Week 2, part 1: PLEASURE, and LIBERTY
JOHNSTUARTMILL
UTILITARIANISM
GREATEST TO
JUSTIFIEDHAPPINESS
UTILITARIANRESULTS D
OUTCOME GOOD BENTHAM
ENDS
CONSEQUENTIALISM
ETHICS
MEANS
In this module we will acquaint ourselves with Jeremy Bentham, John Stuart Mill and
UTILITARIANISM.
BENTHAM
Read Mill Chapter 1, “General Remarks” and Chapter II, “What Utilitarianism Is” (153-185)
Read Horner Chapter 2, “Pleasure” (31-42), paying special attention to these concepts:
• The best state of affairs (33)
• The public interest (33)
• The end justifying the means (34)
• Moral panic (37)
These ideas can all be PROBLEMATIZED (in other words, regarded as problems requiring solutions, or
as concepts with inherent flaws).
Choose one of these ideas, and deconstruct it. Think about its intrinsic problems. Write at least one
developed paragraph on it, and post it to DISCUSSION 3: BENTHAM. Then respond to 2 other
posts.
THIS DISCUSSION (YOUR POST AND YOUR RESPONSES TO 2 OTHER POSTS) IS DUE BY 11:59
PM ON THE WEDNESDAY OF WEEK 2 OF THE COURSE: 12/08/2021.
Disc. 3: BENTHAM
Available until Dec 8, 2021 11:59 PM. Access restricted after availability ends.
Read Horner Chapter 2, “Pleasure” (31-42), paying special attention to
these concepts:
.
.
The best state of affairs (33)
The public interest (33)
The end justifying the means (34)
Moral panic (37)
.
These ideas can all be PROBLEMATIZED (in other words, regarded as
problems requiring requiring solutions, or as concepts with inherent
flaws).
Choose one of these ideas, and deconstruct it. Think about its intrinsic
problems. Write at least one developed paragraph on it, and post it to
DISCUSSION 3: BENTHAM. Then respond to 2 other posts.
–
Fumei Jackson – Discussion 3: Bentham
☆ Subscribe
Fumei Jackson posted Dec 6, 2021 10:06 AM
When society develops a perception of something that is far from what it actually is or when this situation
challenges the values of society it creates moral panic. This causes widespread fear due to something
being found as dangerously deviant usually being fueled by wide media coverage.
Some social problems that this concept has been applied to such as HIV/AIDS, and the War on drugs.
Moral panic is usually beneficial to the relationship between politicians, law enforcement, and media
because of the ability to attract wide audiences which allows them to control the rhetoric and profit off
the communication channels used to distribute this rhetoric.
When this happens, societal divisions are reinforced due to fear and perpetuating stereotypes. The
positive characteristics of the certain individuals or groups that are targeted in moral panics are
disregarded and only the unfavorable ones are evaluated and applied. The result of public hysteria is
usually the passing of punitive legislation to suppress individuals and keep serving the people who have
power and authority.
Discussion 3: Chaitanya Rathod
☆ Subscribe
Chaitanya Rathod posted Dec 6, 2021 4:41 PM
Horner writes in Understanding Media Ethics about the concept of the end
justifying the means. The concept of the end justifying the means is one with
inherent flaws because it’s something that many use to justify their actions. In
some cases, I think the end does justify the means, even if the means where
illegal. Since laws don’t always align with everyones morals, some laws that you
break may not be moral in your opinion, so breaking them may be justified in your
eyes. Therefore, making the ends justifying the means. Often, when someone
defies laws, they are doing it for a specific reason and in almost all cases, they
think that whatever they are doing is justifiable based on the results they want.
For instance, a robber may think that stealing is justified because it allows them to
get richer. Although, for others, this may not be justified. In this case, everyone
has different justifications for everything and if they didn’t have justifications for
it, they would have never performed those actions. I think when the ends justify
the means, is when the end/result is ethical in most people’s POV, otherwise, the
ends don’t justify the means.
This video might be helpful in clarifying Bentham’s utilitarianism. Take special note of the difference
between Act Utilitarianism and Rule Utilitarianism. The speaker refers to Immanuel Kant–we’ll get to
him later in the course.
“Utilitarianism: Crash Course Philosophy #36” Crash Course
MILL
Read Mill, Chapter III “Of the Ultimate Sanction of the Principle of Utility” (187-196)
Read Horner Chapter 3 “Markets” (49-66)
Pay special attention to these concepts:
The Rational Spectator [Audience) Fallacy (56)
The Neutral Media Fallacy (57)
Higher and lower pleasures (58-61)
You might find this video helpful. It compares Mill with Bentham, and focuses on the higher and
lower pleasures:
“Utilitarianism –John Stuart Mill” Then and Now
And if you want to go a little deeper, check out this thoughtful problematization of Utilitarianism,
which the speaker calls “first and foremost a standard for what makes actions right, not a procedure
to apply to every action.” Note the concept of Agent Neutrality. Virtue Ethics are mentioned–we’ll
get there when we think about digital ethics.
