MG Philosophy 2009-2010

MG Philosophy Student Wins National Award!

2010-06-14T09:47:00.003-04:00

Graduating senior Sher Shah Atif has been selected as the high school fifth place National Award Winner for the 2010 Kids Philosophy Slam!

His award includes a $100 cash prize and was presented at Mount Greylock's Senior Awards Night on Thursday, June 10.

Announcement of Sher Shah's award was made in the North Adams Transcript, and is online at the Philosophy Slam website and at the Squire Family Foundation website.

Congratulations!

SO....MUCH.......IRONY

2010-05-23T01:22:00.002-04:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6vqCGhJBK4&feature=related

I stumbled upon this funny, but painfully ironic and sad clip, made from a recorded phone call.

p.s. sorta NSFW (but not really) --no need to get scared and run away, it's just a picture with a little rudimentary animation to make it look like it's talking.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOC58c-Ibdk&feature=related
a slightly more serious video I found a few minutes later.

Craig Venter =God

2010-05-22T20:36:00.001-04:00

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science_and_environment/10132762.stm

Red Letter Media (re-post)

2010-05-22T18:11:00.001-04:00

http://laughingsquid.com/harvey-plinkett-of-red-letter-media-reviews-star-wars-attack-of-the-clones/

it got burried in homework posts so I thought I would go dig it up so people wo didn't see it eariler could.

Everybody Sing!

2010-05-19T18:01:00.002-04:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWMxUsTjhY0

enjoy!

you know the wierd thing is they are half right, if there is a god I doubt he really loves us if he created a world where the only way to keep living is to kill others

Carl Sagan Video

2010-05-17T22:26:00.001-04:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJE_Ld-UyCk

a video made from an excerpt from Carl Sagan's book The Pale Blue Dot

Risk

2010-05-14T08:10:00.002-04:00

What, in your opinion, is the most important feature of what Mavin Zuckerman calls "HSS"

If you are a high you seek high risk activities, which brings them high stimulus. There is a down fall most of these people tend to abuse drugs because of there attitude of trying new things that will create that risk for them. The most important thing is knowing that if you are a high you might be prone to get into drugs. Then once getting the feeling that the highs get will make you want to do more it grows on anyone that tries a new thing.

Does Aptor's way of explaining the evolutionary benefits of risk-taking make sense to you?

I understand Aptors way, he said that risk takers would be the people to try new foods or test if something was poisonous etc. These risk takers would save the life's of others, and if they survived they would get the feeling they wanted.

Risk response

2010-05-13T22:35:00.002-04:00

1. I think the most important feature of the HSS is their inability to be content in a safe situation.

2. I think risk takers often resent neurochemical explanations because they feel that it is suggesting that there is something wrong with them, that their risk taking is due to some imbalance or defect.

Risk

2010-05-13T22:01:00.002-04:00

1.) I think that the most important HSS feature is some one who seeks risk to fulfill a need (dopamine, thrill, etc.) that most people can get without scaling a mountain. They have to go above what normally satisfies people to get the same feeling.

2.) I think that risk takers might dislike the scientific explanations because it may seem to sterilize and minimize the experience. People who take risks probably have their own conscious reasons, putting it in terms or brain chemistry takes the emotion out of it and makes it clinical. I might also resent some scientist telling me why I did something, especially if the scientists weren't adrenaline junkies themselves.

Risk Taking

2010-05-13T20:46:00.002-04:00

1.) In my opinion, the most important feature of the "HSS", or those who favor high risk situations, is there ability to process more information without reverting to the more primitive, instinctual human. This reduces the thrill they get from each activity, creating a boring life. These high-risk seekers often pair off with others like themselves, while those less inclined towards risk taking seek friends of a similar tendency.

3.) I think risk-takers, like rock climber Todd Wells, have a problem with the neurochemical explanations for their behavior because it destroys their very objective. They seek risks to escape from the restrictions placed upon them by society and to gain a greater perspective of themselves. However, when a scientist claims to be able to explain the motivation behind their behavior, they feel that the individuality of their method of escape is destroyed by society's scientific, structured explanation regarding their risk seeking.

Ethics Of Risk

2010-05-11T23:07:00.001-04:00

well, I read it. Seemed like it cut off just as Altham was about to get to her actual argument, so I don't really have anything to say about it.

This one's really only worth 7

2010-05-10T21:47:00.003-04:00

and by the way....

Red Letter Media Does It Again!!

2010-05-09T12:46:00.002-04:00

http://laughingsquid.com/harvey-plinkett-of-red-letter-media-reviews-star-wars-attack-of-the-clones/

I can honestly say this is one of the funniest and most insightful things I have ever seen on the internet, once you've seen one or two parts of this you should get what I mean.

....and yes it's still good even if you don't know or care anything about scifi, but caring about cinema would probably help.

Jimmy Carter Speech

2010-05-08T17:57:00.002-04:00

A speech by Jimmy Carter from 1979, featured in Capitalism: A love Story by Michael Moore:

Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7ysc1P1sH4

Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXvGKJF2XQU&feature=related

Part 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aOMNgxRF2M&feature=related

Part 4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xivhdO_LbGw&feature=related

NEW VIDEO

2010-05-08T15:34:00.001-04:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNNKIKVEdXM

Phi @ Williams Tomorrow...

2010-05-05T14:40:00.001-04:00

Thursday, May 6

Perfectionism and the Meaning of Life in Camus's The Myth of Sisyphus

4:15 p.m., Griffin 7
Lecture by Professor Iddo Landau, Department of Philosophy, Haifa University, Israel and Visiting Fellow at Indiana University at Bloomington.

