Peer Responses – Ethical Virtues and Moralizing

Peer Responses – Ethical Virtues and Moralizing

Peer 1 Response

Hello,

I value your contribution toward understanding the subject of ethical virtues and moralizing. I agree with your critique of Rosenstand’s reference that Sommer’s viewpoint is old-fashioned. Sommer avers that there are aspects of morality, especially concerning decent or indecent human behavior, that transcend boundaries. According to Sommer, virtues such as honesty, respect, and kindness apply uniformly across the board, regardless of one’s background (Rosenstand, 2020). Indeed, one of the reasons why Rosenstand thinks this is old-fashioned is because Sommer introduces objective morality. I also agree with how you dived into Kierkegaard’s position on anguish, bad faith, and authenticity. Kierkegaard’s position is based on the principle that we all should become what we are designed to be. A little suffering will go a long way in helping us adapt to difficult times (Rosenstand, 2020). You have also offered an insightful discussion on different types of ethical feminism, with classical and equity feminism offering the most valuable positions in the modern world. The battle for gender equality is over, and men and women can engage in what they like.

References

Rosenstand, N. (2020). The moral of the story: An introduction to ethics. Mcgraw-Hill Education.

Peer 2 Response

Hello,

This is a great post: Your discussion on the subject of moralizing satisfactorily analyzes Sommers and Rosenstand’s viewpoints. You affirm that Sommers is trying to moralize some human behaviors as morally valid without engaging others or providing a justification. It is true to assume that some basic moral principles apply across the board if one has not traveled and interacted with people from diverse backgrounds (Booth et al., 2005). Rosenstand avers that cultural differences can make a difference in acceptable morals. You have also displayed an understanding of existentialist philosophy, which has anguish, bad faith, and angst as its central concepts. Your viewpoint reinforces the need to maintain positive morals even in the face of diversity. I also agree with the definitions of different types of feminist theories. Indeed, equality feminism is the most relevant in the modern world since other types of feminism are based on the days when there were sharp gender differences. Finally, you have shown that Gillingham’s ethics of care align with Rosenstand’s position on ethics. Levinas also offers a supporting position, especially on women’s ethics of care. These ethical standards will go a long way in shaping their morality.

References

Booth, W. C., Barlow, D., Card, O. S., Cunningham, A., Gardner, J., Gregory, M., & Young, B.             (2005). Ethics, literature, and theory: An introductory reader. Sheed & Ward.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

We’ll write everything from scratch

---

Instructions: Post a brief critical commentary on at least two other students’ brief overview responses. It is important to understand that a critical comment may be positive or negative, but it goes beyond merely stating your agreement/disagreement, interest/indifference, shared understanding or confusion. Your comment may start out that way, but to be a critical comment, it must also provide a reason or reasons for your reaction or specific comment. Each critical comment should be at least 100-150 words in length.