“Consequentialism and Utilitarianism in a Nutshell” Philosophy in a Nutshell
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-evdkosGk
Read Mill, Chapter IV “Of What Sort of Proof…” and Chapter V “On the Connection Between Justice
and Utility” (197-236)
Read Horner Chapter 4, “Liberty” (67-83), paying particular attention to the following:
.
The Importance of the Liberty Principle (74-75)
The “fallibility assumption” (77)
The “partial truths assumption” (77)
The “requirement for testing assumption” (78)
The need for active belief (78)
.
This is an appropriate time for us to renew (or establish) our acquaintance with the FIRST
AMENDMENT, which is essential to our practical understanding of freedom of expression. Watch this
quick introduction for some historical context:
Floyd Abrams, “The First Amendment in Five Minutes” Big Think
Read Baran, “Media Freedom, Regulation, and Ethics” (COURSE RESERVES]
Baran provides a clear overview of the First Amendment and its abridgments. You’ll be struck, I’m
sure, by the fact that these abridgments were framed long before the invention of the internet. We’ll
address internet freedom and regulation when we discuss digital ethics (we’ll think about concepts
like the “policy vacuum” and the “conceptual muddle”), but for now it’s simply worth noticing that
brand new ethical issues are raised by the existence of the internet.
Also–and this is important–Baran arrives at the SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY THEORY. Pay close
attention to it. It connects not only with the First Amendment, but also with David Puttnam’s concept
of a duty of care, and with Mill’s concept of freedom of expression.
Consider 4.5 A JUDGEMENT CALL (Horner 79). Post your opinion to DISCUSSION 4: Liberty,
supported by the content of this chapter and whatever other research you think is required. Write at
least one thoughtfully developed paragraph. Respond to at least two other posts.
THIS DISCUSSION (YOUR POST AND YOUR RESPONSES TO 2 OTHER POSTS) IS DUE BY 11:59
PM ON THE FRIDAY OF WEEK 2 OF THE COURSE: 12/10/2021.
Disc. 4: LIBERTY
Available until Dec 10, 2021 11:59 PM. Access restricted after availability ends.
☆ Subscribe
Consider 4.5 A JUDGEMENT CALL (Horner 79). Post your opinion to DISCUSSION
4: LIBERTY, supported by the content of this chapter and whatever other research
you think is required. Write at least one thoughtfully developed paragraph. Respond
to at least two other posts.
Discussion 4 – Chaitanya Rathod
☆ Subscribe
Chaitanya Rathod posted Dec 6, 2021 5:10 PM
It’s definitely difficult to judge whether publications regarding climate change by
skeptics should be restricted to ensure that false news doesn’t spread. I think that
if we were to restrict publications by climate change skeptics, then we would have
to restrict a lot of other false news as well. Also, what some people may perceive
as false could actually be the truth and vice versa. So, it’s a very difficult
judgement call to completely restrict false news. Horner writes in his book about
incitement and how that’s something which definitely shouldn’t be allowed. I
agree with Horner and think that if the publication is indeed inciting rather than
trying to inform, then it should potentially be restricted. Though, if it’s not, I don’t
think the publication should be restricted. Instead, the publications should back
their claims with evidence and source them, so that can the spread of false news
can be halted.
This video might be helpful in clarifying Bentham’s utilitarianism. Take special note of the difference
between Act Utilitarianism and Rule Utilitarianism. The speaker refers to Immanuel Kant–we’ll get to
him later in the course.
“Utilitarianism: Crash Course Philosophy #36” Crash Course
MILL
Read Mill, Chapter III “Of the Ultimate Sanction of the Principle of Utility” (187-196)
Read Horner Chapter 3 “Markets” (49-66)
Pay special attention to these concepts:
The Rational Spectator [Audience) Fallacy (56)
The Neutral Media Fallacy (57)
Higher and lower pleasures (58-61)
You might find this video helpful. It compares Mill with Bentham, and focuses on the higher and
lower pleasures:
“Utilitarianism –John Stuart Mill” Then and Now
And if you want to go a little deeper, check out this thoughtful problematization of Utilitarianism,
which the speaker calls “first and foremost a standard for what makes actions right, not a procedure
to apply to every action.” Note the concept of Agent Neutrality. Virtue Ethics are mentioned–we’ll
get there when we think about digital ethics.