Beware!!!!!!

2010-05-04T20:45:00.001-04:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5VNe9NTOxA
and also......(gasp!)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWeZ5SKXvj8&feature=related
(the end is the best part)

Provocative Thought of the Day...

2010-04-30T07:25:00.000-04:00

"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."
-Stephen Roberts, database architect (b. 1967)

If you're stressed about college...

2010-04-29T09:56:00.002-04:00

You might enjoy this documentary (when it comes out): "In 500 Words Or Less," a film which follows four high school students through the college admissions process. A short film overview is on the Chronicle of Higher Education's website here.

Timely and Relevant!

2010-04-29T09:41:00.003-04:00

There's a conference at MIT today through Sunday:

*Adoption: Secret Histories, Public Policies*: A conference sponsored by the Alliance for the Study of Adoption and Culture at MIT, and co-sponsored by the MIT and UNH Depts. of Philosophy (among others).

http://web.me.com/shaslang/ASAC_2010_Conference/Welcome.html

If you happen to be going to Cambridge this weekend, they offer reduced conference rates for students... :-P

It's not the one I wanted.........but it works!

2010-04-28T19:05:00.002-04:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbAc98UJw4c

+ it's even related to the class! YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY!

****tune in next week for the annual sacrifice of 2 dozen christians to the goddess Minerva***

Inform Yourself!

2010-04-27T14:36:00.003-04:00

I've compiled a short selection of terms and their use, as well as a really condensed set of excerpts from the Roe v Wade decision, in this doc. We'll read it, as well as Judith Jarvis Thomson's violinist thought experiment, tomorrow.

Is it all the Pope's fault?

2010-04-16T17:13:00.001-04:00

An interesting argument about how everyday Christians are ultimately responsible for whether or not the church changes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VaC95jEPTc

Baby Cows and Philosophy

2010-04-15T15:40:00.000-04:00

....or it that doesn't work

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJnHoOxhzY4

REMINDER: Phizza Tomorrow Night!

2010-04-14T11:44:00.004-04:00

Just a reminder about the pizza and philosophy party tomorrow evening, 7pm, at MCLA in North Adams! It's FREE and TASTY!

Follow this link for a map (*.pdf) of the MCLA campus - the Honors Center/Highland House is number 9 on the map.

See you there...

matrix response

2010-04-13T16:07:00.002-04:00

It's been a while since I've seen this movie, and I forgot how big the religious undertones were. I find it strange that they wrote Morpheus's character to have such a blind faith in Neo, as blind faith is not a trait the majority of Americans wish to emulate. I hope.

The Matrix

2010-04-13T07:18:00.002-04:00

In the second Matrix movie, it is interesting to see that there are many humans who do not agree that Morpheus's firm beliefs. This is a noticeable difference from the first movie where Cypher is the only freed human who does not support Morpheus. The fledgeling religion revolving around Neo is challenged by some of the more sceptic residents of Zion, the last human city. Thus far, Morpheus has taken the mantle of a profit preaching his beliefs to the people of Zion. At the festival, so powerful is Morpheus's own belief, that the people's fears are allayed and they are swayed by his precepts. In our own world, it is very true that the most convincing missionary is also a firm believer in the proposed religion. People want to be unafraid and confident; Morpheus successfully offers them this in his speech to Zion and reaffirms their belief in Neo.

matrix

2010-04-12T16:53:00.000-04:00

notice how everyone knows whee neo is all the time?

Website for Issues on Alcohol

2010-04-08T09:19:00.003-04:00

The site maintained by Dr. Hanson at SUNY-Postdam is a central location for info about the history of American alcohol policy. An interesting read!

Collateral Murder

2010-04-07T21:27:00.002-04:00

WARNING: Disturbing Footage

http://wikileaks.org/

I saw an artcle about this and then watched the video.

I felt like I had to share it

I'm not quite sure what to think of the whole thing

http://www.aolnews.com/nation/article/military-cant-find-its-video-showing-newsmens-deaths/19429850?icid=main|aim|dl1|link3|http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aolnews.com%2Fnation%2Farticle%2Fmilitary-cant-find-its-video-showing-newsmens-deaths%2F19429850

The article can be found in the above link

April Fools' Fun, Matrix/Philosophy-Style

2010-04-01T13:28:00.000-04:00

On YouTube.

College Students Rally Against Alcohol, For...Something Else

2010-04-01T10:17:00.003-04:00

Relevant to this week's discussion, check out this article in the Chronicle of Higher Education. What points do Mr. Pfountz, Mr. Tvert and Mr. McCardell make that are issues we discussed in class?

Philosophy/Pizza Party, Part Two

2010-03-31T10:41:00.002-04:00

Last semester the Williams College Philosophy Department hosted a pizza party for us.

This semester, it's MCLA's turn.

The MCLA Philosophy Department has some money and a swank venue (the Honors House) to host a second-semester shindig including free pizza and excellent conversation with philosophy majors and profs (my colleagues). All they need to know is WHEN.

Your task: comment on this post to let me know which weekday evening you would be most able to come to such a party. I will be able to give rides to up to four students, so let me know too if you would need transportation. Once I have a response, I'll be able to get the plans in motion.

