Amanda Adams – Chapter 9

Chapter 9 Notes

Amanda Adams

Does Science Tell Us the Whole Truth and Nothing but the Truth?

Karl Popper

-Popper argued that the scientific process does not work the by accumulating more and more evidence in support of general scientific principles, but it works based on attempts to falsify daring hypotheses

– Resistance to falsification replaces confirmation as the test of scientific theories

-He believes that the hypothesis itself is a product of imagination or intuition as observation

-Popper views falsifiability saying it could never be conclusively verified even though it was a genuinely scientific claim that can be tested

-“All swans are white”

-“According to Popper, we should view scientific theories not as truth but as provisional, to be retained until they have been falsified or until they have been replaced by better theories”

-Popper also challenge the traditional view that scientific observation must be theoretically neutral

-He argued that all observation is selective

-Thomas Kuhn’s theory of scientific revolutions

-Kwan’s book revolutionized the philosophy of science in called into question 2 proudest boasts of science

  number 1 signs gives us the truth about what nature really is

 number 2 And science is progressive, securing an even greater store of truth about nature and building steadily on the work of path scientists

– In this book he talks about normal science, paradigm, and scientific revolution

–  Normal science means research firmly based upon one or more past scientific achievements

-achievements that some particular scientific community acknowledges for a time as supplying the foundation for its further practice

-Achievements that share these 2 characteristics he refers to as “paradigms” which is a term that relates closely to normal science

-Law, theory, application, an instrumentation together provides models from which spring particular coherent traditions of scientific research

-“For Kuhn science something done by real men people who are born into particular culture at a particular time learn their science out of textbooks and in classrooms and then practice what they have learned in laboratories”

-He is interested in how real scientists learn the craft and pass it onto others

-He believes that normal scientists work out answers to problems that no one has yet solved

-Kuhn’s third key term is “scientific revolutions” Suggesting “noncumulative developmental episodes in which in older paradigm is replaced in a whole or in part by an incompatible new one”

-And this is where the “Paradigm shift” occurs, meaning that one is adopting an entirely new way of looking at the world

-Kuhn pointed out that paradigm change occurs in response to experimental evidence or theoretical calculation and is carried out by argument, reasoning, counter argument, an new experimentation

-He acknowledged that paradigm change does not take place within a single paradigm but instead consists of a struggle between competing paradigms

-Kuhn argued that when a paradigm shift takes place there is a corresponding shift in what counts as a scientific fact as well

-So the result is that if there are two competing paradigms, people cant say whichever one explains all of the facts that the other explains and wins

-In his last section he introduces the idea that science is a “social practice” an activity carried out by men and women who’s interactions with one another shape what they believe

-Social factors can play a role in determining what is and what isn’t a scientific fact

-“Recent work in the philosophy of science has emphasized the social and institutional structure of science rather than portraying science is something done by isolated individuals”

“All swans are white”

Paradigm Shift

Francesca – Week 9

Pgs 133-138, Science as a Social Institution 

• “This recognition, that science, like politics, the economy, marriage, art, and religion, is a social institution, is the distinctive mark of the most recent work being done in the philosophy of science.” (133) 
• Social institution of science: social roles (research scientists, students, professors, etc); carried out in established places (labs, institutes, universities, etc); run by bureaucratic structures (committees, associations, etc); participants (Ph.D., lab coats, etc) 
• “The character, performance, accomplishments, and role of an individual scientist can only be properly understood and evaluated when seen in the context of the total social practice of which he or she is a part.” (133)
• “A group of researchers, looking for a cure for AIDS, is like a town searching in the woods for lost children, except that the researchers cannot even be sure that there is a cure to be found… The search for a cure must be seen as a large social effort, not as a collection of individual efforts, and any philosophical or methodological evaluation of the scientific efforts of particular AIDS researchers can only be carried out in the context of an evaluation of the entire social effort to find a cure.” (136)
• “Eventually through repeated citations, it acquires the status of a fact and is henceforth used by other researchers, perhaps even without citation, as the basis for their own experiments and analyses. What you will see immediately from this description is that it is a matter of social convention whether something is a scientific fact.” (137) I think this is becoming even more relevant as time passes. Especially in our society, we see things becoming “facts” based on popular opinion or emotional feelings.