PEER 1: 1.)When Rosenstand makes the comment that “what Sommers is doing is just old-fashioned moralizing,” this is a reference to a portion of Christina Hoff Sommers’ teachings on human virtue. Specifically, she is making comments that support the objective nature of morality – that there are certain truths of decent and indecent human behavior, and that these truths transcend time, geography, culture, and civilization. This, in the eyes of Rosenstand, looks as though Sommers is merely pontificating to the audience, or perhaps peddling her own personal preferences of moral behavior onto others, labeling it as “objective morality.” Personally, however, I agree with Sommers’ comments and think that she makes an excellent case for the notion of moral absolutism. I think she absolutely nails the core essentials of what it means to behave morally as a human – to abstain from harming others, especially those more vulnerable than yourself, and also to help and empower those around you as a functioning and contributing member of society. These ideas are directly tied to the concept of virtue ethics because they support the value of cultivating virtue in one’s character and maintaining a consistent standard of integrity, honesty, and moral principles.
2.)On the topic of angst, anguish, authenticity, and bad faith, the philosophical views of Kierkegaard, Heidegger, and Sartre differ greatly from one another. Kierkegaard believes that anxiety, anguish, and despair are a critical and necessary aspect of life. His teaching of authenticity is based on the idea that each of us ought to become what we truly are. Heidegger, whom Kierkegaard inspired, takes these views further to propose that human existence is the meaning of existence itself. Sartre believes that “anguish” is embodied in the trap that we as humans find ourselves in, being forced to choose every aspect of our existence as part of one cohesive fabric that makes up mankind. Building on this idea, his concept of “bad faith” is the event of one’s own denial of responsibility in the choices that they make. Of these three philosophers, Kierkegaard’s views most closely resemble my own. My own beliefs are so similar to his because I believe in the essential aspect of feeling despair, angst, anguish, and anxiety about human existence. One can not properly understand both dimensions of human existence without first hitting the guard rails; in my opinion, that experience manifests in suffering.
3.) Of the many strands of feminism, there are four major branches to be studied – classical, difference, radical, and equity. Classical feminism can most succinctly be described as the belief that women, like men, have the right to interfere with freedom over themselves as owners of their own lives and fate. Difference feminism is the belief that women and men are equal in value as human beings, but that the values of women are superior to the values of men. Radical feminism demands a dramatic restructuring of society in order to eliminate male dominance in all institutions and throughout all of culture. Equity feminism advocates for the equal treatment of women by the government, without imposing demands for the government to control the private sector. In today’s world, we mostly see and hear concepts of radical feminism in the public square. For example, radical feminism believes that companies should be interfered with by the government in order to resolve a gender pay gap, whereas equity feminism believes that businesses shouldn’t be interfered with. This latter view is aligned with an objective morality philosophy, because it emphasizes the importance of individual freedom, even if it does not immediately help the moral cause of feminism. I personally believe that classical and equity feminist ethics add important elements to our understanding of the human situation and ethics because they advocate for equal value and opportunities afforded to women, without imposing views or compelled beliefs onto others.
4.) Gilligan’s position with respect to gender differences states that women, due to the sense of obligation to take care of and support others, tend to suppress and alter their own opinions, making it uncomfortable for them to speak their thoughts and feelings in a public setting. I personally don’t think that this theory is perfectly sound, because I’ve known many women who are eager and enthusiastic to share their opinions in a public setting, and who are also very competent and comfortable at communicating it. I also don’t particularly agree with her theory that women perceive moral qualities in a different way than men do, simply because I see no evidence of that being the case in real life. It seems to me the case that a Christian man and a Christian woman will have much more similar views of morality, for example, than say, a Christian man and an atheist man, or a Christian woman and an atheist woman. In comparison to some of the ethical views we’ve studied in the course, this concept appears to be somewhat aligned with the philosophy of Emmanuel Levinas. Gilligan’s claims are similar in that her idea of women’s care towards others resembles Levinas’ concept of responsibility in individuals.

