Make 'em laugh? Easy. Make 'em think? Hard. Make 'em agree? Hardest.

Below are writings from this past semester. 

Casey Deans

Phil 2050 Ethics and Values Section 11

Utah Valley University

August 27, 2010

Plato, A. (2009). Cave. In M. Minch & C. Weigel (Eds), Living ethics: An introduction (pp. 17 - 21).           Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

The Return to the Cave or How I learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Shadow Play

            Plato's Cave seems to mean something different every time I read it. The first time I read it was my sophomore year of high school. Initially my reaction was that everyone built caves around themselves except me. While everyone else watched shadows I believed that I had unfettered myself through rebellion and was free. Freedom was the lack of control. The first time I read it I believed that the cave was the cave of ordered living or ritual. The path to escape the cave was hedonism and selfishness. This was an escape from the cave not ascension into the outside, or enlightenment. To escape the cave you had to disbelieve the shadow play or regular world.

            Now as I read it with a matured attitude I realize I was not fully grasping the concept of enlightenment. Although I realize that I have much to realize, I understand more of what this allegory means. The allegory starts with the people in the cave watching the shadow play oblivious to the outside world. This is all they know. I think this one time cave exodus is true for some but not for me. For me there are many caves and many exoduses. I do not feel repetition or futileness in this process but rather increasing intelligence and comprehension each time I go from the smaller cave to the larger cave. The fact that I recognize the need to always enlarge my cave, or my perception of the world is not frightening but hopeful. I am hopeful because I realize that progression is the only goal. Having no end is not sad but exciting. The part of the allegory where the person questions what he once thought was cool, the ability to interpret and predict the shadow play, used to convey the person's pride when I read it in the past. Now I realize that it contains longing, or a desire to regress. This is similar to the mixed pride sadness feeling I experience when I see young people. I am prideful that I am in a larger cave, or living a life with an open mind. I am also sad because I desire the comforts of ignorance, to be 10 years old again, content to pretend I am Batman for hours, or simply play a game of tag. Most importantly I realize that rebellion is sometimes the opposite of cave escape or enlightenment. When you rebel you are often not acting for yourself or walking in the sunlight but rather acting for your ignorant self or child self and staring into the sun causing damage to your eyes, or perception of the world. It is not to go back to being a child but to imagine your future self looking back at your present self with the sense of longing and appreciating the moment. You might have more caves to escape but you are only defeated when you sit down and enjoy the shadow play.

Casey Deans

Phil 2050-11

Utah Valley University

October 15, 2010

Aristotle (2009). Nichomachean ethics-Book VIII. In M. Minch & C. Weigel (Eds), Living   ethics:             An introduction (pp. 347-351). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

My Buddy and Me

            Aristotle seeks to understand friendship in his Nichomachean Ethics-Book VIII. Friendships come in different types and have different reasons. Women going out for a "girls night" at the movie theatre is a different type of friendship than men bonding on the battlefield. Men seeking romance with women often avoid being trapped in "the friend zone" while some women enjoy spending time with their male friends more than their girlfriends. Can wicked people have friendships? Yes, there is the friendship of a underling to his boss that changes from complimentary to dissentious. There is also the false friendship of a betrayer or deceiver. A new type of friendship occurs in our highly competitive but peaceful society, the "frienemy". A frienemy is either a duplicitous friend who feigns admiration only to seize a vulnerable moment and hurt their friend or an enemy whose conflicts over time are enjoyed, like two boxers hugging each other after the bout. The "object of love" must first be understood before we can further understand friendship. Three types of love are described. The first is irrelevant when talking about friendship because it is the love of lifeless objects. The slogan of McDonalds is "I'm lovin' it" but we are clearly not friends with McDonalds. "Chocolate lovers" is another example of love of lifeless objects. The other two love types have to do with well wishing and the recognition of well wishing. There is love or goodwill towards people who are unaware of the goodwill. The goodwill towards soldiers, movie stars, or Gandhi are examples of this one way goodwill. The third type is friendship and Aristotle concludes that "To be friends, then, they must be mutually recognized as bearing goodwill and wishing well to each other for one of the aforesaid reasons." Examples of this can be found in brotherly friendship and the friendships we  see between people of the same religion. As a youth most of the friendships we have are those that are pleasurable. The other person has a big TV or a shiny car and you enjoy these things in return for being the "funny" person or the person who is accepting. These friendships are built on the both parties gaining pleasure for themselves. Aristotle explains in too much detail something that Christ delivers much more simply when he said, "Love thy neighbor as thyself." This is the perfect friendship, when two people love each other as if the other was them. There was a toy doll that was very popular in the 1980's. This doll had a commercial jingle which summarizes Aristotle's view. The lyrics to the jingle were, "“My Buddy, My Buddy, Wherever I go, he goes. My Buddy, My Buddy, I’ll teach him everything that I know…My Buddy and me. Like to climb up a tree. My buddy and me. We're the best friends that could be. My Buddy, My Buddy. My Buddy and Meeeee!”