“Consequentialism and Utilitarianism in a Nutshell” Philosophy in a Nutshell
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-evdkosGk
Read Mill, Chapter IV “Of What Sort of Proof…” and Chapter V “On the Connection Between Justice
and Utility” (197-236)
Read Horner Chapter 4, “Liberty” (67-83), paying particular attention to the following:
.
The Importance of the Liberty Principle (74-75)
The “fallibility assumption” (77)
The “partial truths assumption” (77)
The “requirement for testing assumption” (78)
The need for active belief (78)
.
This is an appropriate time for us to renew (or establish) our acquaintance with the FIRST
AMENDMENT, which is essential to our practical understanding of freedom of expression. Watch this
quick introduction for some historical context:
Floyd Abrams, “The First Amendment in Five Minutes” Big Think
Read Baran, “Media Freedom, Regulation, and Ethics” (COURSE RESERVES]
Baran provides a clear overview of the First Amendment and its abridgments. You’ll be struck, I’m
sure, by the fact that these abridgments were framed long before the invention of the internet. We’ll
address internet freedom and regulation when we discuss digital ethics (we’ll think about concepts
like the “policy vacuum” and the “conceptual muddle”), but for now it’s simply worth noticing that
brand new ethical issues are raised by the existence of the internet.
Also–and this is important–Baran arrives at the SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY THEORY. Pay close
attention to it. It connects not only with the First Amendment, but also with David Puttnam’s concept
of a duty of care, and with Mill’s concept of freedom of expression.
Consider 4.5 A JUDGEMENT CALL (Horner 79). Post your opinion to DISCUSSION 4: Liberty,
supported by the content of this chapter and whatever other research you think is required. Write at
least one thoughtfully developed paragraph. Respond to at least two other posts.
THIS DISCUSSION (YOUR POST AND YOUR RESPONSES TO 2 OTHER POSTS) IS DUE BY 11:59
PM ON THE FRIDAY OF WEEK 2 OF THE COURSE: 12/10/2021.
Week 2, part 1: PLEASURE, and LIBERTY
JOHNSTUARTMILL
UTILITARIANISM
GREATEST TO
JUSTIFIEDHAPPINESS
UTILITARIANRESULTS D
OUTCOME GOOD BENTHAM
ENDS
CONSEQUENTIALISM
ETHICS
MEANS
In this module we will acquaint ourselves with Jeremy Bentham, John Stuart Mill and
UTILITARIANISM.
BENTHAM
Read Mill Chapter 1, “General Remarks” and Chapter II, “What Utilitarianism Is” (153-185)
Read Horner Chapter 2, “Pleasure” (31-42), paying special attention to these concepts:
• The best state of affairs (33)
• The public interest (33)
• The end justifying the means (34)
• Moral panic (37)
These ideas can all be PROBLEMATIZED (in other words, regarded as problems requiring solutions, or
as concepts with inherent flaws).
Choose one of these ideas, and deconstruct it. Think about its intrinsic problems. Write at least one
developed paragraph on it, and post it to DISCUSSION 3: BENTHAM. Then respond to 2 other
posts.
THIS DISCUSSION (YOUR POST AND YOUR RESPONSES TO 2 OTHER POSTS) IS DUE BY 11:59
PM ON THE WEDNESDAY OF WEEK 2 OF THE COURSE: 12/08/2021.
Week 2, part 1: PLEASURE, and LIBERTY
JOHNSTUARTMILL
UTILITARIANISM
GREATESTT.
JUSTIFIEDHAPPINESS
UTILITARIANRESULTS BY
OUTCOME GOOD BENTHAM
ENDS
CONSEQUENTIALISM
ETHICS
MEANS
In this module we will acquaint ourselves with Jeremy Bentham, John Stuart Mill and
UTILITARIANISM.
BENTHAM
Read Mill Chapter 1, “General Remarks” and Chapter II, “What Utilitarianism Is” (153-185)
Read Horner Chapter 2, “Pleasure” (31-42), paying special attention to these concepts:
.
The best state of affairs (33)
The public interest (33)
• The end justifying the means (34)
Moral panic (37)
These ideas can all be PROBLEMATIZED (in other words, regarded as problems requiring solutions, or
as concepts with inherent flaws).
Choose one of these ideas, and deconstruct it. Think about its intrinsic problems. Write at least one
developed paragraph on it, and post it to DISCUSSION 3: BENTHAM. Then respond to 2 other
posts.