Science and Morality talk @ TED

2010-03-22T15:40:00.001-04:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hj9oB4zpHww

A little on the long side, but still interesting

Science and Morality talk @ TED

2010-03-22T15:37:00.001-04:00

Migration

2010-03-21T14:59:00.003-04:00

The question of migration is not an easy one. People feel strongly about it on both sides. I had never really considered the issue much before this week, and now that I have I still don't have a clear opinion. I agree the our Government has a responsibility to it's citizen first and foremost. Just like I would take care of my family before a complete stranger. The government should make sure that Americans have job opportunities and a way to survive. That being said, one of the big reasons that Americans are losing jobs to immigrants is because the companies can hire migrant workers at a fraction of the price. If migrants could demand a fair price, then the incentive for businesses to hire them would go away.
Also, I think that borders shouldn't be locked down like a war zone. Cultural mixing is important for people to understand one another and get along. Locking down our borders sends the message that we don't want anything to do with other people. That being said, I don't know how many people our infrastructure can handle. Who's job is it to decide who has the right to try for a better life. Maybe our government should up our relief efforts in Mexico, that way there'd be less incentive to move here.

On Immigration

2010-03-21T10:48:00.002-04:00

Immigration remains a controversial issue. Regulation of immigrants as well as who should be allowed into the country is difficult to determine. I believe that immigration should be regulated by the federal government. Although America makes it its policy to aid the oppressed, the country owes more to its citizens than the average human. Just as it is a parent's duty to protect his own child over other children, it is a country's duty to protect her citizens. If immigration were completely unrestrained, then desirable America would become overcrowded, with her citizens perhaps elbowed aside by the newcomers. Therefore, immigration must be regulated, but by who?

Immigration being regulated at the state level is ridiculous; it is not an issue that falls into the sovereignty of each individual state. This issue effects all states, thus it must be collectively regulated by them all, hence by the federal government. The federal government does a good job of regulating immigration currently, striking a balance between cost-efficiency and effectiveness. Because of their proven track record, it makes sense for the federal government to continue regulating immigration.

immigration control

2010-03-20T17:06:00.000-04:00

I think that Immigration should be a controlled process, not just for the sake of Americans but for the immigrants as well. Immigration is such a vast and hotly debated issue that leaving it up to individual states would inevitably result in conflict: Texas demanding that California reimburse them for the money the state lost when illegal aliens who got in through the California boarder, started working in Texas, and so on. Thus immigration should be left up to the federal government, specifically the DEA. Giving the DEA official jurisdiction would help focus efforts on one of the major sources of, and problems with illegal immigration, which is too often overlooked in discussions such as ours, the Mexican-American drug trade. Cutting this trade route, while resource and time intensive, would eliminate much of the crime and violence seen near the Mexican boarder, most likely on both sides.

The other major problem besides drugs is of course work. The congressional bill to allow immigrants to work toward citizenship in a sector of

America

’s job market that’s hurting, i.e. lacking people, yet usually requires little training, is a plan that, as far as I can perceive, will benefit everyone. To truly make this plan work however, the financial expenses and time required by immigrants to legal enter the country must be lessened perhaps making legal channels become more feasible than illegal ones, if possible. Having many legal, rather than illegal immigrants would make it easier for the government to oversee the quality and safety of the jobs in which immigrants work. Without the ability to exploit immigrant workers, businesses would quit hiring them exclusively, and American unemployment would lessen. This would likely have the affect of funneling immigrants into sectors such as farming, as would this congressional bill. The revival of American farm production would strengthen the U.S. economy, and perhaps lead to the revival of U.S. production in other fields as well.

Weekend Blogwork

2010-03-19T10:36:00.004-04:00

As I articulated today in class, your mission this weekend (i.e., homework) is to post 2 paragraphs of thoughtful and intelligent questions and/or arguments concerning the issue of migration control. Intelligent responses will of course include more than simple statements of your opinion - I will enjoy seeing you grapple with questions to which you don't have easy answers.

This is what serious thinking looks like!

I would also love to see you respond to each others' posts - feel free to comment as well as post (respectfully and thoughtfully, as always, though not hesitating to disagree!).

As a supplementary source, here's a link to an mp3 of this (Friday) morning's Marketplace radio show: it includes a brief story (2 minutes or so) about what's happening right now in the national immigration debate, and one particular group of people who have a vested interest in it (from marketplace.publicradio.org):

A congressional bill would provide immigrant farm workers a path to citizenship if they continue to work in agriculture. Farm management leaders say the move is vital to their industry. Jeff Tyler explains why.

Here's the text if you'd rather read than listen.

Who Wants To Be A Torturer? ...I mean, Millionaire? ...I mean, sheep?

2010-03-18T13:18:00.003-04:00

Further reinforcing the suspicion that social pressures are too often stronger than ethics... this link to a story about a TV game show broadcast yesterday evening - quaintly entitled "The Game of Death" - and the documentary filmmaker who produced it. Perhaps the most telling quotation from the article:

"They are not equipped to disobey."

Ethics in Physics

2010-03-18T07:21:00.002-04:00

An MIT physics professor released the results of a study in which he monitored student cheating and its correlation with test scores.

Is anyone surprised?

Nietzche!

2010-03-18T00:26:00.001-04:00

"All sciences are now under the obligation to prepare the ground for the future task of the philosopher, which is to solve the problem of value, to determine the true hierarchy of values."
~Friedrich Nietzche

Apropos of This Week's Topic...

2010-03-17T14:32:00.001-04:00

Check this link from Slashdot.org regrading the much-ballyhooed "virtual fence" along the U.S.-Mexico border.

Are You In Control?