Casey Deans

Phil 2050 Ethics and Values Section 11

Utah Valley University

September 2, 2010

Aristotle (2009). The Object of Life. In M. Minch & C. Weigel (Eds), Living ethics: An        Introduction (pp. 113-121). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Playing with Matches

            Chemistry sets are often sold allowing children to experiment with basic chemicals. These sets from the 1950's contained dangerous chemicals like lithium and uranium. These sets in the past were often the cause of burns, fires, permanent scarring and smelly garages. Today children are given chemical sets that may or may not contain salt and baking soda. The reasoning behind making sets safer was not to make them more educational but to avoid the irreversible scars, burns, and loss of eyesight that plagued the earlier more dangerous sets. People conduct experiments with their happiness like junior chemists. Some people prefer the safe route, they get angry but never fight or they indulge in excess eating but never drugs and alcohol. Other people go to extremes indulging in everything all at once, testing which combination makes them the most happy. Those who play it safe are rewarded with comfort and blamelessness.  Everyone must waver from their original course or fly out of the nest in order to achieve happiness. A balance or mean must be found in the right amount emotion. Similar to chemical experiments these morality experiments can blow up in your face. People who experiment with morality often are scarred emotionally. These scars can be healed and contain lessons which aid the bearer in their quest for happiness. Like chemistry the science of happiness has been extensively researched since the beginning of time. Truly great pursuers of happiness do not start with creating a periodic table of elements or writing their own scripture, rather they use the knowledge of those who came before them. Parents, church leaders, teachers, philosophers, and others all thought similarly to us. Mankind always pursues happiness. Even though there is an extensive plan for happiness some choose not to follow it. They do not express the correct mean of bravery but show too much and become brazen and hard headed. These are those who wish to conduct their experiment their own way, indulging in things that might make them happy. Eventually, but not necessarily during their lifetime, all human beings receive the answer to what happiness is. Those who use the knowledge of the people who experimented with happiness before them have a head start. Those who play with salt and baking soda, or stretch the rules, are often left without the scars of those who play with lithium and nitro glycerin, or disregard the rules. These paths all have the same destination, happiness. As with chemistry experiments, moral experiments can cause damage. People pursue these results with varying degrees of risk and experimentation. How a person achieves happiness is not as important as the choice they make to pursue it at all.

Casey Deans

Phil 2050-11

Utah Valley University

December 4, 2010

Kant, I. (1784). An answer to the question: what is enlightenment?.            http://www.english.upenn.edu/

How to Achieve Enlightenment for Dummies

            Immanuel Kant states that, "Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed immaturity." Immaturity is the inability for a person to think on one's own. To have a thought that you believe in is maturity. Courage and ambition are the traits of a mature person while laziness and cowardice are the traits of a immature person. The age we live in is full of immature people. Technology has allowed us to live life without much use of understanding without guidance from another. Cooking is replaced by dining out. Music isn't the creation or evolution of sound but rather the mashing up and adulterating of sounds created in the past with the help of a sound board and computer. Dancing is not the expression of the body to this music but the following of steps, or instructions. We do not judge the dancer on how they made us feel but how they copied the moves. Movies are remade and remade causing the audience to label the majority of them formulaic. Formulas and step-by-step instructions are the blueprint to people's lives in the twenty first century. Why live life when I can rent the movie? Why learn for myself when the library contains an entire section of How to [insert something you do not have the courage to understand] for dummies.