THIS DISCUSSION (YOUR POST AND YOUR RESPONSES TO 2 OTHER POSTS) IS DUE BY 11:59
PM ON THE WEDNESDAY OF WEEK 2 OF THE COURSE: 12/08/2021.
This video might be helpful in clarifying Bentham’s utilitarianism. Take special note of the difference
between Act Utilitarianism and Rule Utilitarianism. The speaker refers to Immanuel Kant–we’ll get to
him later in the course.
“Utilitarianism: Crash Course Philosophy #36” Crash Course
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-a739VjqdSi
MILL
Read Mill, Chapter III “Of the Ultimate Sanction of the Principle of Utility” (187-196)
Read Horner Chapter 3 “Markets” (49-66)
Pay special attention to these concepts:
.
.
The Rational Spectator [Audience] Fallacy (56)
The Neutral Media Fallacy (57)
Higher and lower pleasures (58-61)
.
You might find this video helpful. It compares Mill with Bentham, and focuses on the higher and lower
pleasures:
“Utilitarianism-John Stuart Mill” Then and Now
And if you want to go a little deeper, check out this thoughtful problematization of Utilitarianism,
which the speaker calls “first and foremost a standard for what makes actions right, not a procedure
to apply to every action.” Note the concept of Agent Neutrality. Virtue Ethics are mentioned–we’ll get
there when we think about digital ethics.
“Consequentialism and Utilitarianism in a Nutshell” Philosophy in a Nutshell
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-e6vdkosGk
Read Mill, Chapter IV “Of What Sort of Proof…” and Chapter V “On the Connection Between Justice
and Utility” (197-236)
Read Horner Chapter 4, “Liberty” (67-83), paying particular attention to the following:
The Importance of the Liberty Principle (74-75)
The “fallibility assumption” (77)
The “partial truths assumption” (77)
The “requirement for testing assumption” (78)
The need for active belief (78)
.
This is an appropriate time for us to renew (or establish) our acquaintance with the FIRST
AMENDMENT, which is essential to our practical understanding of freedom of expression. Watch this
quick introduction for some historical context:
Floyd Abrams, “The First Amendment in Five Minutes” Big Think
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9Cm50cVXkU
Read Baran, “Media Freedom, Regulation, and Ethics” [COURSE RESERVES]
Baran provides a clear overview of the First Amendment and its abridgments. You’ll be struck, I’m
sure, by the fact that these abridgments were framed long before the invention of the internet. We’ll
address internet freedom and regulation when we discuss digital ethics (we’ll think about concepts
like the “policy vacuum” and the “conceptual muddle”), but for now it’s simply worth noticing that
brand new ethical issues are raised by the existence of the internet.
Also–and this is important–Baran arrives at the SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY THEORY. Pay close
attention to it. It connects not only with the First Amendment, but also with David Puttnam’s concept
of a duty of care, and with Mill’s concept of freedom of expression.
Consider 4.5 A JUDGEMENT CALL (Horner 79). Post your opinion to DISCUSSION 4: Liberty,
supported by the content of this chapter and whatever other research you think is required. Write at
least one thoughtfully developed paragraph. Respond to at least two other posts.
THIS DISCUSSION (YOUR POST AND YOUR RESPONSES TO 2 OTHER POSTS) IS DUE BY 11:59
PM ON THE FRIDAY OF WEEK 2 OF THE COURSE: 12/10/2021.
Liberty Discussion Kaitlyn P.
☆ Subscribe
Kaitlyn Piotroski posted Dec 7, 2021 10:05 PM
Something that is deeply prevalent in today’s society is the discussion about
where freedom of speech ends and government censorship begins. In the 4.5
example A Judgment Call, Horner begs the question whether or not it is moral to
restrict publications of climate change skeptics. I believe in order to maintain
freedom of speech, we should not restrict the publication of skeptics because
there is no productive argument that doesn’t have an opposing side, but also while
there needs to be opposition, how can we guarantee the opposition is not simply
spreading lies? It is so hard in today’s media to know what is true and what is not.
You could be watching a clip of a court case, but the certain clip you are shown
could have been edited to aid one argument or taken out of context to support
another opinion. Unless you are there in the room there is no way to distinguish
what the truth is. I think either horn of Mill’s argument ends in catastrophe
because if it is true, we have doomed our world, while on the other hand if it isn’t
we have spent so much time and money focused on one problem when we have a
dozen other problems that could also use attention. Whether or not there is
suppression, there is no guarantee we will be receiving the truth from either side.
At the root, everyone should be allowed to share their opinion and without
becoming the extremely censored option, we are stuck in a middle ground of
wading through endless information from endless sources, which is simply the
nature of the internet.
