shivam’s blog

Human life ethic feminists promote strategies that concentrate on women’s needs, perspectives and the pursuit of social equity between men and women. Emphasis is placed on: personal relationships, suspicion of moral principles, rejection of impartiality, greater respect for emotions. I definitely believe that there are situations where it is important to be impartial. From the surface, looking down at people you don’t know, it seems easier to be impartial. I haven’t had an intimate friendship with people like shop clerks the same way I have with my peers. And in some cases, even with my friends, I treat them impartially. My different moral standards will come into play in order to separate people on different occasions. Just the other day, I purchased a grocery store from Safeway, and when I was checking out a guy next to me, I dropped a salsa that exploded on the road to where I had to go. The bagger, a girl ~19 years old, says, “I’m not on a mop job.” With that simple statement and sound, my feeling a little bad for her went away absolutely. Another bagger from the next lane, around the same age, ran over and dropped paper towels all over the mess. I confess I’ve been feeling bad for her for a second since Safeway was busy, so now she’s got to take the time to clean up a big mess by no fault of her own, coupled with the burden of sitting in front of the crowd watching her clean it up. No, I wasn’t going to help her clean it up, it was her job to do that. It’s part of the work she’s being paid for. However, I think many of us are now going to say that this society has come to let / make people deal with problems on their own. If, for example, the exact thing occurred to my girlfriend at home and she spilled salsa all over her house, I ‘d be able to rescue her because I was concerned with her. I think enough for her to pause and help with what I’m doing. The same thing happens when I’m at work. When it happens to my boss / coworker then it’s up to them to clear it up themselves so that’s the same thing for me. The same way the lady working in the register did not help the bagger. I agree that being neutral often helps you understand what you have when people are supporting you or going out of their way. However, if something out of the ordinary happens to say that someone is attacking a bagger or that my coworker is impartial, he should be out of the window. It’s so far out of the realm of work that someone needs to step in. I believe the “rejection of impartiality” and the manner in which it is related to the unjust treatment of all individuals is highly significant. Not everyone is the same, even in the most impartial terms. I’m not going to handle my partner the same way as a shop clerk. At the same time, I wouldn’t be treating my girlfriend outside of her own abilities. For example, I wouldn’t ask her to help me lift something heavy, and instead ask my friend who is a lot stronger than her. 

Jared’s Ethics. 2020. Jared’s Ethics. [online] Available at: <https://jaredsethics.home.blog/&gt; [Accessed 10 July 2020].

Word Count: 555

Victor and Thomas grew up on the same property, so their father became really welcoming. While their partnership was not the strongest, they were both relatively similar to each other. They were both similar in age, and on the reservation they attended all the same schools. This closeness, owing to their closeness to each other, as well as their parents’ relations, was why Thomas decided to tag along with Victor and gather items from his fathers after his passing. Thomas’s parents were killed in a fire when he was a boy. Arnold, the victor of the dead father saved him from the fire. Later Victor found out that his father had created a fire in the first place. Then, upon finding this out from a stranger, Thomas tells him, “Do you realize why your dad’s always gone? “And Thomas replies,” Hey. He didn’t intend to do it, Thomas. Personally , I believe that the victor silently told Thomas that his father had caused a fire. While I watched the video, I tried to pay careful attention to everyone’s facial expressions to infer how their relationships were related. As Victor said that to Thomas, I realized he had meant it to him. The reaction of Victors seemed like a quietly suffering reaction. Then he left abruptly, as if he could not handle the response. Victor seemed sad, too. He undoubtedly thought it was a social obligation to warn Thomas that his father had committed this horrible act of mistake. Unlike Kant ‘s philosophy of responsibility, there was an unspeakable rule (a religious norm, perhaps) in their society that prompted him to do what he said because he understood what his father had accomplished. This moment reveals how attached they are to their friendship. I can see that they are in love, as if they were a family. Anything that is likely to have been historically breaded in every adult in their limited reservation group. Victor loves a friend like his brother. Even if he doesn’t say these terms, you can sense the emotional connection and affection in the film. Victor has a good understanding of the suffering involved with the fact of what his father has achieved. He was afraid that their long-standing relationship would be lost forever. Victor ‘s father had always seemed to be the savior that had rescued Thomas ‘life, and the victor and Thomas’ friendship always revolved around this savior who had done a wonderful deal. Now he knows that this caring energy that ties him to Thomas is gone. I think Aristotle would categorize their friendship as a pleasure-based friendship because it made them feel good that Victor ‘s father saved Thomas ‘s life. While life was rough on the reservation, and every person lost everyone important to them throughout their lifetimes, realizing that the heroes of the universe were what held them safe. That’s why it was painful for Victor that his father had ignited the fire all the time. What I like most about this film is how much feeling that was conveyed in body language was not recorded in words. There were so many factors in this film that led to my belief in the previous comment made at the end of this film. It is also interesting to remember how close someone is going to have been to the reservation. There’s a really tiny reserve, it’s almost difficult not to meet anyone, even though all families aren’t that similar. Another indication of the unspeakable dialogue that took place in this film by body language was the scene in question, where Thomas posed a question and Victor offered him a reaction informing Thomas that his father’s acts were an accident. Thomas expressed interest, and instead of offering Thomas a right response, Victor answered with anger, not explaining why his father had left, but instead protecting his family. It has given way to a lot of emotion that you can see in any role in the film. 

