Lex’s Weblog

Contemporary Moral Problems
Book Review Chapter 1: Ethical Theories:
Annette Baier: The Need for More Than Justice
Library Reference: N/A
Amazon:

Quote: “Justice is a social value of a great importance”
I choose this statement because this shows that the values shows what is the true meaning of justice that this is very important in every human being which need help and equality, this a re are social value which means that these are for all the people in the world which have value and have the rights to obtain justice for life.
Learning Expectation:
• I want to know who the author of the book is.
• I want to know what the meaning of Need for more than justice is.
• I want to know the different law.
• If this justice are applicable in my life.
Review:
To start the review let start with brief introduction about the author of the book, she is Annette Baier, She Teach philosophy at the University of Pittsburgh, she is the author of different book like Progress of Sentiments Moral Prejudice, she distinguish the justice perpective of kant and Rawls.
To start the Review this is the last Topic of chapter 1 book of Ethical Theories. In this chapter this will show the view of Baier which is the need for more than justice which means that there’s another principle in justice that is need by the people who are connected to the liberty of life, this will show how the people get the right justice, justice as a whole and a great importance of life.
What I’ve learned:
• I learned what is Justice
• I learned who is the author
• I learned that his is applicable in the people now in our country.

Questions:
1. Justice is equal?
2. What is justice?
3. We need Justice or quality?
4. All philosophers will agree on this view?
5. Who is the author of the book?
Citation: (James E. White, St. Cloud State University, 2003)

Contemporary Moral Problems
Book Review Chapter 1: Ethical Theories:
John Rawls: A Theory of Justice
Library Reference: N/A
Amazon:

Quote: “in working out the conception of justice as fairness one main task clearly is to determine which principles of justice would be chosen in the original position.”
I think this statement shows that the working in justice is need to become fair and in order to become successful they must know what are the main beliefs of justice in order for them to gain what is the original position of the justice and to clearly analyze what is happening to the community.
Learning Expectation:
• I want to know who the author of the book is.
• I want to know what is Theory of justice
• I want to gain more knowledge about theory of justice that is applicable in my own life.
• I want to know if these are effective to the people who are reading the chapter.
• I want to adopt all the theories which are indicated on this book.
Review:
To start the review let me first discuss the author of this chapter, a brief introduction of the authors profile, he is John Rawls he is a professor of philosophy at Harvard University, he make many book including the justice as fairness, a Restatement and the law of the peoples.
He believes that there are two principles of justice, the first is the equal basis liberties which means that all people are equal so that they will get exactly what are the freedom compatible to them, second is principle of concern this are the arrangement of social and economic inequalities
To start the review that book tackle the main idea of the theory of justice which shows the meaning of true justice on how they implement it and how the people get the equal justice give the people also. The second topic is the two principles of justice which I said in the second paragraph, all people has the equal rights and justice to get the most extensive liberty of being a human being

What I’ve learned:
• I learned who is the author of the book
• I learned what is the background of the author
• I learned what is the meaning of theory of justice
• I learned that this justice is related now in the present era.
Questions:
1. It is true that all people are treated equally with the right justice?
2. Do you think all the philosophers agree on what he says?
3. It is applicable to the people all over the world?
4. The principles and idea are effective to the country and to the people?
5. This principles exist nowadays in our present period
Citation: (James E. White, St. Cloud State University, 2003)

Review Questions:
What does Dworkin mean by right in the strong sense? What rights in this sense are protected by the U.S. Constitution?
According to the chapter all of us in the world, human being have the right to do their wants and the action they want to do. Because they have the right to do something, and the wrong part is interfering the people. These sense that protected by the U.S constitution is the equal in moral community, equal politics.
Distinguish between legal and moral right. Give some example of legal rights that are not moral right, and moral right that are not legal rights.
Legal right are the right which included in the constitution or in the related to the Government or Country, this will serve as a right for all the people under the same constitution while moral right is like a natural right of a person which does not part of constitutional meaning these are the natural thing that people might experience which involves that morality of a person.
What are the two models of how a government might define the rights of its citizens? Which does Dworkin find more attractive?
There are different model first is the model of balancing the public interest of all people in their personal interest and in the community. Second is the equality in the politics this shows that the government will give the equality in all people same freedom for all the more attractive model Is the second model.
According to Dworkin, what two important ideas are behind the institution or rights?
All the information included in the right case and this will produce the correct values if ideas. The government has the possibility to show that the ideas and values are secured.