June 3rd 

Pgs 372-374

• “Philosophy of science centers on a critical analysis of the various sciences, such as the physical, life, and behavioral. To the extent that all of these sciences (physics, biology, and so on) share certain assumptions about the production of knowledge, the philosophy of science often focuses on methodological issues generally associated with all the sciences.” (373)
• “Questions about the nature of truth and the nature of knowledge inevitably arise as philosophical reflection on science proceeds.” (373)
• “Some scholars warn of scientism, a kind of blind faith in the power of science to determine all truth.” (373) 

Pgs 382-388, Conjectures and Refutations, Karl Popper 

• “My aim in this lecture is to stress the significance of one particular aspect of science- its need to grow…its need to progress…the repeated overthrow of scientific theories and their replacement by better or more satisfactory ones…and these lead us further to experiments and observations of a kind which nobody would ever have dreamt of without the stimulus and guidance both of our theories and of our criticism of them. For indeed, the most interesting experiments and observations were carefully designed by us in order to test our theories, especially our new theories.” (383) Evidence that science cannot be the only tool to learn the truth because there are constant new discoveries. 
• He does not believe science will become dissatisfied because our ignorance is infinite. (383)
• A desirable theory has/shows a higher degree of empirical (based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic) content or of testability (384)
• Verificationists/justificationists: anything that cannot be supported by positive reasons is unworthy of being believed, or taken into serious consideration (383)
• falsificationists/ fallibilists: what cannot presently in principle be overthrown by criticism is presently unworthy of being seriously considered; what can in principle be so overthrown and yet resists all our critical efforts to do so may quite possibly be false, but is at any rate not unworthy of being seriously considered/ believed tentatively (385)
• “The new theory should be independently testable…it must lead to the prediction of phenomena which have not so far been observed. This requirement seems to me indispensable since without it our new theory might be ad hoc; for it is always possible to produce a theory to fit any given set of explicanda” (387) Theories in science should be testable by experiments, therefore the theory should involve material reality, and thus scientific theories cannot and will not be able to answer any questions outside of objective material reality such as the existence or nonexistence of God, supernatural, etc. 

Pgs 390- 400, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Thomas S. Kuhn 

• “Normal science means research firmly based upon one or more past scientific achievements, achievements that some particular scientific community acknowledges for a time as supplying the foundation for its further practice.” (390) Also closely resembles “paradigm” – represents work that has been done once and for all 
• “Paradigm is an object for further articulation and specification under new or more stringent conditions.” (391)
• “Normal scientific research is directed to the articulation of those phenomena and theories that the paradigm already supplies” (392)
• “Assimilating a new sort of fact demands a more than additive adjustment of theory, and until that adjustment is completed – until the scientist has learned to see nature in a different way – the new fact is not quite a scientific fact at all.” (392) This shows that science does not always have the authority to determine a truth. Let alone the errors of science in this statement, the only facts from science are the ones that we perceive with our five senses or extensions of our senses. 
• “The decision to reject one paradigm is always simultaneously the decision to accept another, and the judgment leading to that decision involves the comparison of both paradigms with and nature and each other.” (393) 
• “What must the world be like in order that man may know it?… [This question] is as old as science itself, and it remains unanswered.” (400) This question remains unanswered in a scientific setting because it is not scientific. There is no way to answer this question by replicating an experiment to observe its results. There are many questions similar to this that are not in the realm of science. 

