http://blog.talkingphilosophy.com/?p=1496
Everyone is talking about Tiger Woods these days. But how much does the public have a right to now? Are there any substantial reasons for us to pry into the lives of celebrities and athletes? This article explores the idea of a celebrity's relationship with the public and how much needs to be shared. I find his stance unusual, in that he believes that the public does in fact have the right to pry into Tiger's private life because of the image of trustworthiness he established. It also discusses the different situations in which people have a right to other people's lives. My one question is:If a senator has an affair, it is certainly deplorable, but not illegal. Should he be removed from office, even though he is excellent at his job?
P1: Tiger Woods plays golf for a living.
P2: His endorsements are based off his skill at golf
P3: His private life does not affect his game and is not on view for the public.
C: His private life does not affect the legitimacy of his endorsements as a pro golfer.
Inductive, strong, and cogent. Although people might disagree with P2, so perhaps it is uncogent.
6 days ago
In my mind there's nothing wrong with a senator who has an affair keeping his job, but I think to many people the idea of not voting to oust such a senator is the same thing as saying "I approve of extra-merital affairs," because as everyone knows in order to support a candidate one must agree with every statement they have ever made and every action they have ever taken, and all the actions and statements of their family, and relatives, and old college roomates, and family friends, and elementary school homeroom teachers, and personal trainers, and paper boys..................
ReplyDeleteMegan: I agree that P2 is contentious: one might argue that an important part of the reason he's been chosen to give high-profile product endorsements is precisely his effectiveness as a "role model."
ReplyDeleteBut I don't think Woods needs to be a good person to sell me nikes. He wears the shoes, he likes the shoes, he's famous, ipso facto, I should buy the shoes. I understand why a company would drop him after the news came out. I'm just saying it doesn't make a difference to me.
ReplyDelete