Contemporary Moral Problems
Book Review Chapter 1: Ethical Theories:
Ronald Dworkin: Taking Rights Seriously
Library Reference: N/A
Amazon:

Quote: “The constitution fuses legal and moral issues, by making the validity of a law depend on the answer to complex moral problem.”
For my personal reaction on this statement why I choose this statement is basically this statement shows the combination of different issues which is legal and moral values that all of the rules are dependent by which the moral problems are involved. This will show that every law is valid if you have a answer on different thing which Is complicated like moral problem.
Learning Expectation:
• I want to know who is the author of the book
• I want to know what is Taking Rights Seriously
• I want to know if these are happening in the present day.
• I want to gain more knowledge about the ethical theories.
Review:
To start the discussion let me first discuss who is the author of the book to introduce that he is Ronal Dworkin, He is a professor of different university like Jurisprudence, Oxford University and New York University, he wrote different book like a bill of Rights for Britain, freedoms law, the moral reading of American constitution, sovereign virtue, the theory of practice and equality and taking rights seriously.
This review focus on different aspects like the rights of the citizens which show that are the different rights of the people within that community, if it is the citizen are involve on different situation like taking the rights of other people. It also discuss what is the rights and the right to break the law, this means that there is a certain limitation that you are able to break the law if you argue that you own opinion and you think you are doing right at the same time violating that law of the community. The next is the controversial rights this topic is showing what are the government rules that they need to fosses what are the need of different individual rights.

What I’ve learned:
• I learned who the author is and what his background is.
• I learned what is the meaning of Taking Rights Seriously
• I learned that the government must focus on the different individual rights
• I learned how the people react on the different rights by the government.
Questions:
1. It is compatible with our own culture?
2. How these theories affect the people in the world?
3. Do you think that all philosophers will go after the statement and rules?
4. What is the reason why the author wrote this book?
5. it is his own idea or he experience this?
Citation: (James E. White, St. Cloud State University, 2003)

Review Questions:
What does Dworkin mean by right in the strong sense? What rights in this sense are protected by the U.S. Constitution?
According to the chapter all of us in the world, human being have the right to do their wants and the action they want to do. Because they have the right to do something, and the wrong part is interfering the people. These sense that protected by the U.S constitution is the equal in moral community, equal politics.
Distinguish between legal and moral right. Give some example of legal rights that are not moral right, and moral right that are not legal rights.
Legal right are the right which included in the constitution or in the related to the Government or Country, this will serve as a right for all the people under the same constitution while moral right is like a natural right of a person which does not part of constitutional meaning these are the natural thing that people might experience which involves that morality of a person.
What are the two models of how a government might define the rights of its citizens? Which does Dworkin find more attractive?
There are different model first is the model of balancing the public interest of all people in their personal interest and in the community. Second is the equality in the politics this shows that the government will give the equality in all people same freedom for all the more attractive model Is the second model.
According to Dworkin, what two important ideas are behind the institution or rights?
All the information included in the right case and this will produce the correct values if ideas. The government has the possibility to show that the ideas and values are secured.

Contemporary Moral Problems
Book Review Chapter 1: Ethical Theories:
Joel Feinberg: The Nature and Value of Rights
Library Reference: N/A
Amazon:

Quote: “”Doctrine of the logical correlativity of rights and duties””
I choose this statement because I think this is like the doctrine of all duties that is involves the others people right and attitude. This will connect to the all rights that is involves on the others people duties. Meaning they are connected to each other with return they will get each other benefits because they are linked together this may result a better understanding on rights and duties for every people in the world that they think duties is not important thing.
Learning Expectation:
• I want to know who the author of the book is.
• I want to know what is the meaning of value rights
• I want to know what the connection of nature and rights is.
• If this theories are applicable in our present day.
• I want to know if this topic is related to the human behavior which gives a better understanding in life.
Review:
To start my review let discuss first a brief introduction about the author of the book. The author is Joel Feinberg he is a professor of philosophy at the University of Arizona. As a philosopher he make different book in philosophy including Doing and Deserving, Social Philosophy, the moral Limits of the criminal law and freedom and fulfillment.
He is a philosopher who wants to share and demonstrate that the rights are morally important to person. He has undergo in different scenario which he imagines that a world like people do not have rights. And the result of this is people who do not have rights are people who cannot make any moral claims. And deprive of self respect and human dignity.
To begin this chapter focus on how the doctrine of the logical correlativity rights and duties are connected, and this doctrine will explain and elaborate according to the connection of human duties for themselves.
What I’ve learned:
• I learned who is the author of the book
• I learned what is rights and its value
• I learned the connection of duties to the people with rights.
• That this study is happening now in present day.
• I learned that in order for you to have a great thing in life you should deserve on what you want.
Questions:
1. Is it good if you get special or valuable even if you don’t deserve it?
2. All around the people know what is the meaning of Value of rights?
3. Do you think majority of the community agree with on this topic?
4. Who is the author of the book?
5. What is the meaning of Value of Rights?
Citation: (James E. White, St. Cloud State University, 2003)

Review Question:
Describe Nowheresville. How is this world different from our world?
This is a beginning of the true send of duty to be more purpose and responsible for any action that we made, this is different because duties are allowable with any action as long you have the rights.
Explain the doctrine of the logical correlativity of right and duties. What is Feinberg’s position on this doctrine?
This are the doctrine that all duties are involve which require other people believes and rights. Other duties intend to show that we used action when they feel to do that action; this is like an extensive but lacking in originality usage.

How does Feinberg explain the concept of personal desert? How would personal desert work in Nowheresville?
This will work by giving the right decision to the people by giving them an exact amount of care and providing a rights to the community when a people deserves to have right.
Explain the notion of a sovereign right-monopoly. How would this work in Nowheresville according to Feinberg?
This will work because this is the right to control this is like controlling the right of other people so that this is not good to implement.
What are claim-rights? Why does Feinberg think they are morally important?
These are the different opinion of the people which is connected to the right of a person which intend to make a connection between the rights and the people who affected it is like a petition to have a correct and equal distribution of right.

Contemporary Moral Problems
Book Review Chapter 1: Ethical Theories:
Aristotle: Happiness and Virtue
Library Reference: N/A
Amazon:

Quote: “with the greatest sufferings and misfortunes, but a man who was living so no one would call happy unless he were maintaining a thesis at all cost”
For my personal reaction on this statement, it shows that everyone can be happy but not at all time because according to the statement he can be happy as long as there are maintaining a theory every time, so that being happy is not what you got all the things in you life but is like having a good idea and never lost this idea at all time this is according to the statement.
Learning Expectation:
• Who is the author of the book
• I want to know what the meaning of Happiness is.
• I want to know what the meaning of virtue is.
• I want to know if this theory is applicable in my personal life.
• I want to gain more knowledge in studying Ethical Theories.
Review:
To start the review let me first discuss who the author of the book is, he is Aristotle he is one of the famous philosopher in the world. He is famous in formulation of traditional logic he also argues that all human seek happiness in life which will be discuss in the book.
The book show that the happiness seeks by the people is real because they are happy in different way and angle which is true but the happiness they achieve is temporary. Happiness is one thing that is desirable. The book also covers those two kinds of virtue in life,
So in generalization this book talks about the theories of Aristotle and how the happiness and virtue connected to each other but in different meaning, and also which is good and why the two connected,

What I’ve learned:
• I learned who the author of the book is.
• I learned what the meaning of Happiness is.
• I learned what the meaning of Virtue is.
• I learned that there are two kind of virtue.
Questions:
1. Do you think happiness is real?
2. What is the Happiness of life?
3. Do you achieve the happiness with other people?
4. Do you think is this happening today?
5. Is it good to become happy while you are doing the wrong thing?
Citation: (James E. White, St. Cloud State University, 2003)

What is happiness, accoring to Aristotle? How is it related to virtue? How is it related to pleasure?
Happiness is like a food because it is for all the people in the world and for everyone. When we feel good for other and for ourselves this is happiness. For Aristotle happiness is within the human self, human virtue and those are the ethical and for personal viewpoint of every person.
How does Aristotle expain moral virtue?
Aristotle applies the moral virtue in a way that this is his habit so that this is every person his or her habit. Those habits are the trademark of every human being and this is serving as a character or attitude of a person. Aristotle sees the different virtue of the people that is the person attitude and what is or she rose. This is the thing where we believe and where we raised our personality.