Pgs 400-401, Science and Traditional Thought 

• “You go to the priest, she sacrifices a chicken, and you get well. The priest, who holds traditional religious beliefs , would say that the spirit of the shrine healed you. Is this traditional religious belief scientific?” (401) The healing is not scientific. There is no scientific proof, no observation from the senses, that would answer the question of the healing. There is no material thing that healed the person, therefore no material thing is able to be experimented on and proven. Although science may be able to verify that the person is healed by viewing the body before and after the healing, there is no material evidence of the act of the healing. There is no way to scientifically prove that there has been a definitive cause and effect with the healing. 
• “Suppose you go to a medical doctor and, instead of the doctor sacrificing a chicken, she gives you a shot and you get well. The medical doctor, who holds scientific beliefs (there is no such thing as a scientific belief. Either science proves a fact or theorizes one. There is no need for there to be a belief something exists when science may prove it), tells you that you have a bacterial infection and that the antibiotic she has just given you will destroy the bacteria.” (401) This can be proven to be scientifically cause and effect. The shot is something material that a scientist is able to physically observe with his senses/ extensions of senses and see the shot/ antibiotics interacting with the infection. 
• “Witchcraft is their theodicy or answer to the problem of evil. It explains why things happen.” (401) Emphasis on “why”. “Why” questions are unable to be answered scientifically. In the case of the pole falling and killing someone, science is able to answer what happened: the termites weakened the pole causing the pole to fall with gravity. All those circumstances can easily be observed by science. The answer to why that happened, or why that person died, is not something that can be answered by science because it does not pertain to anything material.  
• A person is killed by a drunk driver and at her funeral the minister says it is a part of God’s plan, but everyone knows the cause was because it was a drunk driver. “Is this a scientific explanation of the tragic accident? Is it an explanation at all? If it is, what kind of explanation if it it? Are we dealing with two incompatible explanations or just two different ways of looking at the same event?” (401) Science, religion, and philosophy are all different realms. Science and religion specifically cannot and do not lessen the other because they deal with completely different aspects. In this particular instance of the drunk driver, the scientific and religious explanations are both applicable together and do not harm each other. Scientifically speaking, science proves the death of the person because it observes the physical damage done to the person caused by a drunk driver hitting her with enough force to cause death. Those circumstances are evident and observable through science (autopsy of the body). The minister’s insight into why she died is of course not scientific. His answer to the question why she died is not something that can be measured by science because it is not physically observable because it is not of material. His explanation/interpretation of her death being part of God’s plan does not discredit the science behind her death. The scientific explanation of her death does not discredit a belief that it is a part of God’s plan. Science cannot answer why a death occurs, but it can answer how a death occurs and what caused her to die. 

Pgs 411-419, Can There be a Feminist Science?, Helen E. Longino  

• Science cannot be completely objective, those that say there is are “bad” science. False. If science were not objective, one scientist could get different results by simply saying, “In my reality it fits.” Science being an observation of material reality through the senses or extension of the senses must have an objective reality, or there will be no conclusion to anything. 

Opinion vs fact

Laura — Week 7

Philosophy of Art

• Plato
  • Art misleads us by offering nothing more than imperfect copies of the world of the senses.
  • ex: nature of circle is presented in wheels, coins, etc. But we should think independently and dwell on what a perfect circle is.
  • We should seek knowledge of the unchanging, universal forms of justice, beauty, and goodness. (Pg. 280).
  • Forms exist independently of changing objects
  • tragedy arouses uncontrollable passions in the audience (disarranges harmony in our souls).

• Aristotle
  • Says Plato is wrong in saying that art just provides us with imperfect copes of forms.
  • “Great artists have the ability, through their art, to grasp the universal that lies within the particular, and to present it to us in such a way that we achieve a greater knowledge than we would otherwise have.”
  • Forms are embodied in particular things of the world of space and time.
  • Since tragedy exists, its better to release the emotions in a controlled setting instead of bottling them up.
  • Catharsis: cleansing or purging
  • “We leave a play calm and not aroused”

• Poetics- Aristotle
  • Poet describes what might happen, not what has happened.
  • History VS Poet — Something that has happened VS something that might happen.
  • Finest forms of Tragedy: plot must be complex and relatable
  • 3 Forms of Plot to avoid:
    • 1) a good man must not go from happiness to misery
    • 2) a bad man must not go from misery to happiness
    • 3) a very bad man must not go from happiness to misery

• Pity is occasioned by undeserved misfortune.
• Poet looks for tragic situations.