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
JOHNSTUARTMILL
UTILITARIANISM
GREATEST TO
JUSTIFIEDHAPPINESS
UTILITARIANRESULTS D
OUTCOME GOOD BENTHAM
ENDS
CONSEQUENTIALISM
ETHICS
MEANS
In this module we will acquaint ourselves with Jeremy Bentham, John Stuart Mill and
UTILITARIANISM.
BENTHAM
Read Mill Chapter 1, “General Remarks” and Chapter II, “What Utilitarianism Is” (153-185)
Read Horner Chapter 2, “Pleasure” (31-42), paying special attention to these concepts:
• The best state of affairs (33)
• The public interest (33)
• The end justifying the means (34)
• Moral panic (37)
These ideas can all be PROBLEMATIZED (in other words, regarded as problems requiring solutions, or
as concepts with inherent flaws).
Choose one of these ideas, and deconstruct it. Think about its intrinsic problems. Write at least one
developed paragraph on it, and post it to DISCUSSION 3: BENTHAM. Then respond to 2 other
posts.
THIS DISCUSSION (YOUR POST AND YOUR RESPONSES TO 2 OTHER POSTS) IS DUE BY 11:59
PM ON THE WEDNESDAY OF WEEK 2 OF THE COURSE: 12/08/2021.
Disc. 3: BENTHAM
Available until Dec 8, 2021 11:59 PM. Access restricted after availability ends.
Read Horner Chapter 2, “Pleasure” (31-42), paying special attention to
these concepts:
.
.
The best state of affairs (33)
The public interest (33)
The end justifying the means (34)
Moral panic (37)
.
These ideas can all be PROBLEMATIZED (in other words, regarded as
problems requiring requiring solutions, or as concepts with inherent
flaws).
Choose one of these ideas, and deconstruct it. Think about its intrinsic
problems. Write at least one developed paragraph on it, and post it to
DISCUSSION 3: BENTHAM. Then respond to 2 other posts.
–
Fumei Jackson – Discussion 3: Bentham
☆ Subscribe
Fumei Jackson posted Dec 6, 2021 10:06 AM
When society develops a perception of something that is far from what it actually is or when this situation
challenges the values of society it creates moral panic. This causes widespread fear due to something
being found as dangerously deviant usually being fueled by wide media coverage.
Some social problems that this concept has been applied to such as HIV/AIDS, and the War on drugs.
Moral panic is usually beneficial to the relationship between politicians, law enforcement, and media
because of the ability to attract wide audiences which allows them to control the rhetoric and profit off
the communication channels used to distribute this rhetoric.
When this happens, societal divisions are reinforced due to fear and perpetuating stereotypes. The
positive characteristics of the certain individuals or groups that are targeted in moral panics are
disregarded and only the unfavorable ones are evaluated and applied. The result of public hysteria is
usually the passing of punitive legislation to suppress individuals and keep serving the people who have
power and authority.
Discussion 3: Chaitanya Rathod
☆ Subscribe
Chaitanya Rathod posted Dec 6, 2021 4:41 PM
Horner writes in Understanding Media Ethics about the concept of the end
justifying the means. The concept of the end justifying the means is one with
inherent flaws because it’s something that many use to justify their actions. In
some cases, I think the end does justify the means, even if the means where
illegal. Since laws don’t always align with everyones morals, some laws that you
break may not be moral in your opinion, so breaking them may be justified in your
eyes. Therefore, making the ends justifying the means. Often, when someone
defies laws, they are doing it for a specific reason and in almost all cases, they
think that whatever they are doing is justifiable based on the results they want.
For instance, a robber may think that stealing is justified because it allows them to
get richer. Although, for others, this may not be justified. In this case, everyone
has different justifications for everything and if they didn’t have justifications for
it, they would have never performed those actions. I think when the ends justify
the means, is when the end/result is ethical in most people’s POV, otherwise, the
ends don’t justify the means.
This video might be helpful in clarifying Bentham’s utilitarianism. Take special note of the difference
between Act Utilitarianism and Rule Utilitarianism. The speaker refers to Immanuel Kant–we’ll get to
him later in the course.
“Utilitarianism: Crash Course Philosophy #36” Crash Course
MILL
Read Mill, Chapter III “Of the Ultimate Sanction of the Principle of Utility” (187-196)
Read Horner Chapter 3 “Markets” (49-66)
Pay special attention to these concepts:
The Rational Spectator [Audience) Fallacy (56)
The Neutral Media Fallacy (57)
Higher and lower pleasures (58-61)
You might find this video helpful. It compares Mill with Bentham, and focuses on the higher and
lower pleasures:
“Utilitarianism –John Stuart Mill” Then and Now
And if you want to go a little deeper, check out this thoughtful problematization of Utilitarianism,
which the speaker calls “first and foremost a standard for what makes actions right, not a procedure
to apply to every action.” Note the concept of Agent Neutrality. Virtue Ethics are mentioned–we’ll
get there when we think about digital ethics.