Course Hero. 2020. Nicomachean Ethics Book 9 Summary | Course Hero. [online] Available at: <https://www.coursehero.com/lit/Nicomachean-Ethics/book-9-summary/&gt; [Accessed 10 July 2020].

Word Count: 662

Aristotle speaks of friendship, saying, “For without friends, no one would choose to live, even though he had all the other goods,” a strong statement. Aristotle discusses the importance of friends and friendship; providing one inspiration, comfort in times of need, assistance, to help direct oneself by advice. That friendship is so important that it is not only isolated to humans, but also spread across other species. He even goes so far as to say that if everyone were friends, justice would not be necessary because people would still treat each other right. Aristotle believes that friendship is a relationship created by affection, and argues that friendship does not apply to items such as artifacts, since one can not wish the entity good, because affection is not reciprocal. To make friendship, Aristotle maintains that it must be “mutually recognized as a goodwill bearer and a good wish to one another.” The three types of friendships are those of pleasure, utility and virtue. Those out of utility are friendships born out of a form of greed. People want something from each other, and they’re going to set up a front. There seems to be less friendship and more courtesy or partnership. Those of pleasure are similar to those of utilities simply because pleasure is similar to utilities, and they both want something from the other. And finally, those of virtue make a “Perfect friendship” because it is between those who do good and have a similar mind, and thus become friends because of their common nature. I do agree that these are three types of “friendships,” but I wouldn’t go as far as calling them all friendships as false friendships, more like partners (non-romantic) or acquaintances. I am aware of such friendships in life, but rarely do I see mutual friendships of pleasure or mutual friendships of usefulness. One such example of friendship of utility is something that was common to me growing up: I, after doing my homework at elementary school, would be interested, and my peers would woo me with the prospect of friendship, take what they needed, and just leave. This follows very closely with Aristotle ‘s description of the wicked nature of utility friendships, but not of the mutual aspects. I needed fellowship on the basis of honesty, they chose one of usefulness. I think, however, that there are situations where I’m seeking to create friends of use about how long they last. One such example is when I play a multiplayer video game, and I make a friend who plays the same game, but friendship ends when the game is over. In essence, we ‘re using each other for how long our alliance can last in the game. On the other hand, I was not personally in friendship for pleasure, although I knew quite a few people who were. Hormone-fueled teenage boys go out to collect women as partners like trophies simply for the physical conquest of sex and drop them just as quickly as they’ve acquired them. I have never connected with these men to a great degree, but their chilling brag will never go unheard of. Speaking about friends about goodness, several of my friends (if not all of them) fell into this group. Though our points of view might not always be identical, we appreciate each other’s company and conversation and can usually depend on each other (apart from this, a great deal of happiness and enjoyment and our relations are the very conversations whether or not our viewpoints are opposite or similar). It seems that the views of the people in friendship are less, but the personality of the people and how easily they mesh and work together. 

marlenesolano22. 2020. Nicomachean Ethics, Book VIII , By:Aristotle. [online] Available at: <https://marlenesolano22.wordpress.com/2012/04/02/ethics-of-aristotle/&gt; [Accessed 10 July 2020].

