The Trolley Problem

assignment 1

Watch Season 2, Episode 5 of The Good Place. This episode is called, “The Trolley Problem.” You can watch it on Netflix. If you do not have Netflix, I will have a viewing on Thursday, 4:30, that you can attend and I will also record it. Here is a clip from the episode:https://youtu.be/DtRhrfhP5b4 (Links to an external site.)

Post 1: Choose one character, and describe which normative theory that character is prescribing from. For example, you can choose Chidi and argue that his normative theory is utilitarianism, which prescribes a certain course of action. Then state the argument as explained in Chapter 12D, “The Structure of Moral Arguments.”

Post 2: Which normative views are most and least attractive to you? Explain.

Post 3: Reply in a substantial way to a colleague’s Post 1. (“I agree!” is not substantive, right?)

Last post dates are 3/22, with the three day grace period.

assignment 2

Have you heard of the Age of Reason? It is an intriguing description for Catholic children who have reached an age, seven years old, at which they can discern right from wrong. Morality, as many think, is actually not a matter of opinion. As examples, it is not a mere preference or opinion that poisoning the water supply for profit, as is happening in Flint, Michigan and the Dakotas is immoral. It is objectively wrong to permanently harm or kill people for money.

We will study morality in Logic. But why? Why would we study morality in Logic, the paragon of abstract reasoning? Answer: All reasoning begins in Logic. Any subject assumes Logic is the bedrock of human rationality – from Physics to Psychology to Law to Sociology to Morality.

In Week 1, we discussed LogicLand. All areas of study and inquiry begin in LogicLand. We must travel there before we travel anywhere.

We learned of many terms there which demonstrate the fundamental difference between Logical Analysis and Truth Analysis.

Explain LogicLand to a child who has reached the Age of Reason. You can use a metaphor as we have used Beaters versus Hondas. Or you can use concrete examples that a child would understand.

This Discussion will get huge! No problem. More minds, more learning.

To pass, post your explanation, and reply in an engaged way to two other colleagues. (“I agree” is not engaging, correct?)

example to help you out In LogicLand there is deductive steakhouse. Deductive steakhouse always has steaks and a working grill. They produce a steak for customers every time one is ed in their restaurant without fail. But the steak isn’t always good. Sometimes the ingredients used are old and of bad quality. You may be served a “steak” every time you go to deductive steakhouse, but just because it’s a steak doesn’t mean that steak is well cooked, seasoned properly, or grilled with fresh ingredients. The point being, the deductive steakhouse is like deductive reasoning; you may be “served” a list of premises that produce an absolute, indisputably valid argument ( a steak). But if the premises (ingredients, seasoning and preparation in grilling the steak) aren’t good or true the argument will not be sound. The “Steak” will not be any good.