“Consequentialism and Utilitarianism in a Nutshell” Philosophy in a Nutshell
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-evdkosGk
Read Mill, Chapter IV “Of What Sort of Proof…” and Chapter V “On the Connection Between Justice
and Utility” (197-236)
Read Horner Chapter 4, “Liberty” (67-83), paying particular attention to the following:
.
The Importance of the Liberty Principle (74-75)
The “fallibility assumption” (77)
The “partial truths assumption” (77)
The “requirement for testing assumption” (78)
The need for active belief (78)
.
This is an appropriate time for us to renew (or establish) our acquaintance with the FIRST
AMENDMENT, which is essential to our practical understanding of freedom of expression. Watch this
quick introduction for some historical context:
Floyd Abrams, “The First Amendment in Five Minutes” Big Think
Read Baran, “Media Freedom, Regulation, and Ethics” (COURSE RESERVES]
Baran provides a clear overview of the First Amendment and its abridgments. You’ll be struck, I’m
sure, by the fact that these abridgments were framed long before the invention of the internet. We’ll
address internet freedom and regulation when we discuss digital ethics (we’ll think about concepts
like the “policy vacuum” and the “conceptual muddle”), but for now it’s simply worth noticing that
brand new ethical issues are raised by the existence of the internet.
Also–and this is important–Baran arrives at the SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY THEORY. Pay close
attention to it. It connects not only with the First Amendment, but also with David Puttnam’s concept
of a duty of care, and with Mill’s concept of freedom of expression.
Consider 4.5 A JUDGEMENT CALL (Horner 79). Post your opinion to DISCUSSION 4: Liberty,
supported by the content of this chapter and whatever other research you think is required. Write at
least one thoughtfully developed paragraph. Respond to at least two other posts.
THIS DISCUSSION (YOUR POST AND YOUR RESPONSES TO 2 OTHER POSTS) IS DUE BY 11:59
PM ON THE FRIDAY OF WEEK 2 OF THE COURSE: 12/10/2021.
Disc. 4: LIBERTY
Available until Dec 10, 2021 11:59 PM. Access restricted after availability ends.
☆ Subscribe
Consider 4.5 A JUDGEMENT CALL (Horner 79). Post your opinion to DISCUSSION
4: LIBERTY, supported by the content of this chapter and whatever other research
you think is required. Write at least one thoughtfully developed paragraph. Respond
to at least two other posts.
Discussion 4 – Chaitanya Rathod
☆ Subscribe
Chaitanya Rathod posted Dec 6, 2021 5:10 PM
It’s definitely difficult to judge whether publications regarding climate change by
skeptics should be restricted to ensure that false news doesn’t spread. I think that
if we were to restrict publications by climate change skeptics, then we would have
to restrict a lot of other false news as well. Also, what some people may perceive
as false could actually be the truth and vice versa. So, it’s a very difficult
judgement call to completely restrict false news. Horner writes in his book about
incitement and how that’s something which definitely shouldn’t be allowed. I
agree with Horner and think that if the publication is indeed inciting rather than
trying to inform, then it should potentially be restricted. Though, if it’s not, I don’t
think the publication should be restricted. Instead, the publications should back
their claims with evidence and source them, so that can the spread of false news
can be halted.
This video might be helpful in clarifying Bentham’s utilitarianism. Take special note of the difference
between Act Utilitarianism and Rule Utilitarianism. The speaker refers to Immanuel Kant–we’ll get to
him later in the course.
“Utilitarianism: Crash Course Philosophy #36” Crash Course
MILL
Read Mill, Chapter III “Of the Ultimate Sanction of the Principle of Utility” (187-196)
Read Horner Chapter 3 “Markets” (49-66)
Pay special attention to these concepts:
The Rational Spectator [Audience) Fallacy (56)
The Neutral Media Fallacy (57)
Higher and lower pleasures (58-61)
You might find this video helpful. It compares Mill with Bentham, and focuses on the higher and
lower pleasures:
“Utilitarianism –John Stuart Mill” Then and Now
And if you want to go a little deeper, check out this thoughtful problematization of Utilitarianism,
which the speaker calls “first and foremost a standard for what makes actions right, not a procedure
to apply to every action.” Note the concept of Agent Neutrality. Virtue Ethics are mentioned–we’ll
get there when we think about digital ethics.