Amanda Adams Week 8 Notes

Amanda Adams

Week 8 Notes

Philosophy of Art

–What is art? Plato’s attack on the poets

-Plato wrote a great deal and was forced to ask himself whether artistic creation is good or evil, whether a life spent in the forming of artworks is a life well spent, what indeed the function of art is in human life and society, and whether there is a place for art in the good society”

-Plato created dialogues of real arguments in which Socrates opponents score points and make philosophical moves that are persuasive also the characters in the dialogues are not cardboard figures 2 dimensional with name tags attached their fully realized human beings with feelings passions and characteristic ways of speaking

-Most of the dialogues were modeled of real people

-“Plato we’ve his the loss of the coal theory about appearance in reality together with psychological insights into human character to produce a series of persuasive and fundamentally true portraits in his dialogues”

-In his philosophy of art He uses an example of taking a mirror turning it around and all directions and in a short time you can produce sun and stars and earth and yourself and all the animals and plants in appearance but not the actual things

-He explains that a painter is a craftsman of that kind, and what a painter is producing is not real, just resemblance

-He uses a bed as an example and says there are 3 sorts: 1 divine workmanship 2 another made by a Carpenter and 3. One by a painter

-He thinks that The work of the artist is at the 3rd removed from the essential nature of the thing

-The painter is only capturing the appearance

-“The art of representation, then, is a long way from reality”

-Plato feared that art would lead us away from reality rather than towards it

-Aristotle wrote a short treaties on the subject of tragedy Which had a wide and deep influence throughout the ages on philosophical theories about art

-Aristotle defends art against the twofold attack of his teacher Plato

-Aristotle believes that Plato is right in insisting that we should seek a knowledge of the unchanging universal forms of justice, beauty, and goodness, but thinks he is wrong in supposing that art merely provides us with imperfect copies of particular instances of those universal forms

-“Great artist have the ability through their art to grasp the universal that lies within the particular, and to represent it to us in such a way that we achieve a greater knowledge then we would otherwise have”

-The dispute between Plato and Aristotle is partly a disagreement about art but on a deeper level is a disagreement about metaphysics

-Aristotle thought the universal forms are completely embodied in the particular things of the world of space and time

-Catharsis – “literally a cleansing or purging. Aristotle uses the term to describe the effect on us of powerful dramatic performances. By watching a play who’s events arouse fear and pity within us, he thought, we are purged of those emotions, so that we leave the theater liberated or cleansed. The opposing view is that such plays arouse in us feelings we otherwise would not have, and not should have such as certain aggressive and sexual feelings”

-Aristotle’s philosophy of art

-“A tragedy then is the imitation of an action that is serious And also as having magnitude complete in itself. In language with pleasurable accessories each kind brought in separately in the parts of work in a dramatic not in a narrative form which incidents arousing pity and fear where with to accomplish its catharsis of such emotions”

-Aristotle explains that the plot must be complex and not simple and that there are 3 forms of plot to be avoided : #1. a good man must not be seen passing from happiness into misery #2 a bad man from misery to happiness and #3 and extremely bad man into Be seen falling from happiness into misery

-“Plato condemns the artist for making copies or imitations and for arousing negative emotions that the wise person would do better to control. Aristotle agrees that artists make copies but claims that those copies can reveal the reality contained within the object. He agrees that the artist arouses negative emotions but argues that in the controlled setting of the art world this arousal can actually have the effect of dissipating and weakening the negative emotions rather than strengthening them”

-Dantos Theory of Artistic Identification

-Marcuse agrees that art can arouse negative emotions, but he sees these emotions as The source of energy for revolutionary and transformative action

-There are two things that they all agree on : 1 Works of art or recognizably copies or imitations or representations of objects in the world. Second, people can tell whether something is a work of art rather than and actual piece of furniture or item of clothing (something real)

