ANNETE BAIER: THE NEED FOR MORE THAN JUSTICE

What I expect to learn:

I want to know if justice is just enough to enforce one’s morality?

Quote:

“when unemployment figures rise, about how the relativity recent flood of women into the work force complicates the problem, as if it would be a good thing if women just went back home whenever unemployment rises, to leave the available jobs for the

men.”

Well according to my quote how can you enforce justice to those given their condition of status in life how can you apply it to them given the fact that they can’t help themselves with. We are gifted enough should share our blessings and threat everyone as if they are of the same level as we are. And we should practice this so that the boundary between them and us would be gone. Master and Slave morality could be applied to this because one can say that people with great status shouldn’t linger with those lower of them but with this review we should erase that fact and we should continue to innovate on creating more jobs for those unfortunate enough. Justice today, well as for our country the Philippines we lack enforcement and on the bad side of it is only applied to those who follow by the law and not to those who don’t know what justice really means. So a lot of immorality issues arise from different high ranking officials. We as the youth once we’ve graduate should continue to enforce more justice and help those who are being downgraded by those higher than them.

What I’ve learned:

I’ve learned that justice today lacks enforcement so that we should enforce this to those who doesn’t have the time to listen as to what justice dictates for the better and improvement of life.

Integrative Questions:

1.  As a student how can you further improve justice?

2.  What are the things you need to improve justice?

3.  How did this review help you?

JOHN RAWLS: A THEORY OF JUSTICE

What i expect to learn: I want to know more about the theory of justice

Qoute: “When this changes, expectations change. I assume that expectations are connected: by raising the prospect of the representative man in one position we presumable increase or decrease the prospects of representative men in other

positions.”

Be given with the advantages or privileges he has. And that as a master himself should consider those lower people as slaves that he shouldn’t interact with them or he would be considered himself immoral at the instance of touching a slave or even having a glimpse with the slave with eye to eye contact. As a master himself he develops a ability or being a moral model to those who know him and that he should act morally all the time. As to exercise this ability he needs some kind of test subject or something that is lower than him.

From the past up to today we still have this kind of comparison with the level of wealth people have or status they’ve gained through heredity. Well with this review it is applied as to how people would act to other people depending on what their status is. Friedrich describes Master morality as a person who is noble who has the right as to whatever he thinks his world conquers with and that those lower than him shouldn’t, Well obviously this would be contradicting as to what people are fighting for the past decades and that we should know that this shouldn’t be used today because of a democratic world that dominates over other possible master and slave thinking.

What I’ve learned:

I’ve learned that justice prevail over any issues one has as long as the person is aware of the consequence he do.

Integrative Question:

1. How did Justice affect the morality of others?
2. Is justice applicable to everyone?
3. How did this review help you?

RONALD DWORKIN: TAKING RIGHTS SERIOUSLY

What I expect to learn:
From the title itself how do you take rights seriously?

Quote:
“When I conceive a hypothetical imperative in general, I do not know beforehand what it will contain-until its condition is given. But if I conceive a categorical imperative, I know at once it contains”

Another topic discussed in this piece is the famous how did rights went wrong to those who have no idea about it? wherein such a person who will act to or interact with their surroundings should know if his/her actions can be followed by others and if not so it is considered to be immoral. This implies that the person beforehand doing a particular action should be able to analyze that his/her actions are for so good.

After a brief description on what a good thing and how you can actually know if the good thing done by a certain person is good or it was done for self enrichment of the said person.
According to Immanuel Kant good will can only be distinguish as good if the doer had no other reason aside from his/her duty. And not for their self interest such as taking the credits for doing a good thing. In doing so this would also help you determine in various aspects of the human actions as to what is right or the opposite of it. You as part of the living community wherein a system of laws are created should reconsider your actions. Actions wherein this would be filtered into layers of test as to what the purpose of it might be. And with the help of this you can also avoid doing what is not good and at the same time promote morality.