“Consequentialism and Utilitarianism in a Nutshell” Philosophy in a Nutshell
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-evdkosGk
Read Mill, Chapter IV “Of What Sort of Proof…” and Chapter V “On the Connection Between Justice
and Utility” (197-236)
Read Horner Chapter 4, “Liberty” (67-83), paying particular attention to the following:
.
The Importance of the Liberty Principle (74-75)
The “fallibility assumption” (77)
The “partial truths assumption” (77)
The “requirement for testing assumption” (78)
The need for active belief (78)
.
This is an appropriate time for us to renew (or establish) our acquaintance with the FIRST
AMENDMENT, which is essential to our practical understanding of freedom of expression. Watch this
quick introduction for some historical context:
Floyd Abrams, “The First Amendment in Five Minutes” Big Think
Read Baran, “Media Freedom, Regulation, and Ethics” (COURSE RESERVES]
Baran provides a clear overview of the First Amendment and its abridgments. You’ll be struck, I’m
sure, by the fact that these abridgments were framed long before the invention of the internet. We’ll
address internet freedom and regulation when we discuss digital ethics (we’ll think about concepts
like the “policy vacuum” and the “conceptual muddle”), but for now it’s simply worth noticing that
brand new ethical issues are raised by the existence of the internet.
Also–and this is important–Baran arrives at the SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY THEORY. Pay close
attention to it. It connects not only with the First Amendment, but also with David Puttnam’s concept
of a duty of care, and with Mill’s concept of freedom of expression.
Consider 4.5 A JUDGEMENT CALL (Horner 79). Post your opinion to DISCUSSION 4: Liberty,
supported by the content of this chapter and whatever other research you think is required. Write at
least one thoughtfully developed paragraph. Respond to at least two other posts.
THIS DISCUSSION (YOUR POST AND YOUR RESPONSES TO 2 OTHER POSTS) IS DUE BY 11:59
PM ON THE FRIDAY OF WEEK 2 OF THE COURSE: 12/10/2021.
Week 2, part 1: PLEASURE, and LIBERTY
JOHNSTUARTMILL
UTILITARIANISM
GREATEST TO
JUSTIFIEDHAPPINESS
UTILITARIANRESULTS D
OUTCOME GOOD BENTHAM
ENDS
CONSEQUENTIALISM
ETHICS
MEANS
In this module we will acquaint ourselves with Jeremy Bentham, John Stuart Mill and
UTILITARIANISM.
BENTHAM
Read Mill Chapter 1, “General Remarks” and Chapter II, “What Utilitarianism Is” (153-185)
Read Horner Chapter 2, “Pleasure” (31-42), paying special attention to these concepts:
• The best state of affairs (33)
• The public interest (33)
• The end justifying the means (34)
• Moral panic (37)
These ideas can all be PROBLEMATIZED (in other words, regarded as problems requiring solutions, or
as concepts with inherent flaws).
Choose one of these ideas, and deconstruct it. Think about its intrinsic problems. Write at least one
developed paragraph on it, and post it to DISCUSSION 3: BENTHAM. Then respond to 2 other
posts.
THIS DISCUSSION (YOUR POST AND YOUR RESPONSES TO 2 OTHER POSTS) IS DUE BY 11:59
PM ON THE WEDNESDAY OF WEEK 2 OF THE COURSE: 12/08/2021.
Week 2, part 1: PLEASURE, and LIBERTY
JOHNSTUARTMILL
UTILITARIANISM
GREATESTT.
JUSTIFIEDHAPPINESS
UTILITARIANRESULTS BY
OUTCOME GOOD BENTHAM
ENDS
CONSEQUENTIALISM
ETHICS
MEANS
In this module we will acquaint ourselves with Jeremy Bentham, John Stuart Mill and
UTILITARIANISM.
BENTHAM
Read Mill Chapter 1, “General Remarks” and Chapter II, “What Utilitarianism Is” (153-185)
Read Horner Chapter 2, “Pleasure” (31-42), paying special attention to these concepts:
.
The best state of affairs (33)
The public interest (33)
• The end justifying the means (34)
Moral panic (37)
These ideas can all be PROBLEMATIZED (in other words, regarded as problems requiring solutions, or
as concepts with inherent flaws).
Choose one of these ideas, and deconstruct it. Think about its intrinsic problems. Write at least one
developed paragraph on it, and post it to DISCUSSION 3: BENTHAM. Then respond to 2 other
posts.