          Kant warns that a person should not run away from immaturity and dive into the pool of popularity, breaking ones neck because of the pool's shallowness. Often times the shifting masses will be too quick to change for the sake of change. This popularity shift is seen in the celebrities we follow, the pseudo-spiritual trends, and the clothes we wear. The populace is now more than ever as Kant describes them, "pernicious is it to instill prejudices". Freedom, or in a free country like America, freedom from poverty causes this immaturity disease to fester and spread, often under the guise of elitism. We see the top few following the very top few and call it enlightenment. Before one should seek the cure Kant suggests making sure that you want a cure, or in other words, if you want enlightenment. Soldiers have little desire for enlightenment. "Thus it would be disastrous if an officer on duty who was given a command by his superior were to question the appropriateness or utility of the order. He must obey." This is very true but I feel Kant has misunderstood the concept of obedience in a military setting. There is a time and a place for enlightenment. One must be enlightened enough to understand his desire to serve and understand his willingness to sacrifice his freedom for the security of their nation. They must also realize that although they cannot act mature, or pursue enlightenment while being ordered they may be called, at a moment's notice, to take upon them the mantle of leadership which entails the maturity and necessity to strive for enlightenment. This turning on and off and on again of the enlightenment switch is what separates an order obeying warrior from an immature follower.  

            

Casey Deans

Phil 2050-11

Utah Valley University

November 16, 2010

Mencius (2009). Justice and Humanity. In M. Minch & C. Weigel (Eds), Living ethics: An        introduction (pp. 227-229). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

I Would Rather Die

            The Chinese philosopher Mencius developed the theory of moral sentiments. According to him there are four feelings which all men are born with. These four feelings are the feeling of distress at the suffering of others, the feeling of shame and disgrace, the feeling of deference to others, and the sense of right and wrong. These feelings are referred in Christianity as "The Light of Christ." Mencius uses the example of people feeling horror and distress when seeing a child about to fall into a well. Modern day examples of this would be the feelings of distress we all feel when we see an Amber alert notifying us of a child abduction. They can also be the feelings of joy we all feel when seeing young newborns or puppies or kittens. The joys of acceptance as opposed to rejection are innately felt when we see them. The feeling of shame we feel as we watch a television commercial requesting charity for a starving African child. The mere fact that children are not instructed to not kill one another yet they never seem to do it is an example of the natural sense of right and wrong. Mencius concludes that the "Gentleman" is the man who does not act like an animal. Men who are not just and humane devolve and become animal like. Men did not evolve from the animal but when they disregard what they are given the become animal like. All men possess a mind which is not concerned only with death and life. This does not exist in animals. A cat or dog would eat their favorite master if they had too. The cat and dog would not say, "I loved this person, I would rather die than eat them." The avoidance of death and the pursuit of life are the dominant goal of all living things besides humans. Human beings are able to choose other things to dominate their life goals besides survival.

            Humans are not survival based like animals. Humans are human based, or in other words they have a natural wiring to seek out and support humanity and justice. Chimpanzees eat other chimpanzees. They do not recognize themselves in the mirror. Science will tell you that the genetic difference is small but your feelings towards chimpanzees tell you that there is much more of a difference. This feeling is because we are human and they are animal. Humans are born with "The Light of Christ". This light is constantly contending with the darkness that is the carnal man. Mencius knew that the pursuit of moral living is greater than the carnal pursuit of living. Humans who sacrifice their lives for the good of their nation are pursuers of this moral living. Those individuals who assist others that need assistance i.e. feeding the homeless or habitats for humanity, are also showing the virtues that make life worth living. The refusal to be led by your genetic desires is the human spirit distinguishing itself from the other creatures. This is why it is good that we sometimes say, "I would rather die than do something against my will."

Casey Deans

Phil 2050-11

Utah Valley University

October 23, 2010

Nietzsche, F. (2009). Beyond good and evil. In M. Minch & C. Weigel (Eds), Living ethics: An        introduction (pp. 55-63). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Those Who Can't Do Teach

            The term "thinking out of the box" is used to describe creative thoughts that do not follow previous paths of thinking. Many philosophers think out of the box but it seems that Nietzsche is saying either "the box is irrelevant" and/or "you are the box and you are a square (meaning not cool). According to Nietzsche the philosophers who preceded him were inaccurate at best and moronic charlatans at worse. He describes them as making "a lot of virtuous noise when the problem of truthfulness is touched even remotely." These philosophers make a priori judgments, or judgments without experience. To Nietzsche this not only invalidates their claims but invalidates their pursuits. They have not only lost the foot race but they ran the wrong direction. Nietzsche seems unaware that he is also a runner in the race. The fact that he is a philosopher criticizing other philosophers for philosophizing gives the reader the same feeling a person who reads a critical review of their art feels which is "All you have is problems without solutions."