-Now in the 21st century artworks do not even pretend to look like or imitate or represent things in our world such as abstract art

-The first believed to be challenged was the belief about art as representation

-Little by little visual artist moved away from faithful representation until an astonishing leap in the 20th century artists began to paint pictures which made no pretense to represent anything at all

-Arthur C. Danto “The Artworld”

-Danto explains that Hamlet shows us that art reveals us to ourselves

“Now in the 21st century artworks do not even pretend to look like or imitate or represent things in our world“

Rachel Week 8

• Terminology- Power, force, violence, strength, and authority.
• These are all words of d’Entreves
• Tempting to introduce new definitions

Power- Corresponds to the human ability not just to act but in concert.

• Never property of an individual, belongs to group
• “In power” refer to his being empowered by a certain number of people
• Current use powerful man, powerful personality

Strength- Unequivocally designates something in the singular, an individual entity

• Object or person and belongs to its character, which may prove itself in relation to other things or persons, independent
• Strength can be overpowered even in the strongest person
• Its power to turn against independence, the property of individual strength

Force- We often use in daily speech as a synonym for violence.

• When violence serves as a means of coercion
• “Forces of nature” or the “force of circumstances”
• To indicate the energy released by physical or social movements

Authority- Relating to the most elusive of these phenomena and therefore, as a term, most frequently abused.

•  Personal Authority
• Neither coercion nor persuasion is needed
• To remain in authority requires respect for the person or the office.
• Enemy of authority is contempt, the surest way to undermine it is laughter

Violence- Distinguished by its instrumental character

• It is close to strength
• Since the implements of violence, are designed and used for the purpose of multiplying natural strength until, in the last stage of their development.
• “Thus institutionalized power in organized communities often appears in the guise of authority, demanding instant.” (281)
• Transit failed to operate and people refused to leave example, combination of power and violence.

• Power in terms of command and obedience 
• Domestic affairs is the last resort of power and violence
• “The gap between theory and reality is perhaps best illustrated by the phenomenon of revolution” (282).
• “How to make a revolution”
• “Where power has disintegrated, revolutions are possible but not necessary.” (282) Plato’s topic on power
• Disintegration often becomes manifest only in direct confrontation
• “Power needs no justification, being inherent in the very existence of political communities; what it does need is legitimacy. The common treatment of these two words as synonyms is no less misleading and confusing than the current equation of obedience and support.” (283).

Francesca – Week 8

 Pgs. 271 – 275, Philosophy of Art, Plato’s Attack on the Poets 

• Artistic brilliance of Plato’s dialogues: constructs real arguments; characters are fully realized human beings; his characters exemplify and give evidence to his philosophical theories. (272)
• Thefit between character and belief is designed by Plato as an expression of the central thesis of his philosophy: the doctrine that the metaphysical order of the universe is mirrored in the inner psychic order of the soul. (272) 
• Plato’s philosophy is based upon a distinction between appearance and reality
• “Popular opinion may sound wise but really be foolish.” (272)
• “…there is an image, a belief, and action, a feeling, which seems to be right, true, good, accurate, veridical, or healthy, but is really wrong, false, evil, misleading, fallacious, or harmful. The ability to tell the difference between the two is always, according to Plato, a matter of some sort of knowledge, and the power or part of the soul whose job it is to make that distinction is reason. Reason tells us that the stick is really straight, even though it looks bent; reason tells the diabetic not to eat the apparently good sugar; reason finds the flaw in the valid-looking argument; and reason shows us when the easy way- cheating, or going along with popular opinion- is, in the end, the harmful, destructive way.” (272-273) I think this is a great quote. Plato really understood that there is a difference between knowledge and intelligence. I believe there are many people who know many things; however, I also believe there are many of these types of people who lack reason and common understanding enough to apply knowledge and use it in an intelligent way. 
• “So too, a man who mouths current arguments without really having thought through of himself will sound very knowledgeable until we press him with some hard questions. Then we will discover that his knowledge is only appearance.” (273) Especially in this time of social media, where people get skewed news from very biased sources, it seems rare that people research subjects thoroughly before forming an opinion and attempting to defend it. 
• “Callicles really believes, as he says, that might makes right, that there are no universal rational principles binding the weak and the strong, the ordinary and the extraordinary, to a single standard of conduct. This total confusion (as Plato sees it) is mirrored in the disorder of Callicles’ soul.” (274) I too see this as total confusion, When there is no objective truth or objective reality or objective morality, there will always be confusion. However, I don’t understand what this has to do with art? 