THIS DISCUSSION (YOUR POST AND YOUR RESPONSES TO 2 OTHER POSTS) IS DUE BY 11:59
PM ON THE WEDNESDAY OF WEEK 2 OF THE COURSE: 12/08/2021.
This video might be helpful in clarifying Bentham’s utilitarianism. Take special note of the difference
between Act Utilitarianism and Rule Utilitarianism. The speaker refers to Immanuel Kant–we’ll get to
him later in the course.
“Utilitarianism: Crash Course Philosophy #36” Crash Course
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-a739VjqdSi
MILL
Read Mill, Chapter III “Of the Ultimate Sanction of the Principle of Utility” (187-196)
Read Horner Chapter 3 “Markets” (49-66)
Pay special attention to these concepts:
.
.
The Rational Spectator [Audience] Fallacy (56)
The Neutral Media Fallacy (57)
Higher and lower pleasures (58-61)
.
You might find this video helpful. It compares Mill with Bentham, and focuses on the higher and lower
pleasures:
“Utilitarianism-John Stuart Mill” Then and Now
And if you want to go a little deeper, check out this thoughtful problematization of Utilitarianism,
which the speaker calls “first and foremost a standard for what makes actions right, not a procedure
to apply to every action.” Note the concept of Agent Neutrality. Virtue Ethics are mentioned–we’ll get
there when we think about digital ethics.
“Consequentialism and Utilitarianism in a Nutshell” Philosophy in a Nutshell
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-e6vdkosGk
Read Mill, Chapter IV “Of What Sort of Proof…” and Chapter V “On the Connection Between Justice
and Utility” (197-236)
Read Horner Chapter 4, “Liberty” (67-83), paying particular attention to the following:
The Importance of the Liberty Principle (74-75)
The “fallibility assumption” (77)
The “partial truths assumption” (77)
The “requirement for testing assumption” (78)
The need for active belief (78)
.
This is an appropriate time for us to renew (or establish) our acquaintance with the FIRST
AMENDMENT, which is essential to our practical understanding of freedom of expression. Watch this
quick introduction for some historical context:
Floyd Abrams, “The First Amendment in Five Minutes” Big Think
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9Cm50cVXkU
Read Baran, “Media Freedom, Regulation, and Ethics” [COURSE RESERVES]
Baran provides a clear overview of the First Amendment and its abridgments. You’ll be struck, I’m
sure, by the fact that these abridgments were framed long before the invention of the internet. We’ll
address internet freedom and regulation when we discuss digital ethics (we’ll think about concepts
like the “policy vacuum” and the “conceptual muddle”), but for now it’s simply worth noticing that
brand new ethical issues are raised by the existence of the internet.
Also–and this is important–Baran arrives at the SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY THEORY. Pay close
attention to it. It connects not only with the First Amendment, but also with David Puttnam’s concept
of a duty of care, and with Mill’s concept of freedom of expression.
Consider 4.5 A JUDGEMENT CALL (Horner 79). Post your opinion to DISCUSSION 4: Liberty,
supported by the content of this chapter and whatever other research you think is required. Write at
least one thoughtfully developed paragraph. Respond to at least two other posts.
THIS DISCUSSION (YOUR POST AND YOUR RESPONSES TO 2 OTHER POSTS) IS DUE BY 11:59
PM ON THE FRIDAY OF WEEK 2 OF THE COURSE: 12/10/2021.
Liberty Discussion Kaitlyn P.
☆ Subscribe
Kaitlyn Piotroski posted Dec 7, 2021 10:05 PM
Something that is deeply prevalent in today’s society is the discussion about
where freedom of speech ends and government censorship begins. In the 4.5
example A Judgment Call, Horner begs the question whether or not it is moral to
restrict publications of climate change skeptics. I believe in order to maintain
freedom of speech, we should not restrict the publication of skeptics because
there is no productive argument that doesn’t have an opposing side, but also while
there needs to be opposition, how can we guarantee the opposition is not simply
spreading lies? It is so hard in today’s media to know what is true and what is not.
You could be watching a clip of a court case, but the certain clip you are shown
could have been edited to aid one argument or taken out of context to support
another opinion. Unless you are there in the room there is no way to distinguish
what the truth is. I think either horn of Mill’s argument ends in catastrophe
because if it is true, we have doomed our world, while on the other hand if it isn’t
we have spent so much time and money focused on one problem when we have a
dozen other problems that could also use attention. Whether or not there is
suppression, there is no guarantee we will be receiving the truth from either side.
At the root, everyone should be allowed to share their opinion and without
becoming the extremely censored option, we are stuck in a middle ground of
wading through endless information from endless sources, which is simply the
nature of the internet.
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