2010-03-17T11:04:00.003-04:00

Is addiction a choice, or a disease? Exactly how much of a role does free will play in an addict's actions - is s/he compelled, or free to choose? An interesting conundrum for philosophers, with real-world consequences: check out this book review of a recent publication from Harvard University Press on these questions.

In the year two thousand and ten of the almighty Chuck

2010-03-16T05:31:00.001-04:00

http://www.asylum.com/2010/03/10/chuck-norris-turns-70-we-present-a-norris-fact-for-every-ass-ki/

Local philosophy event: TOMORROW!

2010-03-15T14:19:00.002-04:00

Philosophy lecture at Williams TOMORROW NIGHT... I'll be there - will you? Where else will you ever get the chance to hear philosophy described as "a cerebral form of shock therapy"?

Plato's Poetic Redemption of Socrates' Tragic Neglect of Poetry

4:15 p.m., Hopkin B1964
Lecture by Joseph Lawrence, Professor of Philosophy, College of Holy Cross. At home in the hills of Kentucky, Lawrence is emphatically an outsider (and a highly critical one) to the world of middle-class suburbia. Accustomed to philosophize with a hammer, his teaching has been likened to a cerebral form of shock therapy. Most of his publications have been on the philosopher Schelling, though he has made frequent forays into ancient philosophy and the wisdom traditions of the East. Sponsored by the Philosophy Department.

And now.......for something.....completely different!

2010-03-12T15:54:00.002-05:00

For all you heretics who don't watch The Dailyshow:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-march-9-2010/exclusive---marc-thiessen-extended-interview-pt--1

part 1/3

Siddhartha, day II

2010-03-09T10:01:00.000-05:00

Try this link for an online resource for Hesse's Siddhartha.

Siddhartha!

2010-03-08T10:24:00.002-05:00

HW for tomorrow: pages 3-38 of the easy-to-read, 14-point-font handout of Herman Hesse's Siddhartha. Don't expect to understand everything - I don't! But be ready to ask Ms. Finnegan or myself your questions in class tomorrow.

By the way, here's an interesting article about how some famous philosophers are getting involved in the public debate over evolution and creationism...

2010-03-04T23:41:00.000-05:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMEe7JqBgvg

black guy dies first always

p.s. blue....no YELLLLLLLOOOOOOWWWWWW!!!!

Believe It Or Not...

2010-03-04T17:44:00.003-05:00

"squircle" is actually being used seriously in the media. (Remember our class discussion of logical impossibilities?) From a description of a new Microsoft/Verizon cell phone:

Turtle (pictured above), is reportedly "squircle" in shape, and includes a
microphone at the bottom of its slide-out keyboard[.]

Philosophy is so cutting-edge, we're bleeding.

Rivera Case

2010-03-02T22:45:00.002-05:00

I think that the family should have used the fact that Gabriela worked in toxic conditions to sue for money to pay for her medication. I agree with Megan that the doctors should have sought legal action to have a different person recognized as Gabriela's medical proxy. I think the doctors needed to do morre earlier on, like having regular meetings with Gabriela about her diet and medications to make sure she was treating herself properly. They should have done more to make her understand the consequences of not following their orders, by bringing in her son to help translate for her. If this had happened then many of Gabriela's problems would not exist.

Murder vs. Suicide

2010-03-02T21:26:00.002-05:00

Murder and suicide can been seen as both, very similar, and completely different, depending on the speficific situation. Murder is wrong and immoral but there a few situations where many people would find justice in murder. Suicide is also a sensitive subject that you can't put in a right or wrong category...generally, I believe its wrong but not all suicide is the same.

End-of-life decision

2010-03-02T17:20:00.000-05:00

Marcos should have translated what the doctor was saying to Mrs. Rivera. She should know what’s going on with her health so she could have a saying in what should be done. Marcos should have at least asked Mrs. Rivera what she thought about having a “hospice” before making a decision of not needing one. Mrs. Rivera clearly needed a hospice, since it seems like the family will not be helping out with her health. I don’t think they’ll put her on a diet or help out with her needs as much as she needs it. I believe Marcos should have both listen to the doctor by getting Mrs. Rivera a hospice and Marcos should have translated everything that the doctor said to her. Mrs. Rivera has a right to know what is going on with her health.

murder vs. suicide

2010-03-02T17:04:00.001-05:00

I believe that both murder and suicide are morality wrong and they are both completely different. Suicide is taking your own life and murder is taking the life of someone else. Suicide is your own choice to die. Murder is not a choice for the other person. I don’t think that murder is right in any way; people should not take the lives of others in any circumstance.

2010-03-02T07:57:00.002-05:00

In Mrs. Rivera's situation the fact that she can not understand some of the things that the doctor might be saying and that she has no clue about what will happen and what her choices are. This is where Marcos should have though about her past and how all this has happended and how much longer would she actually live once getting the transplant, she will still have diabetes which could cause death later on. I think Marco should have got a "hospice" and should have brought the family closer by speding more time with here as she went out.

HW

2010-03-01T22:08:00.001-05:00

A greater effort should have been put in to making sure Gabriella understood the situation. Her son should have translated for her so that the doctors could be entirely sure that the language barrier was not causing a problem. I'm not sure what the doctors could have done differently with Marcus, they can't force him to comply with their recommendations, even if he is making a bad decision. The doctors could possibly seek legal action to grant some one else Gabriella's medical proxy, I think there is some precedent for that, but it is highly unlikely to succeed.

Hurray for Utah!!!!!!!!