Word Count: 616

Someone who is not like his rational brothers is an incontinent guy who completely reacts with out the thought of choice to his voluntary reactions and movement. a person who is shocked via any other man’s fist responds willingly but not without option through throwing a finger returned at his opponent. ‘urge for food and anger aren’t commonplace to irrational animals, too. The incontinent man once more acts with urge for food however now not with desire; the continent guy acts with alternative, however no longer urge for food. again, starvation is towards desire but no longer greed. once more, desire relates neither to what is awful nor to what’s painful, nor to what is a laugh. Aristotle says that the most vital beings and babies react completely to voluntary, incontinent human being’s (compulsion / instinct) appetite. but, the rational guy or guy of the continent is a person who possesses the strength of desire no longer dictated by way of his personal dreams or appetites. a man of outstanding weight may have his power of choice constantly checked, desiring to shed pounds. An overweight guy will understand the preference and/or appetite to devour fatty meals, but because he is a “rational” creature, he knows he is most effective going to damage him and make him unwell. All alternatives are voluntary however now not all choices are voluntary. He then discusses indifference, and how it performs a component in human being’s behavior judgment. accordingly, a person who commits in exercise with out knowing what’s to come back isn’t always one guilty or to reward. it’s far but critical to differentiate between what comes from lack of knowledge and what comes from being in lack of knowledge. Being in lack of understanding may be located in his case as a case of the intoxicated utilization of Aristotle. “a man who’s intoxicated (assuming he voluntarily drank himself) isn’t always as innocent or unblameable as a man who knows some thing reasons anything / outcomes something by chance and unknowingly.” a person who desires to get intoxicated is aware that he might be in lack of knowledge and consequently should make a planned desire to become unaware, a situation that could result in unintended damage or income. but, a under the influence of alcohol guy is simplest in part accountable, regardless of being voluntarily inebriated and as a result ignorant, his lack of knowledge in his drunken state nonetheless presentations an element of lack of understanding that is not one hundred percent in charge, although voluntary. according to Aristotle, the best ones guilty are individuals who make choices with whole understanding about the cease result. it is those who have to be worth of blame or reward whilst making decisions and selections. I agree with the important thing points of Aristotle approximately push aside, but I need to outline a question approximately how a lot we’ve got the energy to pick in our choices typically approximately knowledgeable assumptions. He says that after we’re capable of make an cease, we are absolutely responsible for our selections. observe to join your dream university, for example. The choice and preference of look at is voluntary and rational, however what we’ve the electricity to pick out when all that we can remember is the cause we have in thoughts and all its assumptions. do not forget that I’ve selected to look at and I’ve studied at my favored college, but i have the worst enjoy of my life once I come due to a lot of harassment. I first taken into consideration registering as a university student as it had best qualifications, splendid evaluations and a great program for my most important. I think I’d have the time of my existence while going to university, however actually I experienced the other manner round. it could be said that I did not understand what befell due to the fact I had not finished a tour on campus, but the trouble is going on. but, think I retain my studies at such universities, and after experiencing such problems and conflict I’m a miles praised strong character acquainted with the art of perseverance. I suppose that is the ‘failure’ preference because of my lack of understanding. My factor is that at the same time as Aristotle says that I’m one hundred% in price of you decide, I do now not suppose we’re uncertain within the destiny to any degree. In formative years, we choose the only we consider to be helpful with out realizing what is absolutely up to us while you make a choice between ingesting a blue candy or the crimson one.

Classics.mit.edu. 2020. The Internet Classics Archive | Nicomachean Ethics By Aristotle. [online] Available at: <http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/nicomachaen.3.iii.html&gt; [Accessed 10 July 2020].

Word Count: 774

Open borders better for the overall population, open borders might sooner put an quit to poverty with accelerated manufacturing / greater jobs and then 300, for example, 5,000 more people. a few calculations are made if the border ever opens, and the result is a proper search on every facet of the border, for poor humans and rich people. There had been regular objections to the route, including to forget every person else and first of all to suppose that the united states will surrender technological improvements if we’ve open frontiers, and immigration will convey issues from the sector. some of those statements may additionally sound dull and remote from the top, however something more humans think about. a number of them can be calculated even in reality.

