right in controlling her body. On the other side of the spectrum, philosopher Don Marquis wrote a pro- life paper called “Why Abortion Is Immoral.” Ultimately, Marquis argues that abortion is immoral with rare exceptions because it is resulting in the deprivation of the fetus’s valuable future. He supports his paper by creating the future-like-ours argument that compares the future of a fetus to the