Philosopy 1010 Tutorial 2

Tutorial Objectives

1. Administrative
2. Key Terms/Concepts
3. Groups and Small-Circle Activity
4. Slightly Larger Group Sharing
5. Assignments Returned

Key Terms/Concepts

• Origin of Submission and Rejecting It
• Value of Equality
• Separation Thesis and Connection Thesis
• Cultural vs Radical Feminism

Small Circle Activity

This week’s assignment is a bit different than normal. Rather than answering particular questions, I want you to map the argument structure for the article by Mill, classify his kind of liberalism according to West, and then present West’s argument that elucidates on the failure of Mill’s approach and her suggested alternative approaches. You should make point form notes - full sentences are not required. In examining these arguments, I would suggest you:

• Identify thesis statements to provide clear directions for the arguments
• Identify how subheadings relate to that thesis and its purported aims
• Identify the component elements of subsections, and determine how they relation to their respective subheadings and integrate with the larger argument, as it is positioned by the thesis
• When identifying West’s argument, identify how and why she creates her distinctions between liberalisms and feminisms
• When explicating West’s issues with Mill’s theory, evaluate whether her criticisms are fair
• When presenting her own feminist approaches, determine if her intentions with those approaches in any way accords with Mill’s original project. Explain whether they do or do not.

Slightly Larger Group Sharing

Get together with another group and talk about how you would have outlined this argumentative structure. Ask questions of each others’ outlines - why did the other group do X and not Y. Your aim is to collaboratively learn from one another, not to grade or critically evaluate each others’ work.

Tutorial Objectives

1. Administrative
   1. Reading Strategies
   2. Writing Strategies
2. Key Terms/Concepts
3. Groups and Small-Circle Activity
4. Large Group Sharing
5. Assignments Returned

Key Terms/Concepts

• Original Position
• Principles of Justice
  (a) Equal liberty; (b) Difference

• Maximim Principle
• Utilitarianism vs. Kantian Right and the Unencumbered Self
• Communitarianism and the Self’s Situatedness

Small Circle Activity

Note: Most of the questions on Rawls are questions of comprehension. They are intended to integrate with other class discussions/lectures surrounding Rawls’ material to provide you with a more comprehensive foundation to develop your essays upon.

Rawls, A Theory of Justice

1. What does Rawls mean when integrating justice and fairness?
2. Why do we come to adopt the veil of ignorance? What specific role(s) does it play in Rawls’ system? Ground your discussion in the text.
3. What are Rawls’ definitions of ‘justice’ and ‘injustice’?
4. What are social and natural goods, and how do they respectively fit into his political theory? Extend your analysis beyond the page where he initially classifies these goods, and ground your discourse in the text.
5. What role does self-respect have in Rawls’ account of accepting one’s civil duties?
6. What is the core difference between imperfect and perfect procedural justice?

Sandel, Morality and the Liberal Ideal

1. Why do Kantian liberals draw a distinction between right and good? What are the consequences of this for a political society?
2. Are you convinced by the communitarian account? Why or why not?

Note: Sorry that this is a week late - the post got mucked up by the database holding this blog and I didn’t realize until now.

Tutorial Objectives

1. Administrative
2. Key Terms/Concepts
3. Groups and Small-Circle Activity
4. Large Group Sharing
5. Assignments Returned

Key Terms/Concepts

• Positive/Negative Freedom
• Fairness and Compromise towards Authors and Addressees
• Reduction of Alternatives
• Dahl’s Activity and Legitimacy and Authorship of Law

Berlin, Two Concepts of Liberty

1. How can the two concepts of liberty exist beside one another in a political environment? What problems can arise? Both ground your answers in the text, and think of some empirical examples to reinforce your claims.
2. What is the distinction made between “True” and “Empirical” selves? Which of these selves should be addressed in reference to positive liberty? Which might be addressed with regards to negative liberty?
3. What do you think that Berlin means when stating that positive and negative notions of freedom historically develop in divergent directions, and not by logical steps? Try to ground your responses in reasons/examples given in the text.
4. What notions does Mill confuse, and what are the possible implications of this confusion for his larger argument? Make sure to both ground your response in Berlin’s article, and extend his argument by referencing Mill (i.e. Berlin says that X and Y problems happen, and X and Y play Z role in Mill’s argument. As a result of X and Y, what problems does Mill’s argument run again?).

Singer, Democracy, Fairness, and Compromise

1. How might the refusal to compromise with others be related to negative and positive freedom, as they are discussed in Berlin’s article?
2. Suppose that massive telecommunication companies are responsible for providing the majority of the available mass-consumable news. Suppose further, that the newspapers are advocating a law the would criminalize a civil action (perhaps file sharing) and that politicians, as the representatives of the people, vote to criminalize this law despite not hearing from the silent majority who oppose the law. As the politicians are the representatives of the people, and as they have been authorized by the citizenry to institute laws on the citizens’ behalves can we call this this law legitimate, even if a great number of citizens would find themselves faced with a law which they opposed but that was passed on the basis of the disproportionate influence of other groups? Ground your response in the text.
3. Lobby groups are responsible for pressuring the government to pass laws favouring the groups’ interests. What do you think that Singer’s attitudes towards these groups might be? Ground your response in the text.