Open Borders: The Case. 2020. Utilitarian Case For Open Borders. [online] Available at: <https://openborders.info/utilitarian/&gt; [Accessed 10 July 2020].

Words 123

There are various approaches of detecting Kantianism and utilitarianism if an motion we make is accurate or wrong. in step with Kant, we ought to study the unique action’s maxims or intentions. “guy’s existence is valuable due to the fact people endure rational existence” believes Kantians. this is, humans are healthful, moral individuals willing to act themselves and not completely for different human’s entertainment or satisfaction. Utilitarian believe alternatively that we need to do matters which convey the finest satisfaction. however, the problem is that humans may be used as mere way and sacrifice lives for the more top. on this appreciate, the author Christopher Bennett states that Utilitarian justify the punishment of an harmless birthday celebration “if a good enough impact is essential.” promises, usually binding in our lifestyle, may also be violated if a commonplace gain arises from it. this could make bigger to any pledge, such as the ones given to loved ones. Utilitarianism entails now and again sacrificing someone’s happiness or existence to promote the best stage of happiness and misery. In Kantian ethics it’s far easier to determine an movement than in utilitarian ethics. while the records is scarce, Kantian principle affords higher accuracy than utilitarianism due to the fact it’s also set up whether or not someone is used certainly as a means, despite the fact that the impact on human happiness is ambiguous. The Kantians ‘see simplest the proposed measures and confirm that those proposals do not use something else as in basic terms mere manner.’ Utilitarianism, through contrast, compares all to be had actions and sees the best effects. while utilitarianism is extra enormous than Kantianism, it’s miles a faster method. The manner of calculation of the capability fees and advantages of an intervention takes a wonderful deal of energy and lets in less room to sell the aim of the realistic.

O’Neill, Onora. “A Simplified Account of Kant’s Ethics.” 411-415. Blackboard. Web. 19 Oct. 2014.

Words 310

“The creed which accepts as the muse of morals, utility, or the best Happiness precept, holds that moves are proper in share as they have a tendency to promote happiness, incorrect as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.” This quote through Mill proves that he condones happiness and strives for it. “And this perverted use inside the simplest one in which the phrase is popularly acknowledged, and the only from which the new generation are obtaining their sole belief of its meaning.” mills is saying that there are tons of writers who respect and cost the that means of the word satisfaction, however today’s children take it as a bad word. turbines states,” potential for the nobler emotions is in maximum natures a completely gentle plant, without problems killed, not most effective by way of antagonistic influences, but through mere need of sustenance; and in the general public of young individuals it promptly dies away if the occupations to which their position in life has devoted them, and the society into which it has thrown them, are not beneficial to maintaining that higher ability in exercise.” turbines is announcing that human beings can’t continually control what happens in life and that existence takes away pride and happiness. I don’t absolutely trust this because I feel that you make your very own direction. you are making your personal happiness. life isn’t easy and things get hard, however in case you push beyond all of the sad moments, there might be happiness. Your situation or lifestyles won’t be ideal but you have to consider others who are way much less fortunate than you, which need to be an amazing cause to be happy. Be happy for what existence has given you, for what freedoms your u . s . a . has fought for, and for the humans that care about you. I suppose society places themselves to a lower pride due to the pressures of society places on people to in which they don’t feel like they’re good enough or that they don’t need to be happy. everyone deserves to be glad and to push themselves to their happiness stage.

Heena’s Thoughts. 2020. J. S. Mill: Utilitarianism, II. [online] Available at: <https://heenastanekzay.wordpress.com/2020/02/22/j-s-mill-utilitarianism-ii/&gt; [Accessed 10 July 2020].