            Nietzsche is refreshing when he critiques Schopenhauer. Schopenhauer is "a pessimist, one who denies God and the world but comes to stop before morality-who affirms morality and plays the flute-the laede neminem morality-" Laede neminem is "hurt no one" Schopenhauer is a flute playing atheist who affirms a hurt-no-one morality. It is pleasing and humorous do read Nietzsche poke holes in this situation. In Nietzsche's opinion "life itself is essentially appropriation, injury, overpowering of what is alien and weaker; suppression, hardness, imposition of one's own forms, incorporation and at least, at its mildest, exploitation-". Nietzsche would have been a fan apocalyptic films like Mad Max, A Boy and His Dog, Escape for New York, and Waterworld. People become as Nietzsche describes along with an affinity for extreme hair styles and metal studded leather. Nietzsche would find he was low on the food chain in these post apocalypse societies. He never did or made anything besides ideas. He himself is aware of this "those who can't do teach" concept. He argues that "In the philosopher, conversely,[to the clockmaker/scientist] there is nothing whatever that is impersonal; and above all, his morality bears decided and decisive witness to who he is-". While enjoyable to some according to Nietzsche philosophy is the pursuit of those who allow us to witness their journey, a journey of self discovery not the discovery of truth. Whether or not he includes his own philosophy in this description is unclear as his critique is outward only.

            Nietzsche is the kid at school who talks about how lame everything is. You think he is funny and agree with him until you pity him. In this age of rapidly growing atheism Nietzsche is often the poster child for the disbelief in God. In my opinion this creates more problems than it offers solutions for the individual and society as a whole. Nietzsche is also the blogger who blogs on the negative qualities of social media. He seems unaware that he is uncovering a problem while contributing to it at the same time.

Casey Deans

Phil 2050 Ethics and Values Section 11

Utah Valley University

August 31, 2010

Plato, A. (2009). Euthyphro. In M. Minch & C. Weigel (Eds), Living ethics: An introduction (pp.   159 - 161). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Good Grief

            Plato's Euthyphro attempts to clarify God's relationship with goodness. Is goodness defined by God or is God defined by goodness? God is love or is God love? The human brain has large amounts of untapped potential. The phrase "you only use 10 percent of your brain" labels what I feel when I think about infinity and eternity. This question requires 11%, maybe even 12%. Frustration was my first emotional reaction while reading this. Determined not to throw this onto the "chicken and egg" pile of unsolved metaphysical mysteries I rolled it around my noggin. What is goodness? To the Greeks a "good time" would probably get them arrested today. There is pleasure in righteousness but also pleasure in unrighteousness. Which is "good"? Perhaps this is why the commandment from the Ten Commandments "Thou shalt not have any other Gods before me," has more to do with our monotheistic culture than the polytheistic culture of the past. Perhaps we never stop believing in God but rather start believing we are God. Often times my elementary response to the "chicken and egg" question is "Who cares, eggs are delicious, pass the ketchup?". Similarly I find myself responding with, "Either way, you have to do God's will or suffer his judgment." But this is unsatisfying and really only a 5% way of looking at the problem. Also, we do not know how much intent or understanding factors into our judgment, or in other words we might be denied favor during judgment because we lacked the true understanding of why we were righteous. No escape in sight we are forced to answer this tough question, my answer is that God does make the good good and commands us to follow moral rules of His creation and this means that only certain religious believers are moral. This conclusion explains my belief that God is mysterious. Mystery is not something that is akin to goodness. Some of God's commands are not obviously good, some are apparently bad, like death by un-parting seas. Is this unfair? Does this make humans feel like children whose parents say "Because I said so." Perhaps this feeling of unfairness gives more value to our obedience. If God simply commanded people to do good we would all be living it up Greco-Roman style, vomitoriums and all. Rather by having faith in God instead of goodness we show our devotion. However this means that the consequences of obedience are varied. When your God starts commanding you to blow up the infidels it is a bad thing. When God starts commanding you to feed the hungry it is a good thing. Our mortal minds can only seek to be given the answer and not be angry if the answer doesn't come while we are alive. We do however have to choose God/good over Devil/evil, regardless of which came first.