Question 1: What was Plato’s stance on morality/ if it was objective, where did it come from? 

• “Plato actually believed, on the basis of his theoretical distinction between appearance and reality, that artistic creations are appearances and that as such they lead us away from knowledge and away from a proper inner harmony of the soul.” (275) I would agree with some aspects. Appearance of good can definitely lead people away from true knowledge; however, art with message does not necessarily always lead people away if they look carefully at the message behind the art. 
• Metaphysics: the study of the forms and nature of being (275)
• Plato: “Art leads us away from reality rather than toward it, he claims, and it destroys our psychic harmony rather than reinforces it.” (275)

Pgs. 275 – 279, Republic, Plato 

• “There are any number of beds or of tables, but only two Forms, one of Bed and one of Table.” (275)
• “We have three sorts of bed: one which exists in the nature of things and which, I imagine, we could only describe as a product of divine workmanship; another made by the carpenter; and a third by the painter. So the three kinds of bed belong respectively to the domains of these three: painter, carpenter, and god.” (276)
• The god makes only one Bed Form because if he were to make two, there would still only be one ideal bed. (276) This reminds me of this argument an early French feminist made about women. That women were subpar to men because they were created second and solely for the man’s enjoyment & that the biology of a woman is her downfall and horrible in general. I wonder if she took this idea and used it in this way?
• God: the author the true nature of Bed (276); Carpenter: the manufacturer of a bed (277); Painter cannot be called manufacturer, so what is he in reference to a bed? > represents the things which the other two make > at the third remove from the essential nature of the thing
• Tragic poets and all other artists are third in succession from the throne of truth. (277)
• “The art of representation, then, is a long way from reality.” (277) (Representing the carpenter’s bed from its appearance from different angles.

Pgs. 279 – 282, Aristotle’s Defense of the Poets 

• Aristotle, Plato’s most distinguished “student”, is generally considered to be the greatest philosopher of all time. 
• “Great artists have the ability, through their art, to grasp the universal that lies within the particular, and to present it to us in such a way that we achieve a greater knowledge than we would otherwise have.” (280) Aristotle 
• “The dispute between Plato and Aristotle is partly a disagreement about art, of course, but it is, at a deeper level, a disagreement about metaphysics.” (280) 
• Aristotle held that the universal Forms are completely embodied in the particular things of the world of space and time; Plato believed that there is a reality that transcend the appearances of the senses and the world of space, time, and physical things. 
• Plato was afraid that tragedy would arouse uncontrollable passions in the audience and thereby disarrange the proper harmony of the soul. It would weaken the ascendency of the rational forces within the personality and release erotic and aggressive elements that are destructive and deluding. Aristotle argued: since those harmful passions are present anyway, far better to release them in the controlled setting of the drama than to bottle them up entirely. 
• Catharsis: we are purged of the pent-up passions without having expressed them in the terrible deeds that the playwright has depicted on the stage. We leave the theater calmed, not aroused. 

Pgs. 282 – 283, Poetics, Aristotle 

• “There are three forms of Plot to be avoided. 1) A good man must not be seen passing from happiness to misery, or 2) a bad man from misery to happiness. The first situation is not fear-inspiring or piteous, but simply odious to us. The second is the most untragic that can be; it has not one of the requisites of Tragedy; it does not appeal either to the human feeling is us, or to our puty, or to our fears. Nor, on the other hand, should 3) an extremely bad man be seen falling from happiness into misery. Such a story may arouse the human feeling in us, but it will not move us to either pity or fear; pity is occasioned by undeserved misfortune, and fear by that of one like ourselves; so that there will be nothing either piterous or fear-inspire in the situation. “ (282) 

Question 2: Did Aristotle and Plato ever discuss their disagreements in person? 

