Guess Who is Coming to Dinner
These discussion boards have been designed to explore
controversial philosophical topics. Some of the questions are
designed to solicit very personal responses and opinions,
and these debates have the potential to become heated. In
the act of creating ideas, heat can be a good thing, but not
at the expense of hurt feelings or frustration. Remember
that the practical aspect pf philosophy asks us to examine
and perhaps even change something about ourselves.
Hopefully, we will be challenged by others with a different
opinion, but we need to remember that a challenge to our
beliefs is not a threat. To the contrary, it should be regarded
as an opportunity to re-evaluate and understand why we
hold these beliefs.
Some important rules to follow:
1 There will be no Ad hominems (attacks against the
person); not following this rule may result in failure of
the assignment. You can disagree with a person’s
opinions, but you may not attack other people. You
may, however, disagree with the ideas of others, but
do so in a constructive manner. For example, you can
say, "I don't agree with your post. I think instead that .
. . " But, you cannot say, “You’re an idiot” or even
“That’s just plain stupid.” Academia requires a diversity
of opinions but presented politely; after all, ethics is
part of Philosophy.
2 Avoid making statements meant to be absolute (such as,
"There is no other way to think about this"). Instead of
asking closed-ended questions looking for a “yes” or
“no” or the “right” answer, ask open-ended questions
(such as, “Have you thought about . . . ?”)
3 Try to connect the current discussion to topics from other
lessons. Remember that all of the Philosophers wrote
about more than a single topic and the way they think
about one area of Philosophy probably affects other
areas as well. For example, it might be extremely
useful to mention John Stuart Mill’s ethical theories
from an earlier lesson during a later discussion of his
support for women’s rights and equality.
4 Rather than simply reacting to the readings and the
responses of your classmates, think about the
arguments being made. Really consider the
effectiveness of these arguments. “I agree” responses
are not useful to the discussion and will not receive
credit.
Give some serious consideration to the topic or scenario
before answering; and, then, using the questions below as a
guide, write a 75-100 word initial response about the issue
being discussed. Next, please take the time to respond to at
least two of your classmates.
The scenario:
Immanuel Kant said that lying was, without exception,
always wrong and that we have a moral duty to tell the
truth. When posed with a dilemma in which we might be
tempted to lie, he said we are still obligated to do the right
thing, even if we think doing the wrong thing would produce
better results.
The traditional example is of a serial murderer showing up at
your front door and demanding to know the location of your
family so he can kill them. You know full well that you just
sent them out the back door, and most people could
probably convince themselves that because they do not
know the technically “exact” location, saying “I don’t know”
would not be telling a lie.
Additionally, you reason that because he is a murderer, you
have no real obligation to help him kill your family by telling
the truth; so, you lie to him and say, “I don’t know.”
Unable to complete his plans, he leaves and is headed back
to the sidewalk—just as your family is coming around the
house. And, he kills them all. Had you told the murderer that
the family went out the back door, that would have bought
them the time they needed to escape as he ran through the
house.
According to Kant, you are now responsible for their deaths
because you did the wrong thing. Had you done the right
thing, even if your family died, it would not have been your
fault. Your lie made you morally responsible for their deaths.
Respond
Unless being honest would land you in jail, please truthfully
discuss the following questions:
1 Describe under what circumstances, if any, is it permissible
to lie. Under what circumstances, if any, do you think it
might be preferable to lie? What do your answers
indicate about the justification of the nearly universal
principle that one ought not to lie?
A hungry cannibal chieftain looks you over and declares that
you will indeed make a fine dinner. Using some of the ideas
from our readings, what can you say to the cannibal
chieftain to convince him that cooking you would be morally
wrong? (Convincing him that you won’t taste good is not
enough to keep you out of the cooking pot.)
Purchase answer to see full
attachment