Words 361

Ruth Benedict ‘s criticism of ethical relativism calls for legal relativism, as the description suggests. This is our idea of social well-being and social health. We live in a society which accepts our times’ standardized morals, Benedict says. However, we do not have the power to judge the moral or ethics of a culture in this sphere. Ruth ethical relativism has demonstrated that actions that are not appropriate and healthy in some we find to be evil in our culture. And behaviors in some cultures that are considered bad can be good behavior. What is good or evil in the bulk of culture decides the value of behavior. Therefore, because different cultures have different moral standards , different ideas of goodness and evil, we can not say that there is one moral code which applies to everyone. Benedict argues, “Like a work of art, a culture chooses which theme from its repertoire of basic tendencies to emphasize and then produces a grand design, favoring those tendencies” (Benedict, pg. 1). Primitive societies or communities that are largely disconnected from the modern environment have various normative beliefs, depending on the issues determined by the majority as good or evil. What is right for a organization is what is implemented. It just does not mean that we have a choice “as we reside in the simplified normative area”. One evidence she offers to justify her point is that she speaks about the Kwakiutl community who is accustomed to killing another human when a loved one dies. It is not out of spite even if anyone suffers, be it death to an opponent or disease. That is not out of retribution. It’s done to wipe away a loved one ‘s death by another’s death. It is perceived to be completely unethical to us. According to Benedict ‘s philosophy, however, if he resided in the Kwakiutl community, the individual in our society who behaved in this way was not to breach moral codes. If Benedict’s defense of ethical relativism is correct, then you can’t defend her against the consequence of the majority favoring capitol punishment and being against abortion, making abortions wrong and capital punishment right. It states that in some cultures what is ‘healthy’ is determined by public culture, violence, murder and slavery, so that we should find ‘good.’ This is why I find ethical relativism to be risky. Benedict can not be protected from abortion that is perceived to be evil and death penalty to be fine. Due to its definition of ethical relativism, any social characteristic, that I find very dangerous, can be good or bad. Rape, slavery and killing will always be bad regardless of the culture. I also have a problem with the idea of majority voting on the moral and immoral. What if the land is a patriarchate, and there is no true voice in determining what is right and wrong for those affected by certain morals? I know that not all women undergo this procedure in the practice of female mutilation. Can they express their genuine convictions? Or are you afraid to be ostracized or repressed for the fact that your mouth is shut? But, because it is mostly influenced by ethical relativism, then it is right. I agree that ethical relativism may not be a systematic or rational solution when it comes to assessing morality, since injustice and the misuse of power can disproportionately influence what the masses consider as good or evil. I think of two relatives who believe very differently in their gender roles than I am when I think of my own lives and where ethical relativism applies. I think that for me, couples need to share household responsibilities and the notion of ‘the house owner’ is patriarchal and need not to occur. The other thing is my aunt and uncle. They are really kind people, who work hard and love each other very much. First, they ‘re very kind people. Both are Christian fundamentalists who also share in the principle that the guy is in control while a woman is submitting to her lord. We are Christian fundamentalist. It was because we have a common background and values that I found that I needed to stop criticizing them. I realized that I was not able to judge their culture or give a moral assessment, because I am not a member of this culture and they both seem genuinely happy about their own lives, because of ethical relativism. And I think it’s oppressive for women, however my aunt prefers because she insists that it’s true. I’ll never chose that route. All I can do is respect them and enjoy them.

luisamariahernandez. 2020. A Defense Of Ethical Relativism By Ruth Benedict. [online] Available at: <https://luisamariahernandez.wordpress.com/2011/09/14/a-defense-of-ethical-relativism-by-ruth-benedict/&gt; [Accessed 10 July 2020].