PEER 2: 1.) When Rosenstand mentions “moralizing” in the context of Christine Hoff Sommers’ argument, he is referring to an approach to moral discourse. Moralizing typically involves making absolute moral claims or asserting certain values as universally and objectively true without engaging in further discussion or providing substantial reasoning or justification for those claims. By raising the issue of moralizing, Rosenstand suggests that some may view Sommers’ stance simply because it does not discuss the complexities of ethical reasoning and cultural differences. Sommer’s viewpoint can be seen as a repudiation of moral and ethical relativism. She argues that certain basic human virtues are not relative to time, place, circumstance, or situation. According to Sommers, mistreating a child, humiliating someone, tormenting an animal, etc…. are universally wrong. Conversely, being considerate, respectful of others, charitable, and generous are universally right actions. Sommers’ stance implies that there are objective moral standards that transcend cultural and individual differences. Although her argument may provide food for thought and potentially challenge some aspects of moral relativism, whether it is enough to make a relativist abandon their position would depend on the individual’s openness to reconsidering their beliefs. Sommer’s assertion that there are basic human virtues that are not relative to time, place, and circumstance aligns with the core ideas of virtue ethics. She identifies virtues such as decency and honesty, which also align with the central idea of virtue ethics.
2.) Angst or anguish, authenticity, and bad faith are central concepts in existentialist philosophy. These concepts explore the individual’s experience of existence, the search for authenticity in the face of existential dilemmas, and the consequences of avoiding or denying one’s freedom and responsibilities. To illustrate these ideas, let’s consider “The Shawshank Redemption” directed by Frank Darabont. The film explores existential themes through the character Andy Dufresne, a banker wrongfully convicted of murder and sentenced to life in Shawshank State Penitentiary. Andy’s journey reflects the concepts of angst or anguish. Throughout his time in prison, he confronts the harsh reality of his existence, facing isolation, injustice, and the uncertainty of his future. Andy experiences deep existential angst as he grapples with the question of his identity and purpose amid a seemingly meaningless and oppressive environment. Authenticity is portrayed through Andy’s commitment to maintaining his integrity and personal values. The concept of bad faith can be seen in the character of Warden Samuel Norton. The warden presents himself as a righteous figure, using religion to maintain control over the prison population. However, it is revealed that the warden is involved in corrupt activities, exploiting the prisoners for personal gain.
3.) Classical feminism focuses on achieving gender equality within existing social and political structures. It seeks equal rights and opportunities for women, such as equal access to education, employment, and political representation. Difference feminism highlights women’s unique experiences and perspectives and emphasizes the value of women’s contributions to society. It recognizes and celebrates the differences between men and women and argues for the inclusion of women’s voices and experiences in decision-making processes. Radical feminism critiques the patriarchal system as the root cause of women’s oppression. It seeks to dismantle and challenge traditional gender roles, power structures, and social institutions. Equality feminism focuses on equal treatment and equal opportunities for both genders. It advocates for fair treatment based on individual qualities and abilities rather than gender. In today’s world, I believe that equality feminism is most relevant as it promotes a vision of a society where individuals are evaluated based on their abilities rather than their gender. When considering the ethical issue of reproductive rights and the dilemma of abortion. Liberal feminists would approach the issue by focusing on women’s rights to bodily autonomy and reproductive choice. They argue that women should have the freedom to make decisions about their own bodies, including the decision to have an abortion. Difference feminists would approach the issue by acknowledging and respecting women’s unique experiences and perspectives. They would recognize that women’s views on abortion may vary based on factors such as race, ethnicity, class, and cultural background.
4.) The evaluation of Gilligan’s position in relation to the ethical views studied in the course aligns closely with ethical perspectives that prioritize care ethics or ethics of care. Care ethics emphasizes the importance of relationships, empathy, and interconnectedness in moral decision-making. It recognizes that individuals have different roles and responsibilities based on their relationships and social contexts. Gilligan’s emphasis on women’s moral concern and their inclusion of other points of view aligns with care ethics’ emphasis on the case and well-being of others central to moral judgment. Regarding the view of Emmanuel Levinas, his philosophy emphasizes the ethical significance of face-to-face encounters with others. Levinas argues that encountering the other places a responsibility on individuals to prioritize the needs and well-being of the other, which he refers to as the ethical relation of “I am responsible for the other without waiting for reciprocity.” Gilligan’s claims about women attending to the voices and needs of others and including different perspectives in their judgments can be seen as resonating with Levinas’ emphasis on ethical responsibility towards others. As for the claim that women see moral qualities such as being just or being good differently from men, Gilligan argues that women’s moral concern and sensibility to the needs of others may shape their moral judgments. Gilligan’s claim suggests that women may emphasize caring relationships and empathy in their ethical decision-making more prominently than men, whom different social and cultural factors may influence.