Tutorial Objectives

1. Administrative
2. Review of Key Terms and Concepts
3. Groups and Small-Circle Activity
4. Large Group Sharing
5. Exams and Assignments Returned

   Key Terms

   • Liberty
   • Limits of Freedom (general)
   • Expression and Development
   • Limits of Freedom (individuals)

     Small Circle Activity

     Note: You’ll note that many of these questions are asking you to critically engage with Mill - this is to help you become comfortable asking questions of the text, and then playing devil’s advocate and responding to your own critiques. I strongly encourage you to reflect on these questions after class, in groups and/or individually, to develop skills that will serve you well on the essay you will write later this term.

     1. How can we know if someone’s action will cause harm (hint: recall how Mill identifies ‘harm’)?
     2. What reasons does Mill provide for why we should let someone harm themselves, so long as they are not injuring another? Ground your reasons in the text. Do you accept his reasons? Why or why not?
     3. Freedom of the press/speech is effectively limited by the willingness of others to listen. Mill argues that it is unjust to forcefully silence someone’s opinions, but would he support silencing of minorities by ignoring their opinion? Justify your answer in the texts on Mill that we have read to date.
     4. Who decides what is allowed for a person to do to themselves? How is this decision made (think in reference to the totality of Mill’s work that we’ve read)? What if the people who must step in to stop someone feel they don’t want to step in - are they obligated to? Ground your responses in the text.
     5. What is the most extreme consequence that you can imagine following from Mill’s principle of non-interference? Do you think that it would undermine the political body that Mill is suggesting be created (i.e. a liberal democracy)? Now, try to response from Mill’s position - what would he say about your analysis of his principle of non-interference?

As Dr. Payrow Shabani has been reminding you for the past few classes, you’d be well served to find a group of people in the class and wok through the questions for the midterm with them!

Tutorial Objectives

1. Administrative
2. Review of Key Terms and Concepts
3. Groups and Small-Circle Activity
4. Large Group Sharing
5. Assignments Returned

Key Terms

• Utilitarianism
• Utility
• Consequentialist
• Instrumental democracy
• Proportional Representation

Small Circle Activity

Utilitarianism

1. Define and distinguish between rule and act utilitarianism?
2. What are perfect and imperfect duties?
3. What two things does does his idea of justice suppose?

Considerations On Representative Government

Case: A law was created many years ago that makes it a finable offence to share music without either copying that music to particular forms of physical medium (i.e. a tape, CD, or mp3 player) or licensing it for public performance - fines are delivered for infringing upon copyright if music is shared in any other way. Despite this law people are increasingly sharing music using online electronic tools, wilfully engaging in copyright infringement. Despite the wide ranging interest in reforming this law, and copyright generally, the citizens’ political representatives refuse to alter the law.

1. Assuming that sharing music using online systems increases the utility enjoyed by citizens, is the law used to justify fining individuals who commit copyright infringement ‘legitimate’ as far as Mill is concerned? Why or why not? Ground your response in the text.
2. What reasons might Mill provide as to why citizens are not being represented in the legislature? Be specific, and draw on as many reasons as you can justify through the text. How might he propose that these disenfranchised citizens become re-enfranchised in the political system?

Tutorial Objectives

1. Key Terms/Concepts
2. Groups and Small-Circle Activity
3. Large Group Sharing
4. Quick Tutorial Evaluation
5. Assignments Returned

Locke, A Letter Concerning Toleration

1. What three sets of law does Locke establish in this text?
2. What kind of government is Locke advocating for? Why do you think he is advocating for this kind of government? Ground your response in the text.
3. Does the civil magistrate have the duty to protect the church? Can the magistrate force the church to do something that violates religious law? Can the church force the magistrate to do something if the magistrate is a member of their church? Try to justify your response in the text.

Suppose the King of Britain is a devote Catholic. As the legislator, executor, and judge of law, he asserts that it is criminal to have relations with another man’s wife - this assertion is grounded in his own faith, but is principally arrived at using the force of reason. What would Locke have to say about this situation, and why? Is there a way to reconcile any concerns Locke might raise so that the King could continue to rule and publicly discuss his Catholicism?

Marx and Engel, A Communist Manifesto

1. Why does capitalism spawn its own demise? Ground your responses in the text.
2. What is ‘justice’ for Marx and Engel?
3. What is the role of the communist elite? Where do they come from? How can the proletariat identify them?
4. Has the communist manifesto been realized in practise? Why has/hasn’t it?

There is a theory of economics called ‘trickle down economics’, which argues that as wealth is accumulated by a core group of industrialists it will ‘trickle down’ to the rest of society. This theory sees citizens in Western nations as being better off as wealth is concentrated into the hands of a few, and its advocates arguet that many scientific advancements have only happened because the rich has had the capital to invest in (seemingly) outlandish experiments. In light of these advancements, isn’t The Communist Manifesto a document that would limit technological development?

How would Marx respond to the above situation? Do you agree with the Marxist response? Why or why not?