2010-03-01T21:00:00.002-05:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbAc98UJw4cay

Murder v Suicide

2010-03-01T16:52:00.002-05:00

In my opinion, murder and suicide are obviously very different things. Each has it's own causes and different thoughts from society. Personally, I believe suicide is a completely wrong and is for the cowardly. Murder, on the other hand, cannot be stopped. It has been occurring since mankind has been around. Behind murder there is always some sort of cause, most of which are not just.

Ethical Perspectives on the News

2010-03-01T13:35:00.003-05:00

This link takes you to a page on Santa Clara University's website. Check it out - they've got a library of podcasts on a range of interesting topics, from bioterrorism to climate change to freedom of the press to sex and violence in video games.

Philosophy in Interdisciplinary Conversation

2010-03-01T13:19:00.002-05:00

Tomorrow, Tuesday March 2 at 4pm at Williams:

Interdisciplinary Gallery Talk: Models of the Mind

4:00 p.m., Williams College Museum of Art
Joseph Cruz, philosophy; Andrea Danyluk, Dean of the Faculty and computer science; and Safa Zaki, psychology present a talk in conjunction with the exhibition Landscapes of the Mind: Contemporary Artists Contemplate the Brain. WCMA

MURDER VS SUICIDE

2010-02-26T09:14:00.001-05:00

I think that Murder is morally wrong, unless you are defending yourself when someone is trying to kill you. I think that Suicide is morally wrong as well unless you are dangerous enough to hurt someone else.

Murder VS Suicde

2010-02-26T09:06:00.002-05:00

There is definately a difference in suicide and murder. If you are to kill yourself than it is your own choice rather then being murdered it's the murderer's choice. If you are to make the decision to kill your self ad take your own life then you are making your decision not letting someone else make it for you. deciding weather your life is worh living is up to you, not someone taking your life away from you for whatever reason.

Murder verse Suicide

2010-02-26T09:00:00.003-05:00

When you think about murder you always think about people killing other people. The one queston i was wondering about was the fact were suicide is basically murdering yourself. yes there is a difference in suicide because its your choice to die. Murder you don't really have a choice unless you are the murderer. In class we discussed right and wrongs in murder and i believe there a few ways where murder is ok. Yet most of the time i will admit it is wrong.

murder vs. suicide

2010-02-24T19:27:00.002-05:00

I think that murder is morally wrong. There are instances that murder might not be wrong, in class we talked about instances that might trigger your instincts to kill another in self defense. I think that this is the only way that murder would be fine.

Murder vs. Suicide

2010-02-23T22:16:00.002-05:00

The basic difference that I see between the two comes down to rights. In class we talked about the right to live. People seemed to generally agree that everyone has the right to live their life. The thing about rights is, you can choose not to use them. For example, I have the right to bare arms, yet I choose not to exercise that right. It can be argued then, that suicide is what people do when they choose not to exercise their right to live. Murder is different, however, because it infringes upon another person's right to live. It would be like some oen telling me I could no longer vote or own a gun. A person cannot impede the rights of others, even if they choose not to use those same rights.

Suicide Vs. Homicide

2010-02-23T20:20:00.002-05:00

The only real difference I can see is that suicide is committed with the consent of the victim (asuming it is intentional and not accidental), and homicide can be committed with or without the consent of the victim. Also intentional suicide is by definition premeditated by the victim, while homicide can be or not.

The Morality Of Suicide

2010-02-23T18:48:00.002-05:00

Thankfully, the majority of humans agree that murder is morally incorrect. Our society is only able to exist because of this fundamental belief. Naturally, we all have an interest in determining what is right and what is wrong regarding killing. I believe that murder is always morally incorrect. However, there are instances when killing is the morally correct option. Although suicide is a tragic option that should be avoided it is not morally incorrect for a person to kill himself. However, it is our duty as sane members of society, to prevent our fellow members from harming themselves while not in their right mind. None of us would hesitate to save a drunk friend who was contemplating suicide. But, if the act is coldly calculated and rationally decided then I believe that it should neither be looked down upon nor illegal. No one should be trapped in life, stuck as a convict is in prison. The only exit should not be locked and barred. Nevertheless, if we are to allow suicide, we must ensure that has been well thought out, (one might even say premeditated) and is not a spur of the moment decision.

What none of you have been waiting for...

2010-02-22T16:44:00.001-05:00

http://thatguywiththeglasses.com/videolinks/thatguywiththeglasses/nostalgia-critic/15087-swchr

muhahahahahahahaha now there is no escape!!!!!!!

....well ok there is but for the sake of argument lets just pertend....

Materialistic Neuroscience

2010-02-22T15:41:00.002-05:00

http://youtube.com/watch?v=77XBZHJcoK4

it's hard to pick up everything at some points, I suggest simply pausing to read the text and then listening to the audio.

p.s. to the first semester people: you are still wrong (if you even remember what I'm talking about)--I rest my case

Name that Fallacy!!

2010-02-05T20:03:00.002-05:00

I was wondering, is there a name for the fallacy of "my opponent said something dissagreable on another topic, so he's probably wrong about this topic as well." ? or would this just fall under ad hominem?

TRY

2010-02-04T15:29:00.002-05:00

http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xj9x6kUJX98

This is the strangest short film i've ever seen and i haven't quite been able to figure out what it means. See if you can figure it out.

Hypercube .gif

2010-02-03T20:18:00.001-05:00

http://images.4chan.org/gif/src/1265207910819.gif

X-Prize, 2.0

2010-02-03T14:12:00.002-05:00

Maybe you've heard of the X-Prize, a $10 million award originally given for developing a successful commercial passenger space vehicle. Now, the second X-Prize has been announced, and it's going toward the development of a rather different tech: read about it (the first couple of paragraphs are background), and think about the possible consequences.

god=groupthink?