Pgs. 290 – 292, The Artworld, Danto 

• “If a mirror-image of a is indeed an imitation of a, then, if art is imitation, mirror-images are art. But in fact mirroring objects no more is art than returning weapons to a madman is justice; and reference to mirrorings would be just the sly sort of counterinstance we would expect Socrates to bring forward in rebuttal of the theory he instead uses them to illustrate.” (291)

Raffaello

Midterm # 2 IDs – (Tues., July 16, 2019)

1. What is Socrates’ approach to following the laws of his state?
2. What is MLK’s approach to following the laws of his state?
3. What is Nietzsche’s main argument? What are his main points? (all human actions are a “will to power”)
4. Do you think Nietzsche’s ideas are circulating in society today? If so, how do they affect thinking about design and art?
5. Explain the counter-argument to Nietzsche (human actions can be truly unselfish, generous, genuinely sympathetic)
6. Why do scholars believe Nietzsche broke down and lost his ability to think? Start video at 43 minutes and 30 seconds – click on link here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkhbSLExYbc&t=2697s
7. What is Suzanne Pharr’s main argument regarding the relationship between homophobia and sexism?
8. What is Cornel West’s argument about affirmative action?
9. What is Peter Singer’s main argument about charitable giving?
10. What is Bill McKibben’s main argument about the global environment?
11. On page 273 of the text by Robert Wolff, Plato’s position is noted regarding a “woman who has some true opinions but does not really understand what makes them true.” Plato says there are two consequences to this problem. What are they?
12. Page 275 of Wolff’s text states, “artistic creations are appearances and…they lead us away from knowledge and away from a proper inner harmony of the soul.” Why does Plato believe this?
13. On page 280, Aristotle’s position on art is that “we achieve greater knowledge than we otherwise have.” What is Aristotle’s position on the function of art?
14. What is the definition of Danton’s “artworld”? (See page 293 of the Wolff text)
15. What is Sam Harris’ main argument about free will? Do you agree?
16. Describe a counter argument to Sam Harris.
17. On page 136, a scientific endeavor is described as a project involving many actors in a large institution. In what ways might a design project operate in a similar fashion?
18. Describe how the idea of Kuhn and Popper are complimentary.
19. Provide 3 examples of design ideas based on surveillance and the panopticon and their replacements in current times. (One example is the long corporate board room table in the conference room with one person at the head of the table. This has been replaced, in some cases, by meeting rooms that resemble something like a living room than a board room.)
20. Provide 3 examples of the Foucauldian idea in design. (One example is the mall developer who did not put down a foot path until the paths were created naturally by pedestrians themselves.)

Cindy – Week 7

Peter Singer

• Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University
• Famous and influential ethicist known as a utilitarian
• Wrote “Animal Liberation”, which introduced the idea of “speciesism”, the tendency of humans to favor their own species over animals
• Previously, Singer had published an article entitled, “Famine, Affluence and Morality”, in which he argued, “suffering and death from lack of food, shelter and medical care is bad and if it is within our power to prevent something bad from happening without thereby sacrificing something of comparable oral value we ought to”.
• Supposing that affluent people are moral, and the fact that they have money, they should be the ones to stop poverty.
• His book, however, made a huge impact on how people viewed animals, and it inspired them to stop eating meat, avoid fur and leather goods, and opposing animal experimentation.
• People in the US spend 1/3 of their income on things that are not ‘necessities’
• Some immoral actions are justified by reducing the importance of a poor victim for instance
• We should help those in need
• Singer says, “suffering and death from lack of food, shelter and medical care are bad“
• and “if it is in our power to prevent something bad from happening, without thereby sacrificing anything of comparable moral significance, we ought, morally, to do it” .
• Morally, we should try to prevent these situations from happening