Tutorial Evaluation

IMPORTANT: DO NOT INCLUDE YOUR NAME OR STUDENT NUMBER!!!

On a sheet of paper:

1. Write one thing that you are enjoying about the tutorial
2. Write one thing that could be improved upon in the tutorial.

Tutorial Objectives

1. Guest Presentation – Sean Yo
2. Review of Key Terms
3. Small Group Activity
4. Large Group Sharing
5. Assignments Returned

Class Blog: http://www.christopher-parsons.com/UOG/F07/PHIL1010
Note: If link isn’t working for you, just click the PHIL1010 link at: http://www.christopher-parsons.com

Hobbes

1. .What is the definition of the commonwealth? Why can’t subjects change its form? Why can’t they accuse the sovereign of being injust?
2. Why is it important that the sovereign judge and deliberate upon controversies amongst subjects?
3. Do subjects have natural liberties that cannot be violated? If so, what are they, and why mustn’t they be violated? Does the sovereign have laws or rights? What are they?

Locke

1. Why do people enter into the body politic?
2. Does Locke’s account allow for slavery? Justify your answer with reference to the text.
3. What is liberty and freedom for Locke (hint: look at pages 497-8)?

Case: Your family is incredibly poor. Your mother is ill, and your father left with another woman years ago. If you don’t get some medicine from a pharmacy (medicine you cannot afford or get a loan to pay for) you mom will die, leaving you alone in the world. Fortunately there is a pharmacy down the block that is run by a rich doctor. You break into the pharmacy and steal the medicine and, after administering the medicine, the police arrive and charge you with theft. Both your mother and the rich doctor vehemently protest your arrest, to the point that they both interfere with the arrest. The doctor insists that he will drop the charges he filed, and pay any fine that need be paid, but will not allow you to be taken to jail.

Questions:

1. What would happen to the participants in this case in the Hobbesian and Lockean commonwealths? Ground your responses in the text.
2. Based on your conclusions in 1., which commonwealth would you prefer to reside in? Why? Make sure that your reasons for preferring one over the other find points of reference in the texts.

The Set-Up

At an educational seminar that I attended this weekend something important was brought up, something that I hadn’t even considered: A lot of administrative-type terms are used by TAs and professors, but those terms are rarely translated into comprehensible descriptions that are useful to you. Of course, upper year students, TAs, and professors aren’t intentionally failing to provide you with the definitions of these terms - we just totally forget the learning curve we had to go through to unearth the meanings of these (relatively) nebulous terms.

Today, let’s talk about ‘Office Hours’.

Office Hours

In the first class of the semester, all the TAs (myself included) marched up to the board and provided you with our email addresses, the tutorials we were going to be leading, and when/where our ‘office hours’ were being held. So, what’s the deal with these hours?

Office hours are times when students can visit their TA or professor and chat about the course and the course content. If you’re particularly intrigued by a particular element of the course readings, feel free to come by and talk to them with us! We’re always interested to talk to students about this material - we love philosophy, and love to talk about it!

Another (and perhaps somewhat more common) reason to visit me/the professor during office hours is to discuss or get help understanding content. What was Locke talking about when using the term ‘State of Nature’? What is the difference between a ‘Right’ and a ‘Law’? What is a particular sentence talking about? What reading tips/study techniques might be helpful? I should stress that office hours are not about either the professor or I reteaching content - you’re expected to be attending lecture and the tutorial, and to be trying to work with the material on your own. That said, the professor and I are available to talk about these things with you - we’re here to help, but can only help you if you come and talk to us!

MINS? Where is that!?!

You’ve likely discovered that there are more buildings that start with the letter ‘M’ on the UoG campus than you thought was possible. Moreover, you might never had heard of the ‘MINS’(aka the Macdonald Institute) building before - don’t worry, you’re not alone in being mystified about where it’s located. Fortunately, the University foresaw your challenges in finding buildings and provided us all with a delightful campus map. Just head over to the map, and click on ‘MINS’ and then on the ‘Find Map’ button under ‘Locator’.

If that’s still not helpful, fire me an email at cparsons@uoguelph.ca and I’ll try to give you some even better instructions to find the building. Don’t forget - if you’re in doubt, always ask!

Great - So When Are Your Office Hours Again?

Glad that you asked! My office hours are Mondays, 2:30pm - 3:30pm in MINS 113. I hope to see you there sometime soon!

First of all, I want to congradulate you guys on (by and large) really trying to sink your teeth into these texts - they’re not easy to read, and it’s clear that you’re really working to grasp what the various authors are talking about, so pat yourselves on the back for that! With that said, I think that there are a few places where you can (relatively) easily improve your summaries to make them even sharper!

1. Make sure that you’re writing on the correct week - summaries that are handed in on Tuesday are on the material for that week that has yet to be covered. This means that, if a Hobbes reading spanned two weeks, that the summary handed in on the second week would have to focus on the material that was not covered in week one.
2. Make sure that you’re following the instructions - the assignments are one page, double-spaced, with non-wacky margins.
3. When writing your summaries, make sure that the critical question is phrased as a question, rather than as a statement.

I’ve been enjoying how you are individually engaging with the reading - keep up your good work!