2010-02-01T21:04:00.001-05:00

the begining is unneccesary, but by the end you'll see why this video is on here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3IYC2RKETKo

Scary as Hell!!

2010-01-30T16:20:00.002-05:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKZKETizybw

It's a bit on the long side, but definetly worth watching if you care anything about, well, still having human rights in the next few years. Some of it's a little fear-mongerish, but most of it is spot on in my opinion.

Dr.P!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2010-01-29T12:14:00.003-05:00

I'm sorry I had to type up my paper so quickly I didn't have time to look it over, so there were some typos in it, here is the good version, which I also have a hard copy of, though I doubt I'll need it.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Christopher Bope
Dr. Petruzella
Mt. Greylock Regional High School
1781 Cold Spring Rd.
Williamstown MA 01267
413-458-9582
gpetruzella@mgrhs.org
1/14/10

In order to answer the question of which is mightier, first it must be established what “might” is. In this instance might means the ability to shape the external world to internal will. When we compare pen and sword we are of course not talking about literal pens and swords, but rather these are neat allegories, the pen standing for reasoning, rhetoric, and ideology, and the sword standing for the use of violence. Overall, in the task of making people act and think the way that an individual wishes them to, the pen has proven to be vastly more effective.
A major use of violent actions in pursuit of social reform today is the use of suicide bombers by terrorist groups such as Al-Qaeda and the Taliban. These bombings are fairly good at raising people’s stress levels in nations in which the attacks are occurring, but not very effective at inciting support for Sharia law, or the acceptance of Jihad. For many people in countries in which bombing is not going on, news of suicide bombings and increasing numbers of victims goes unread and uncared for by a vast majority of people. I have had several conversations on the subject of “how to be a good despot,” and it is accepted by everyone in these conversations that being a good despot implies the use of fierce and consistent violence. If the despot cannot keep his people constantly in fear, with horrific, random acts of violence, he is likely to be overthrown.
In comparison, rule by rhetoric and reasoning is much easier and more secure. Some of the most successful non-democratic governments, such as the former Soviet Union, and the misleadingly entitled Democratic Republic of Vietnam, exist(ed) and thrive(d) for as long and as well as they have (did), because they had many people who had been so convinced by the respective ideologies of socialism and communism, that they were willing to make great personal sacrifices for the betterment of their nation. People will work much harder, and with much more care, if they are doing it because they want to rather than because they have to. Control by the pen is at its best in the form of religion. Religions tell people what to do and how to think about the world, and the major ones, Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism, each have influence over hundreds of millions, if not billions of people. The pen cannot be wielded with skill by everyone, and so it does not always work, but when it does, it does so to the nth degree.
Words and logic are, in many situations, much easier, and more effective, than violence. Though violence appears to be very motivational, in practice it does not work as well as expected. The fact that rhetoric cannot be wielded successfully by everyone makes it all the more useful for those who can.

_____________________________________________________________________________________
sorry about this hope you didn't send it yet

2010-01-29T08:13:00.004-05:00

http://blogs.technet.com/microsoft_blog/archive/2010/01/27/microsoft-internet-freedom.aspx

A blog post I found on slashdot about internet freedom. It says that internet freedom supersedes national laws.

P1: The internet is one of the last places where free speech really exists

P2: Free speach is important to human rights

P3: If internet companies like Microsoft and google gave into certain national laws this would damage free speech

P4: Free speech is more important than law.

C: Internet companies should not be required to comply with national censorship laws.

Deductive,Valid, Sound

This seems really great that some of the companies are doing this, but I wonder if this will have any real impact, since in all likely hood nations like China and North Korea will simply set up a super powered sonicwall, and stop everyone but the best hackers in the nation from actually getting any info. Of course on the plus side, the world will have more than enough freedom-seeking hackers in it.

2010-01-29T06:58:00.002-05:00

http://www.alien-ufo-pictures.com/nazi_ufos.html

Aliens are what make UFOs
Nazis make UFOs
therefore Nazis are aliens.

This would be inductive and uhh unsound.

Is it possible then that Nazi Germany was not defeated but only retreated...into outer space?

Prayer in public schools

2010-01-28T21:49:00.002-05:00

http://forerunner.com/forerunner/X0098_Ban_on_school_prayer.html

This is the link to a prayer in public schools advocate who believes that our morals are on the decline due to the banning of prayer in public schools.

p1. Prayer directly influences a person's morals and well-being

p2. Prayer has been banned from public schools from the Engel vs. Vitale ruling in 1962.

C. The children attending public schools are being directly harmed and immoralized due to the inability to pray in school.

What is Good?

2010-01-28T19:07:00.002-05:00

This isn't an ethical question. This is a question of opinions. I think the Office is an amazing show. My best friend, Lauren, only likes the dramatic parts of episodes, so she really only likes about ten minutes of the whole series. How are these opinions formed? I guess that's my question for this post.
Some people are intrigued by drama, others by hilarity. These likes and dislikes are all subjective. Therefore, when reviews are released stating that one show or movie is better than the other, this doesn't prove anything.

Weekly BlogWork

2010-01-28T18:37:00.003-05:00

Sorry I didn't come to the Pizza party. The history mid-term demanded all my attention.