What I’ve learned:
I’ve learned that we should know when or even we should take rights seriously all the time

Integrative Questions:
1. How often do you practice rights?
2. Do you think that your acts are equal to those who take it seriously?
3. How did this review help you?

JOEL FEINBERG: THE NATURE AND VALUE OF RIGHTS

What I expect to learn:
According to it’s title I want to know what composes of the nature and value of rights. How it should affect us in our world. And what is our world without rights itself? I want to know all this as to be explained by Joel Feinberg.

Quote:
“Even if there are conceivable circumstances in which one would admit rights diffidently, there is no doubt that their characteristics use and that for which they are distinctively well suited, is to be claimed, demanded, affirmed, insisted upon.” PAGE 71

Joel Feinberg elaborated on the importance of rights in determining values, morality and basically what’s good in our society as to what Kant had said. Feinberg described rights as an enabler to the people and the society who wishes their actions to be good and this is also applicable not only to them but this should be accepted by everybody else. As to make an example Joel Feinberg said imagine the city of Nowheresville and imagine it has does not follow any kind of right everything should have. He describe it as a chaos and everything would be destroyed as to everybody wants to rule because of their own greed.

Nobody would really care about anyone who they see or they would live to themselves and might as well die alone. That is if we are to follow Nowheresville but today as through the improvements and laws done we are able to exercise the rights of every human and living thing [well almost everything]. Because it’s not that discovering the nature and value of rights would help us do good but also it will help us bridge to one another. And finally once we’ve practiced this it can lead to unity of one’s duty and as well it affects everybody else.

What I’ve learned:
I’ve learned that aside from the virtue and what is good will, I should consider what or how does the living things around me feel when I try to do something good or bad. If it is bad I should reflect upon the consequences they might face and I should also think how to avoid this in the future.

Integrative Questions:
1. What are the nature and value of rights according to Joel Feinberg?
2. How can this be a tool to determine which is bad or good?
3. What is nowheresville as told in the story?

ARISTOTLE: HAPPINESS AND VIRTUE

What I expect to learn:

I want to know what Happiness is according to Aristotle and why did he partnered it with virtue. How does this two go along? What can Aristotle say about virtue that in can be used with happiness?

Quote:

“If happiness is activity in accordance with virtue, it is reasonable that it should be in accordance with the highest virtue; and this will be that of the best thing in us. Whether it be reason or something else that is the element which is thought to be our natural ruler.”

Happiness if defined today would mean a gradual release of hormones wherein it triggers you to have a feeling of enlightenment. Or according to this article: http://www.yuksel.org/e/philosophy/happiness.htm Happiness defined today is “The permanent happiness is the product of permanent hormones that paints our subconscious. Those hormones are released according to our mental interpretation of three intervals: our past memories, current perception, and expectations. A person is perpetually happy if his brain produces joyful hormones for this three intervals. The importance of those three intervals differs from time to time, person to person. Nevertheless, the crucial one is the future. Our expectations or worries about the future has an overriding impact in our state of happiness.” as to so the meaning of happiness to Aristotle in the ancient context is that we should be all that we can or let you full potential come to surface and nourish our self. So that we can show that we are complete or be one with our inner self. This could also help us achieved balance to ourselves and create a harmony that no other thing can give. And if we compare as to the modern definition of happiness with the ancient this would come to a crossroad wherein the ancient meaning mixed with virtue should tell us that balance or moderation are needed to attain such happiness in the past context. But as to now given all the developments we are the victims of our own greed and given us a temporary happiness and not what the people who lived with virtue and celebrated happiness in the past. In this review Aristotle described the different emotions or feelings one felt and balanced it with another emotion to show that what one truly feels. He shown that happiness can either be felt or even not felt at all by just being into oneself or contentment.

What I’ve learned:

I’ve learned that happiness shouldn’t always be as to enrich oneself with the material things around us but as to discover oneself and nourish it furthermore as to become a living model. But we should also be modest with our enrichment of oneself so that it would have balance and wouldn’t result into greed.