Is it possible for everyone in our society to be happy, as Aristotle explains? If not, who cannot be happy?
Aristotle want every people in the society to be happy and he has a lot of reason why should this happen and what are the possibilities to make this happen. And for me I think every people in the society has a change to attain happiness in life, this is a free and when you achieve happiness and all people get happiness in life I think this is better to the community and society. Every person can have their happiness it a matter of time when he/she will be happy. For human being no one can decide that you are happy but you self only. Because happiness is not a tangible material but this is inside in the human nature.
Discussion Questions:
Aristotle characterizes a life of pleasure as a suitable for beasts. But what, if anything, is wrong with a life of pleasure?
Aristotle characterizes a life of pleasure as a suitable for beasts because we as a human being we wants pleasure in life, and for my personal side this pleasure is something that you will decide, so that we have our own mind to decide what is wrong. Different culture and religion practice their morality in life so for other thing are right and other are wrong. If you get the right pleasure in the right time you will achieve your happiness in life that is the true pleasure when you attain the happiness in life.
Aristotle claims that the philosopher will be happier than anyone else. Why is this? Do you agree or not?
Aristotle is trying to show us what his own perspective view of what is happiness is. We can apply this because everyone in the world has a change to become philosopher but in the end only yourself are the one who can said the you are happy or not because it is within human being as a circumstance of individual

Contemporary Moral Problems
Book Review Chapter 1: Ethical Theories:
Immanuel Kant: The Categorical Imperative
Library Reference: N/A
Amazon:

Quote: “It is impossible to conceive anything at all in the world, or even out of it, which can be taken as good without qualification, except a good will”
For my Personal reaction about this quotation there is a certain limitation of people that is with them because it is impossible to see and visualize that world because we are human being and we cannot see the future, you cannot take it as long you have the good will which is given by God.
Learning Expectation:
• I want to know what is Categorical imperative
• Who is the author of the book?
• I want to know what the relationship of this topic is for us.
• To gain more knowledge in different ethical theories
• To adopt this theories in the present era.
Review:
To start my Review, let me first discuss who the author of the book is, he is Immanuel Kant he is a German, and one of the most important philosophers of all time. He made significant contributions to all areas of philosophies, he wrote the book Critique of Pure Reason, Prolegomena to All Future Metaphysics. Kant Believes that our moral duty can be in one supreme rule, meaning this will become a good idea if all of the people gather their ideas and share it to other people.
This chapter Cover the good will and the duty of the person, which means that all the talents that you have has a purpose the intelligence, wit, judgment and all of the talents of mind will be elaborated so in generalization this chapter is all about Immanuel Kant Theories and his idea which helps the people to discover and analyze which is the best theories.

What I’ve learned:
• I learned who is the author of the book
• I learned what is the meaning of categorical Imperative
• I learned that the good will is important.
• I learned that Immanuel Kant is a Famous Philosopher which shares a great idea for all the people in the world.
• That this idea is very logical to understand.
Questions:
1. Who is the Author of The Foundation of the Metaphysics of Morals?
2. Immanuel Kant is the Best Philosopher?
3. What is Categorical Imperative?
4. Do you think that their ideas can affect our present situation?
5. Do you think all the people believe in their Ethical Theories?
Citation: (James E. White, St. Cloud State University, 2003)

Review Question:
Explain Kant’s account of the good will
Good will is the things that are possibility or chance to visualize in this world, sometimes goodwill produce good and bad because sometimes there is a possibility that you may affect other person or your own self.
Distinguish between hypothetical and categorical imperatives.
Categorical imperative is you will easily know what it contains, and this becomes the universal law of all. While the hypothetical is like a wild guess because you have no idea on what will happen.
State the first formulation of the categorical imperative (using the notion of a universe law), and explain how Kant uses this rule to derive some specific duties toward self and others.
This is just an opinion, this is his idea and what is the main purpose of the idea.
State the second version of the categorical imperative (using the language of means and ends). And explain it.
We set the community as a not balance settings we leave anxious whether the people who suffer is there. We shall be able to share to them what is the true meaning of imperative and what the theory means.