1.)

http://slate.msn.com/?id=113959&

This article discusses the differences between an ethicist and someone with valid, well thought out principles. For example Jones Institute for Reproductive Medicine sent out their plan to ethicists. The ethicists applauded the scientists for their outstanding ethics. However, in actuality, the ethicists were only examining the scientists proposal within narrow parameters. Thus, they were not demonstrating solid principles, merely an intelligent manipulation of the question. They phrased the question in such a way that it appeared ethical without delving into the subtle nuances.

2.)

P1: It is immoral to justify one's work with invented morality disputes.

P2: Many stem cell research companies are justifying their work with ethics committees that only examine the morals in question within specific parameters.

C: Many stem cell researchers immorally justify their work.

Deductive Valid Sound.

3.) This article presents an interesting point of view. I personally lost respect for the scientists that seemingly invented special ethics committees to review their work and decide it is valid. However, the question remains, are the scientists guilty of this knowingly doing it, or are they blind to their faults? Do they actually believe that these ethics committees are justifying their work entirely or merely agreeing with their logic. I believe that many of these scientists want to believe their work is ethical and this is enough for them to overlook the finer points. They are happy to except agreements from third parties. Let this be a warning to all. It is very easy to become caught up in an exciting series of events, but we must always examine the morality of our deeds.

Parenting

2010-01-28T14:01:00.002-05:00

This was not an article I found, I watched this ethical issue on a tv show and I really wanted to use it as an example. A mother cooks meth in her house with her small child and her husband. The husband is unaware that the mother is doing this. The father walks out of the house and the house blows up because the mother was cooking meth on the kitchen stove. The father saves both and brings them to the hospital. The mother was severely burnt and is going to die. The father finds out that the reason the house blew up was because the mother was cooking meth. The mother only has several minutes left to live and the father refuses to let the daughter see her mother before she dies.

P1. The house blew up because the mother was cooking meth in the kitchen.
P2. The mother puts the daughter in danger.
C. The mother does not deserve to see the daughter before she dies.

Deductive Strong Uncogent

Was the father right to not let the daughter see her mother before she died ?

Jokes and Philosophy

2010-01-28T09:02:00.002-05:00

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10158510

This is an interview with the authors of the book "Plato and a Platypus Walk into a Bar... Understanding Philosophy Through Jokes." It's a funny book and very spot on with alot of the philosophy we've been talking about, like metaphysics: A seeker has heard the wisest guru in all of India lives atop India's highest mountain, so the seeker tracks over a hill in Delhi until he reaches the fabled mountain. It's incredibly steep, and more than once, he slips and falls. By the time he reaches the top, he's full of cuts and bruises. But there's the guru, sitting cross-legged in front of his cave.
Oh, wise guru, the seeker says, I have come to ask you what the secret of life is. Ah, yes, the secret of life, the guru says. The secret of life is a teacup. A teacup? I came all the way up here to find the meaning of life and you tell me it's a teacup? The guru shrugs, so maybe it isn't a teacup.

P1: Philosophy can be hard to understand.
P2: Jokes make understanding easier.
C: We should tell more philosophy jokes.

Inductive, soung, and cogent. And we totally should tell more jokes.

I bring the a magical scene of living ink and fantastic cacophonies for thy perusal

2010-01-26T22:49:00.002-05:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rN3fYng87SM&feature=related

as always EXPLICIT CONTENT watch at your own peril!

Entropy in the News

2010-01-26T14:20:00.002-05:00

From slashdot.org:

"In a paper soon to be published in the Astrophysical Journal, Australian researchers have estimated the entropy of the universe is about 30 times higher than previous estimates. According to their research, super-massive black holes 'are the largest contributor to the entropy of the observable universe, contributing at least an order of magnitude more entropy than previously estimated.' For those of us who like their science in the form of a car analogy, Dr. Lineweaver compared their results to a car's gas tank. He states, 'It's a bit like looking at your gas gauge and saying "I thought I had half a gas tank, but I only have a quarter of a tank."'"

Pizza @ Williams!

2010-01-25T12:49:00.002-05:00

It's official: the Williams College Philosophy Department will be hosting a pizza party THIS WEDNESDAY, 7 to 9 pm, for our class to meet 'n' greet philosophy majors, eat free pizza, and hear about the future and value of philosophy from the college student perspective.

The gathering will be held at The Log at 78 Spring Street in Williamstown.

2010-01-24T22:07:00.002-05:00

Human beings make decisions based in part on their emotions and in part on their reason. Most people regard the use of reason very highly and treat reasoned decisions as preferable to those based on emotion, but at the same time emotion tends to be a much stronger motivator than reason.

P1: Humans base their opinions on emotions and reason.
P2: Emotions are the main basis of human actions.
C: Humans listen to their emotions over reason when making a decision.

Deductive Weak

What comes first when making a decision? This is a very difficult question to answer. Should you trust your instinct?... Or should you trust reason?

Video not unrelated

2010-01-24T21:18:00.001-05:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zrm7W3zGSoA

Why should Corporate Directors be concerned with ethics?

2010-01-24T20:59:00.002-05:00

http://ethics.ubc.ca/index.php?p=misc&id=26

This article talks about ethics in business. In the section "Why Does This Concern The Board?" Larry Colero talks about why corperate executives should be worried about the ethics of themselves and their employes, and why they should do something about it.

P1: The board is generaly heald responsible for the actions of their company and it's employes.

P2: The typical business system breeds coruption.

P3: The Board has the power to make changes to their business model

C: The board should institute policies that promote ethical behavior.

Inductive, strong, cogent

With CEO's and the like being able to get away so easily with crimes and unjust practices, I wonder if they would actually have to worry?