Casey Deans

Phil 2050 Ethics and Values Section 11

Utah Valley University

August 31, 2010

Plato (2009). The Republic-Book II. In M. Minch & C. Weigel (Eds), Living ethics: An        introduction (pp. 229-230). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

What Goes Around

            Justice League of America is a team of super heroes whose original members were Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Flash , Green Lantern, Aquaman, and Martian Manhunter.  Was this JLA intrinsically good and good for the result it brings? Wasn't Batman born out of the injustice of society? Can we follow the JLA's example of morality? Does the JLA have to changes it members to keep up with the ever changing face of villainy? The JLA was not intrinsically good but rather good because of the result it brings. Smashing someone into a building is not good in itself but the result of stopping a villain is good. Batman's knowledge of how to snap someone bones in two is not a good thing until you are tied up by the Joker facing unspeakable horrors. A society gone awry caused the deaths of Bruce Wayne's parents not his intrinsic goodness. We see this too often in the real world. The good are poor the unjust go unpunished. Dirty cops, crooked politicians, and wall street criminals are the examples of justice we see. We cannot look to the state to provide any examples of true justice only man's best attempt at justice. Perhaps this is why villains are getting nastier and tougher to defeat in the DC universe. We would be too ashamed at our pitiful attempts to create justice in our society if Batman wiped out crime and lived in contentment. We need to be able to see him struggle and sweat as we do, always fighting and clawing his way out of Gotham's seemingly endless grime of crime. Man cannot rely on society to produce examples of morality because society is man multiplied and man in his original state is immoral. In our world we build bigger and bigger institutions of "justice". Whether in the form of prisons or welfare institutions they are never enough. Is justice possible? In the DC universe yes, in our lifetimes no, but this does not mean that we cannot try. The results of trying are thus good whereas justice is always failing. Justice is not bad but imperfect. Due to this ever changing villainy we need to change justice. Society seems to be in favor of allowing immortality when it becomes the majority. This sliding scale is evident in prostitution laws. Prostitution was immoral and thus illegal until it became easier to legalize due to the majorities acceptance. We cannot allow morality to be dictated by the state either. Without the ability to be immoral we lose our free agency or intelligence. The only hope is finding a balance between the two extremes hence the scales of justice not the Justice League. 

Casey Deans

Phil 2050-11

Utah Valley University

October 16, 2010

Smith, A. (2009). The Wealth of Nations. In M. Minch & C. Weigel (Eds), Living ethics: An        introduction (pp. 468-469). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Born Every Minute

            Adam Smith's picture of a successful economy is one which self interest and competition create natural economic order which the government should not involve itself in. He describes that every person tries to make the most out of what he has by engaging in the economy. This engagement is motivated by self interest but also enhances the annual revenue of the society. People are motivated by the desire to have money which causes them to consume and engage in the economy, or buy and trade things. The emotion most of us have for money is need. We need food, shelter, and other life sustaining things. The other more sinister emotion is greed. Greed is the desire to have money for wants. These wants can be luxurious wants, for example a yacht or a jet ski. These wants can be to satisfy addictions like food, drugs, sex, etc. Power is a desire which can be easily bought by money. People who want luxury, power, class, etc. often forgo hard work, saving, and determination for the easier path: greed. The term "A sucker born every minute" would be more accurate rewritten as "A person turns into a sucker because of greed every minute." Bernie Madoff did lie and steal but he did so under the guise of greed. Madoff used the promises of "easy money" and "fast money" to swindle millions of dollars.

            In a global economic crisis like the current one people begin to question Smith's economic philosophy. History is a far better teacher in regards to economy. History shows us that when a government creates a communistic economy it ruins the country. The USSR was a communistic country along with Cuba. Both countries suffered terribly for the mirrored reasons free economies built on Smith's ideals thrive. In the communistic countries the motivation was misplaced into the hands of the elite and those in government. These greedy people did not play by their own rules which caused those who did play by the rules to lose every time. By placing the power or capacity for self motivation in the hands of everyone like in free markets we create an environment which increases in value. The problem that is occurring now is that in the free markets the speculators and high level bankers have sequestered the power. Their greed has caused them to seek the easiest and fastest paths to money. The play musical chairs with credit default swap derivatives. They use others greed and ignorance to orchestrate a elaborate shell game. This tourniquet of finance causes gangrene which eventually spreads to from the hands to the rest of the body. Amputation and replacement with artificial limbs is sadly the best the global economy can hope to achieve. The old banking ways will never return but we still must make sure that other sectors of economy are left open and free.