Reality

The rich ‘helping’ the poor

Laura — Week 7

Peter Singer- Our Obligation to the Poor

• professor of Bioethics at Princeton University
• Utilitarian- became popular after his book in animal rights
• speciesism: tendency for humans to show preference for the good of themselves over other animals that they share an environment with. (pg 261)
• Affluent people have the means and moral obligation to stop the evil of poverty (pg 261)
• Supererogatory: act if praiseworthy but not obligatory
• Story of Dora: bring boy to address in exchange for $1000. Spends money on TV but finds out the boy is going to be killed for his organs.
• So much of our income is spent on non essential things- could mean life or death to someone else (262)
• Brazilian woman selling kid for TV vs. American who already has a TV but chooses to upgrade — Both have money being spend in ways that don’t help poverty, but could have (262)
• Is it wrong to live well without giving money to the poor?
• Bob and his Bugatti VS train killing child — able but unwilling
• $200 can transform a sick 2 year old to a healthy 6 year old
• Able but unwilling to donate — Bob and you, who dont donate
• Follow-the-crowd ethics— Same a Nazis
• At what point do you stop giving? Only when sacrifices become very significant
• Argues that people who give 10% of their income to the poor are doing good, but not great — cant criticize Bob
• Everyone does their fair share
• Whatever money you spend on luxuries, not necessities, should be given to the poor
• We fail to live a morally decent life if we just think of ourselves

Amanda Adams Week 7

IS JUSTICE POSSIBLE FOR ALL?

Amanda Adams

Week 7 Notes

Is Justice Possible For All?

Suzanne Pharr

Homophobia as a weapon of sexism

-“Who do gender roles serve? Men and the women who seek power from them

who suffers from gender roles? Women most completely and men in part..”

-She explains that gender roles are maintained by the weapons of sexism such as economics, violence, and homophobia

-Sexism is a system by which women are kept subordinate to men

-Pharrr explains that there are 3 powerful weapons designed to cause or threatened women with pain in loss

-Economics violence and homophobia .

-Economics is the greater controller in both sexism and racism

-She explains that the major tactic is to provide unrecompensed or inadequately recompensated labor for the benefit of those who control wealth

-Saying that we see women performing unpaid labor in the home or filling low paid jobs and we see people of color in the lowest paid jobs available

-The method behind this is complex but basically says to limit the educational opportunities for women and people of color and then withhold adequate paying jobs an blame them for being incapable of filling the positions

-Also blame the economic victim keep their self esteem low within the media and education

-Violence is the second means of keeping women in line. First there is physical violence of battering rape and incest

-“Men physically and emotionally abused women because they can because they live in a world that gives them permission male violence is fed by their sense of their right to dominate and control and their sense of superiority over a group of people they consider inferior to them”

-She explains is not just the violence but the threat of violence that controls our lives

-Many women say that verbal violence causes more harm than physical violence because it damage is self esteem so deeply

-As a society on a whole, women are seen inferior

-The violence against women is supported by a society in which woman hating is deeply embedded

-“Homophobia works effectively as a weapon of sexism because it is joined with a powerful arm hetero sexism”

-Gay men are perceived as a threat to male dominance and control and the homophobia expressed against them has the same roots in sexism as does the homophobia against lesbians

-Gay men are seen as betrayers and traders who must be punished and eliminated

-2 instances where it is legitimate for men to be openly physically affectionate with one another are in competitive sports and in the crisis of war

-for many men these 2 experiences are the highlights of their lives and they think of them again and again with nostalgia

-When gay men break ranks with male roles through bonding and affection outside of the arenas of worn sports they are perceived as not being “real men”

-Any woman named a lesbian and threatened with terrible losses and fears are these fears real these losses include employment, family, children, heterosexual privilege and protection, safety, mental health, community, credibility

-Homophobia has been one of the major causes of failure in women’s liberation movement to make a deep lasting change

-The only successful work against sexism must include work against homophobia

“Heterosexual or Masculine Interior”

“Women are seen inferior”