I forgot.

2010-01-24T18:57:00.000-05:00

The argument is Deductive Valid Sound

Stem Cell Research

2010-01-24T18:29:00.002-05:00

1.)

http://www.unisci.com/stories/20012/0601016.htm

This article advocates and attempts to justify stem cell research. The base of the argument rests largely on the fact that if the embryo is already to be destroyed, it would be of much greater use for stem cell research.

2.)

P1: The embryos do not have human identity until they are 14 days old. (An embryo can split into twins anytime until then.)

P2: The embryo will be destroyed regardless of whether it is used for stem cell research.

C: Not only is it morally correct to use the embryo for scientific research but it is admirable to use something that would be destroyed for the greater good.

3.)

Should embryos be used for stem cell research? This is a very delicate subject that I don't know enough about to feel comfortable expressing my personal opinion on it. Thus, I will summarize the general argument. There are some people who believe that stem cell research is completely acceptable. However, there is another faction that believes that stem cell research destroys human life. (The embryo contains the tissue necessary for the research and is destroyed.) The group that believes it is wrong insists that scientists are essentially murdering innocent babies. The scientists rebut this allegation with the assurance that the embryos would have been aborted anyway and since they are not causing the destruction of the embryos it is morally correct. Each person must decide his own stance on this issue.

weekly post

2010-01-24T15:19:00.002-05:00

http://www.phy.duke.edu/~rgb/Philosophy/axioms/axioms/Religion_versus_Science.html

This part of this very comprehensive philosophical article talks about the difference and similarities of science and religion. As well as what they are based on.

Faith is unprovable
Science and religion are both based on some sort of faith.
Therefore, both are unprovable and incorrect.

I believe the issue that this article does not answer to is why is the world, then, built in such a manner where somethings can be wrong and right at the same time if viewed from different angles as so to speak?

God & Haiti

2010-01-24T14:16:00.002-05:00

http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=7329512294177672518

This article talks about Pat Robertson's recent comment that Haiti was struck with an earthquake as a punishment from God for making a deal with the Devil.

P1: According to the New Testament, God is merciful and just.
P2: Killing thousands of innocent people to get back a a few sinners is neither merciful nor just.
C: Pat Robertson is a moron and the earthquake was nothing more than a tragic natural phenomenon.

Inductive, but strong and cogent.

Guilty by association

2010-01-24T13:05:00.002-05:00

http://www.hsus.org/hsus_field/animal_fighting_the_final_round/dogfighting_fact_sheet/

This website is strongly against dog fighting, and gives numerous reasons why it is inhumane and illegal.

p1. Dog fighting is illegal in all fifty states

p2. Spectators paying money to watch dog fights are keeping the "sport" alive.

p3. Because they are illegal and not widely publicized, spectators are actively seeking out dog fights, not just happening upon them

C. Spectators should be prosecuted along with the organizers and participants of the dog fight.

I'll Only Do It If I Don't Get Caught

2010-01-24T11:40:00.002-05:00

This post is exciting. If you enjoy sports, violence, The Office, thinking or living, you will enjoy this post.

This weekend I made a trek down to Connecticut to visit some colleges and watch some top-notch Williams basketball. I brought my The Office and Philosophy along for the ride. I had just finished the chapter regarding ethics and watching the games made me think.

I dare someone to go to a basketball game and not notice a player, coach or fan being upset by a call. At the Wesleyan game on Friday night, a Wesleyan player was using excessive elbow. He actually elbowed Joe Geoghegan, a Williams senior, in the back of head causing him to bleed. It was bad! But the player was never called out on it. He continued to use his elbows until he elbowed Blake Schultz, another Williams senior, and got called for a foul. He then became more aware of his illegal elbowing and stopped. (Good thing too because he was now guarding the smallest guy on the Williams team).

The point of my little recap is the virtue behind it. He only stopped doing something wrong once he was caught.

Some actions will have consequences for others, but not directly to you. If you are never caught for these actions, the repercussions will never affect you. But, the well-being of others should be a concern no matter what. Therefore, it doesn't matter if you won't get caught, don't do bad things.

2010-01-21T14:31:00.002-05:00

If your curiosity on matters metaphysical was piqued by today's discussion, you might find this article in ArsTechnica of interest - a layperson's explanation of quantum computing.

On the other hand, you might want not to wander off in a different direction, but learn more about light cones and their significance in understanding relativity and time. If so, this site is an intro-level description of light cones, with videos and such, created for non-specialists at Syracuse University.

Oh Alaska!

2010-01-20T17:23:00.000-05:00

Welcome to the most random two minutes and eleven seconds of your life!

Philosophical Film @ North Adams

2010-01-20T10:30:00.002-05:00

Looking for something fun and interesting to do tomorrow night? Watch a movie!

Tomorrow, Thursday, Jan. 21, 7:30 p.m., Club B-10, MASS MoCA, North Adams:

Cinema Lounge: Lie Cheat Steal and Fake It. The first in a series of documentaries looking at complicated ethical equations, this film by Leslie and Andrew Cockburn is "a powerful and shocking look at the subprime lending scandal," according to Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz. "If you want to understand how the US financial system failed and how mortgage companies ripped off the poor, see this film." Tickets $5 for students.

Random Humor

2010-01-19T18:32:00.002-05:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rquKFYAuCSs

Just some random video if you're bored. It makes no sense but its funny as hell.
And no, i didnt waste hours of my life finding this. A friends showed me.
-Cheers