Integrative Questions:

1. Define happiness in the ancient context?

2. How can one be sure that the happiness he felt is true happiness?

3. Why do Aristotle consider virtue as a moulder of one’s action to become happy?

IMMANUEL KANT: THE CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE

What I expect to learn:

I expect to learn on how Immanuel Kant looks at good will and what are his insights with goodwill. I also want to know if goodwill would affect the course of our actions and interactions with our environment.

Quote:

“When I conceive a hypothetical imperative in general, I do not know beforehand what it will contain-until its condition is given. But if I conceive a categorical imperative, I know at once it contains”

After a brief description on what a good thing and how you can actually know if the good thing done by a certain person is good or it was done for self enrichment of the said person.

According to Immanuel Kant good will can only be distinguish as good if the doer had no other reason aside from his/her duty. And not for their self interest such as taking the credits for doing a good thing. In doing so this would also help you determine in various aspects of the human actions as to what is right or the opposite of it. You as part of the living community wherein a system of laws are created should reconsider your actions. Actions wherein this would be filtered into layers of test as to what the purpose of it might be. And with the help of this you can also avoid doing what is not good and at the same time promote morality.

Another topic discussed in this piece is the famous “The Categorical Imperative” wherein such a person who will act to or interact with their surroundings should know if his/her actions can be followed by others and if not so it is considered to be immoral. This implies that the person beforehand doing a particular action should be able to analyze that his/her actions are for so good. And further do so Immanuel Kant came up with his formula as to how a person could actually apply Categorical Imperative. First of the formula is to know if the action they are about to do is considered to be good by the present law, Second, if the course of action do affect someone we should consider that the people affected shouldn’t be used as a tool for your own benefit but as to help them grow. The last formula for Immanuel Kant’s Categorical Imperative Third one is the combination of the two.

What I’ve learned:

I’ve learned that before the cause and effect phrase you should know what will happen first and how does the law determine as to what my actions will be so that it would be the cause of a certain action I’ve done wherein it will lead into a good effect to my environment and fellow people.

Integrative Questions:

1. How can you say that your action/s are really good?

2. Based on Immanuel Kant,What are the considerations of an actions to consider them good?

3. What are the formula for applying Categorical Imperative?

JAMES RACHELS: THE DEBATE OVER UTILITARIANISM

What i expect to learn: Why did James Rachels want to debate with this review?

Qoute: “As between his own happiness and that of others utilitarianism requires him to be strictly impartial as disinterested and benevolent spectator.”

Well first of all the defined as to what morality is and he said that it is to determine how a human would act as to be good or the opposite. A human should know this because this serves as his/her guideline as to whatever challenges he faces in life. John Arthur said that we should follow these guides that morality molded for us and with the help of religion itself can improve our views as to follow what morality tells us. Religion composes of faith, love and hope that we will do good and be saved by our Father in the darkness that might befallen us. We it also includes that we are to be afraid as to what sins we might commit because purgatory will greet us as we go to the other life. So in hand to hand with religion, this would help morality handle those hard-headed human beings from going out of the road and take another detour.

From the title of the review itself, I could say that these words should be able to give you a little background as to what morality covers from the wide range of variety that it can tackle from the translation of psychologists to the preaches of churchmen. This review can also be supported by James Rachels because we shouldn’t be selfish as what we act and we should be a moral person as to being rational as what God gave us. So that we can be wrapped by our conscience once we are to perform or be tempted by sins.

What I’ve learned:

I’ve learned from the point of James Rachels that we should use this in a broader way not the usual way John taught in his review.

Integrative Question:

1. How can you say that these three words in the title go with each other?
2. Are you able to perform moral acts with these words?
3. How did this review helped you?

JOHN STUART MILL: UTILITARIANISM

What i expect to learn: What is the meaning of Utilitarianism and how is this related to our moral values

Qoute: “It would be absurd that while, in estimating all other things, quality is considered as well as quantity, the estimation of pleasures should be supposed to depend on quantity alone.”