Contemporary Moral Problems
Book Review Chapter 1: Ethical Theories:
James Rachels: The Debate Over Utilitarianism
Library Reference: N/A
Amazon:

Quote: “What things are good? Is different form the question what action are right?”
In my personal opinion about this statement is as a utilitarianism point of view if you do the right action of your own or doing the right action, this are the ones that create the most good. That this two questions are connected to each other so that doing the right action is the better thing to implement in our own life because, it may produce a large amount of Excellency.
Learning Expectation:
• I want to know who the author of the topic is.
• I want to know what is the real meaning of Debate over Utilitarianism
• I want to gain more idea about this topic so that I can apply it now in our present day
• I want to know that if Utilitarianism suits the best ethical theory.
• To enhance my idea about utilitarianism
Review:
To start my review let have a brief introduction about the author of this book, he is James Rachel he presents the main objection to utilitarianism and the replies given by defenders of utilitarianism. This review is all about utilitarianism on how the happiness shows to become the only thing desirable. The book will discuss the theories of Classical Utilitarianism, there are three action in the books the first action are to be evaluate what is right or wrong, send is assessing the consequences of other people, the right action produce the equality to all. And the third is calculating the happiness or unhappiness that will be caused, this is like no one are happy which is counting by the other.
It also tackle that hedonistic or utilitarianism what are most effective in generalization this chapter focuses on the debate over the utilitarianism and different angle how they arrive with their different arguments,

What I’ve learned:
• I learned who the author of the book
• I learned what they want to tell us if this are effective and right
• I learned what is the meaning of Utilitarianism
• I learned that happiness is like a law which you must follow
• I learned not all people are not happy because they are hedonistic people.
Questions:
1. It is wrong to have happiness in life?
2. It is true that happiness is chain in rules?
3. Do you think all people are agreeing with this book?
4. What is happiness?
5. What is Hedonism?
Citation: (James E. White, St. Cloud State University, 2003)

Contemporary Moral Problems
Book Review Chapter 1: Ethical Theories:
John Stuart Mill: Utilitarianism
Library Reference: N/A
Amazon:

Quote: “According to the Greatest Happiness principle, the ultimate end with reference to and for the sake of which all other things desirable whether we are considering our own good or that of other people.”
For my personal reaction about the quotation is showing a happiness and helping other is a good idea, because this is a good essential of doing good, being happy is considering the sake of other people,
Learning Expectation:
• I want to learn what the meaning of Utilitarianism is.
• I want to know who the author of this chapter
• I want to learn what the viewpoint of the author is.
• I want to know what are the different principles in utilitarianism
Review:
To start my book review let start on the author of the book, he is John Stuart Mill he is one of the most important British philosopher. His most works in ethics are Liberty (1859) and Utilitarianism (1861)
And to begin the review the topic discuss the principle of happiness which in equality side, this topic shows that in order for you to become happy there is a certain approval this is the approval of all people, but it depends on the act of a person, and the example of this is stealing if you think you are happy in stealing other peoples money, and as a utilitarianism community legal aspect stealing is wrong so the majority wins,
What I’ve learned:
• I learned the meaning of utilitarianism
• I learned Who is the author and what is his story
• I also Learned Who are the people become happy
• I learn that Utilitarianism is the happiness of all people.

Questions:
1. Every people in the world are utilitarian?
2. What are effect of this in all philosopher did they get any benefits??
3. Utilitarianism is Correct?
4. Does Utilitarianism Country become wealthy?
5. It is happening today in our daily lives?
Citation: (James E. White, St. Cloud State University, 2003)

