Transcript The Enlightenment - Mr Collett\'s Blog

The Enlightenment
Philosophy- The question of
why?
TNT
RENE DESCARTES (1595-1650)
"I am thinking therefore I exist."
(Latin: Cogito ergo sum)
René Descartes is perhaps the single
most important thinker of the European
Enlightenment. At an age most people
graduate from college nowadays, he
quietly and methodically went about
tearing down all previous forms of
knowledge and certainty and replaced
them with a single, echoing truth:
Cogito, ergo sum , "I think, therefore I
am." From that point onwards in
European culture, subjective (what you
think) truth would hold a higher and
more important place than objective
(what they think) truth, skepticism
(doubt) would be built into every
question, investigation would hold a
higher place than accepting the way
things are, and the mind would be
separated from the body
So now lets do some thinking!
What is the definition of
truth?
What is right and wrong?
What is good and what is
evil?
What is the definition of
thinking?
Ethics
Applied ethics involves examining specific controversial
issues, such as abortion, infanticide, animal rights,
environmental concerns, homosexuality, capital
punishment, or nuclear war.
In 1982 a couple from Bloomington, Indiana gave birth to
a severely retarded baby. The infant, known as Baby Doe,
also had its stomach disconnected from its throat and was
thus unable to receive nourishment. Although this stomach
deformity was correctable through surgery, the couple did
not want to raise a severely retarded child and therefore
chose to deny surgery, food, and water for the infant.
Local courts supported the parents' decision, and six days
later Baby Doe died. Should corrective surgery have been
performed for Baby Doe?
Argument 1
1. Animal welfare
We are stewards (carers) of animals. Their lives and experiences have
value, but it is up to us to decide how to maximize the total value by
using animals in various ways.
Associated attitudes
Various traditional uses of animals are permitted, as
long as they serve non-trivial ends and are conducted in
ways that eliminate unnecessary animal
suffering.
For example:
•medical research
•humane animal slaughter for food products
•hunting, at least to prevent wildlife overpopulation
Typical underlying philosophical basis
• We have a moral obligation to balance benefits and harms.
• If an animal can suffer pain, then we have an obligation to balance
this harm against the benefits of any human use of the animal.
• So we should to use animals when the benefits to us outweigh the
costs to them, but in doing so, we should eliminate unnecessary animal
suffering.
Argument 2 TNT
2. Human dominion
We have dominion over animals. That is, they have value only as means to
our ends.
Associated attitudes
Everything under animal welfare is allowed, plus things like:
• cockfighting, circuses, rodeos, and bullfights
• confined exotic animal hunting
• injuring animals for movies
Typical underlying
philosophical basis
• Animals have no moral standing, because they lack consciousness (ability
to think), including consciousness of pain.
• So it doesn't matter, morally speaking, how we treat them; no treatment of
animals can be judged immoral except if it causes humans pain by doing it.
For example hurting someone else's pet
Argument 3 TNT
3. Animal rights
Animals have moral rights. And when individuals have moral rights, we
cannot treat them as means to our ends.
Associated attitudes
Many or most traditional uses of animals are opposed, including everything
listed as allowed under either of the above views, plus such things as:
• consuming animal byproducts (like milk and eggs)
• captive breeding programs for endangered species
• keeping pets
Typical underlying philosophical basis
• If you have rights, then we cannot justify harming you just because the
benefits to us outweigh the harms to you.
• Some non-human animals have mental lives similar to those of some
humans (dogs have the same IQ as very small children).
• So if we recognize rights for all humans (including very small children) then
we should recognize rights for those animals.
• And so, for those animals, we cannot justify harming them just because
the benefits to us outweigh the harms to them.
Questions:
For those in the animal welfare and animal rights camps:
Which animals do you think are conscious and why? For instance, are
sponges and barnacles conscious (these are both in the animal
kingdom)? What about mosquitoes and cockroaches? What is the
moral status of non-human animals?
For those in the human dominion camp: What is the scientific basis
for denying that animals are conscious? And if you believe that (at
least some) animals are conscious, but you believe we may do with
them as we wish, what is the moral justification for ignoring any
suffering we cause them?
Is this dog really sad? Or do
we just think so because we
would be sad if we were in a
cage?
Is this dog really happy? Or
do we think so because it
looks like its smiling and
that’s what we do when were
happy?
Homework


Read Section 3 “The American
Revolution” Pg 464-468
Do Vocabulary Words and Main Idea
1 and 2