Words 771

In keeping with Mill, utilitarianism or the best Happiness principle says “on which this theory of morality is grounded-namely that delight, and freedom from pain, are the most effective matters acceptable as ends And that some thing applicable (several inside the utilitarian method as in every other framework) is both desirable for its very own entertainment, for the sake of stimulation of happiness and for the reason of deprivation of suffering “(Mill, paragraph 3).He believes that what’s appropriate is the least pain and the best pride feasible and that that is the essential principle of ethical values. the moral is that which promotes trendy happiness, and the immoral is that which fails to inspire happiness or satisfaction. In his terms, utilitarianism contributes to the proper path, as it encourages delight, that is false because it actions inside the contrary course to supply happiness. because of happiness is delight, and shortage of ache; due to disappointment, pain and satisfaction.(Mill, para three). The purpose Mill says utilitarianism must be taken into consideration proper is because through residing in line with this ethical preferred, the purpose and final results is the finest possible happiness of all: “utilitarianism, the give up of human motion, is unavoidably also the usual of morality; thus the rules and precepts for human behavior may be described, by means of looking at which life because it has been defined. A utilitarian does what’s proper in the long run or what’s convenient, thereby raising general pleasure, despite the fact that his very own satisfaction can be impaired a touch or his pleasure won’t be immediately. Mill argues that nobility of character is an inevitable final results or requirement for you to act in step with the utilitarian fashionable. “Utilitarianism, consequently, ought to best achieve its quit via the overall cultivation of nobleness of individual, even if each man or woman were best benefited with the aid of the nobleness of others, and his very own, so far as happiness is worried, were a sheer deduction from the advantage” (Mill, para 12). Do I assist Mill ‘s evaluation? sure , it really is right. There appears to be a legitimate justification for the population not to have recourse to “superior pleasures.” but I think it wrong if the pleasures range. thru me, dominance is sounding “simple pleasures.” as opposed to “simple pleasures” I consider mental rewards is probably used to make matters look simpler and bad. I do not consider one is higher or worse than the alternative. both fitness and intellectual leisure are widespread. Utilitarianism has a tendency to live up towards a clear ethical precept. I believe the simple term The finest precept of Bliss, where the ultimate goal is the greatest amount of bliss, and this refers back to the group’s best happiness, now not simply the man or woman. I agree that the nobility of man or woman I consider to be a utilitarian is an essential detail. Egoism prevails with out moral norms along with utilitarianism.

Heena’s Thoughts. 2020. J. S. Mill: Utilitarianism, I. [online] Available at: <https://heenastanekzay.wordpress.com/2020/02/16/loretta-m-kopelman-female-circumcision-genital-mutilation-and-ethical-relativism/&gt; [Accessed 10 July 2020].

Words 500

This post is concerning North Africa and South Arabia genital mutilation. Women since their childhood go on a variety of operations to remove labia majora, lips minora, clitoral hood, and even clitoris, mainly from puberty! That’s just nuts, but due to cultural values they continue to do so. This is a very painful procedure for girls, because during the surgery they use no anesthesia. The women are vulnerable to illness, kidney loss, kysts, and menstrual irregularities following surgery. Some people believe that it is also necessary to improve health and well-being, which totally contradicts the way that the procedure is performed. While they suffer such abuse (from my point of view), their values are overwhelming. Cultural relativism is called this.Cultural relativism is “an act that is right if a person’s culture is approved and wrong if disapproved” (Pg. 5,2). Social scientists try to find out how powerful and hard to comprehend cultural relativism is. However, there are two ways of understanding relativism, one being relativism and one being relativism in terms of ethics. Descriptive relativism “is the opinion that people from various cultures act differently and have separate standards (pg 5.1). ” Whereas ethical relativism is the controversial position that “An action is right if it is approved in a persons culture and wrong if it is disapproved (Pg 5.2).”It is questionable whether, because of their point of view of culture and traditions and as a rule, it is morally correct for them to continue this circumcision and genitally mutilation in women. In my view, the most healthy and painless way to do this is the morally correct way of living, in order to be moral correct in the practice of your religion or traditions. I do not accept that these approaches make cross-cultural conclusions realistic. It means preserving your body from illnesses, pain and stress to live a happy and fulfilling life. Science and technology have demonstrated that this is the best way to live in humans. Cross-cultural judgments are therefore overridden. If they are empirically and scientifically defensible, intercultural relativism may claim normative legitimacy. Those defending female circumcision/genital mutilation say that it promotes important cultural goods. “We share common needs, goals, and methods of reasoning and evaluation a world community with interests in promoting peoples health, happiness, empathy, and opportunities…desires to stop war, torture, pandemics, pollution, oppression, and injustice (Pg 15.2).” This should be the universal law by which everybody wants to live. It ensures the world’s greatest delight and peace. It only promotes oppressive unintentional practices that violate legitimate and universal human rights or values supported by the human community if they continue as they are. We should adopt common discovery, assessment and explaining methods.

Heena’s Thoughts. 2020. FEMALE CIRCUMCISION/GENITAL MUTILATION AND ETHICAL RELATIVISM. [online] Available at: https://heenastanekzay.wordpress.com/2020/02/11/491/ [Accessed 10 July 2020].

Word 448