Review Question:
State and explain the principles of utility. Show how it could be used to justify actions that are conventionally viewed as wrong, such as lying and stealing.
A utility principle means that the idea of moral work is conducted by overall utility. This is a majority action of the people what they want their happiness, and other thing. Their choices are majority of other people even if they not agree; the majority of other people become the rule and this become as a general rule for all of the people. Other people and the majority of the people know and agree that stealing is prohibited so that this is not applicable for a person to do stealing even the person wants to do that.
How does Mill reply to the objection that Epicureanism is a doctrine worthy only of swine?
In the chapter it says that Mill that he don’t want to agree that the rule of Epicureanism is liable with the perfection in imagining of the different consequences from the other utilitarian people. Because doing that is like a insulating of all people in the community.
How does Mill distinguish between higher and lower pleasures?
It shows that higher pleasures are the thing or act that is some people can’t do that and can’t refuse to go along with because it is not easily to achieve while lower pleasure is the thing that is advantage to you and easy to achieve like taking care of others people life your own life.
According to Mill, whose happiness must be considered? T
he Happiness to consider is the happiness of all the people, because the utilitarianism is majority so that the first priority is the majority number of people. The good things that will make the people happy this is the best happiness for the people.
Carefully reconstruct Mill’s proof of the principle of utility
Base on my own perspective mills proof principle of utility if we have something to act or to show to the other people you should think if the majority will become happy or it will produce unhappiness. In generalization principle of utility is doing something that the majority should agree.

Contemporary Moral Problems
Book Review Chapter 1: Ethical Theories:
Mary Midgley: Trying Out One’s New Sword
Library Reference: N/A
Amazon:

Quote: “Moral isolation forbids us to form any opinions on these matters. Its ground for doing so is that we don’t understand them”
Based on my personal reaction on this quotation is these moral isolation affect the human being to have a better idea on different thing like give a equal attention on different people, so that the effect of this is misunderstanding among different people because of different opinions and language.
Learning Expectation:
• The meaning of Trying out one’s new sword.
• I want to increase my knowledge about isolation opinion.
• I want to know if this chapter has a better output for being a good person.
• Who is the philosopher wrote this theory and why he wrote it.
Review:
This Review the topic is all about the ethical perspective of the author, and to start let start to introduce the author. The name of the author is Mary Midgley he Share her knowledge at the University of Newcastle-upon-tyne in England for about twenty years and now retired. She is the author of cluding Animals and why they matter.
This chapter attacks the moral isolationism, the view of anthropologist and others that we cannot criticize cultures that we do not understand. This view shows that every culture has its own uniqueness and according to the author equilibrium of different people is the most important. According to the author this isolationism is a place where embrace the humankind is piercingly.
We cannot criticize other people and other country for our own happiness and idea. This isolation is like separated societies with different boundaries and limitation eat societies have different policies, but in the end moral isolation is wrong because it is different moral to apply in different person and moral values what we are familiar with.
What I’ve learned:
• I learned what the meaning of Trying out new Sword is.
• I learned that moral isolation is wrong.
• I learned how the authors differs the moral isolation to the different view.
• I learned that every country is unique, that we will need to understand their culture before make a conclusion for them.
• I learned that this is happening now in the present period.
• I learned who the author of the chapter is and why he wrote this study.
Questions:
1. It is true that morality isolation is correct?
2. How does it affect the people now in our country?
3. It is applicable now in our present day?
4. Criticizing other culture will give happiness?
5. What is Moral Isolationism?
Citation: (James E. White, St. Cloud State University, 2003)

What is “moral isolationism”?
Base on this chapter the moral isolation focus on the people who do not now know about their own culture. Sometimes it affects the living of a person. It is the view of anthropologist and other that we cannot criticize cultures that we do not understand.
Explain the Japanese custom of tsujigiri. What question does Midgley ask about this custom?
It is like when you have new weapon like sword, katana and etc. you are trying to apply your new learned abilities to your opponent and to other people who provoke you because you want to know if its effective or not. It is like every culture has their own specialty that will make them unique but sometimes being unique make isolate you from other people because you are considered dangerous.
What is wrong with moral isolationism, according to Midgley?
For her we should understand that the different cultures exist and this will produce different idea, criticism about their different act. She agrees that the moral isolationism is effective for the people, which are giving idea and truth because it would prevent the other people to go into other society and follow their rules.
What does Midgley think is the basis for criticizing other cultures?
Midgley think the basis for criticizing other culture is by insulting them without knowing what is their true culture, by isolating them and compare them to other.