We are to enable this by being ourselves and we shouldn’t depend on to whatever material things we have today. And of course we shouldn’t be selfish as to what we feel or be happy and share it to others because what’s the point of keeping it up to you when we in nature are social animals we need to interact with others. We should evaluate as to what we are interested in our life and use it as a basis as to what we think we will be happy with. Well define self? how can you say your alone or not? Or are you really that happy with your current life being alone or with the feeling of other people? According to what I’ve read in this review, Lastly we should know as to what our action might be of effect to others that they would think we want to be alone with ourselves. We should know infact that they are as of the same level as we are that we should treat them the way we love ourselves.

John Stuart Mill wants to elaborate on the word happiness as to how people would view it today and as to what it means as time passes by. John said that it can be attained in different ways that people pursue it in exchange of any material value they have. Well according to him happiness can be attained by simply doing what’s right and feel good about it not that kind of happiness we modern people feel today.

What I’ve learned:

Well I learned not to be selfish and also think as to whatever I might cause that I would lose potential friends or even my current friends or love ones who care about me.

Integrative Question:

1. What is utilitarianism according to John Stuart Mill?
2. Why did he use this word?
3. How did this review affect you?

MARY MIGLEY: TRYING OUT ONE’S NEW SWORD

What i expect to learn: How did the Japanese culture relate to this review? And as to what explanation Mary Migley did

Qoute: “If there were really an isolating barrier, of course, our own culture could never have

been formed.”

In Japan in the past there is what we call wielder of blade and those who fight using these wielded blades. And to wield one’s blade should be sharp enough to cut through a bamboo so that it can cut down a enemy at the battle field or a confrontation. And to know that a wielder or what they call a swordsman should test this before entering the battlefield and in Japan they are to test this by passing by a unknown person and cutting him in half just to know how sharp the swordsman’s blade is. Well in our modern life we really shouldn’t try this or its criminal charges that we’ll face but this has a point in our daily life we should be practicing as to what we apply in the battlefield or in a confrontation because we should know as to what it might take effect to other people who will go through our sharp sword or our moral values.

We should know that every action has a opposite reaction so that we should keep practicing on whatever we tackle everyday so that in the end we will not go to mistakes.

What I’ve learned:

I’ve learned that we should practice our moral values often so that no one would be cut by our sharp moral acts and in the long run help us on applying this moral value.

Integrative Question:

1. Aside from cutting down other people with your sharp moral value how can you practice?
2. How did Mary Migley compared the culture of Japan to applying it in our moral value?
3. What are you insights with this review?

FRIEDRICH NIETZSCHE: MASTER AND SLAVERY MORALITY

What i expect to learn: I want to know if this could be applied today? And why is that morality have this kind of comparison

Qoute: “The essential thing, however, in a good and healthy aristocracy is that it should not regard itself as a fuction either of the kingship”

From the past up to today we still have this kind of comparison with the level of wealth people have or status they’ve gained through heredity. Well with this review it is applied as to how people would act to other people depending on what their status is. Friedrich describes Master morality as a person who is noble who has the right as to whatever he thinks his world conquers with and that those lower than him shouldn’t be given with the advantages or privileges he has. And that as a master himself should consider those lower people as slaves that he shouldn’t interact with them or he would be considered himself immoral at the instance of touching a slave or even having a glimpse with the slave with eye to eye contact. As a master himself he develops a ability or being a moral model to those who know him and that he should act morally all the time. As to exercise this ability he needs some kind of test subject or something that is lower than him.

Well obviously this would be contradicting as to what people are fighting for the past decades and that we should know that this shouldn’t be used today because of a democratic world that dominates over other possible master and slave thinking.

What I’ve learned:

I’ve learned that we should close the gap between a masters mindset and a slaves view of his/her life and that we should practice our way to devote to have equality.

Integrative Question:

1. Are you a master or slave moral person?
2. Referring to number 1, How can you say so?
3. How did this review help you?