Ethics Talk: Philosophy, Flourishing and The Good Life

We continue discussing Marcus Aurelius' Meditations, focusing on the relationship between the individual, rational being and the Commonwealth or "World City".   This week we will be approaching the topic from the lens of self-interest.   How does Marcus Aurelius' view of a Commonwealth of rational beings connect with notions of self-interest?  Further, how do Marcus Aurelius' exhortations to rid ourselves of anger and promote tolerance and patience connect with one's self-interest?  These are some of the questions on which we will focus for this week's episode of EthicsTalk.

In his Meditations, Marcus Aurelius repeatedly affirms that human beings are both reasonable and social.  And in Book X, Verse 2, he appears to identify a deep connection between aspects of human nature when he claims “what is reasonable is consequently also social”.   In this show, we will explore the meaning of this connection.  What is the nature of relationship between the reasonable and the social?  Do human beings possess the natural capacity for reason to serve the social?  Or are human beings social so that their rational natures can be developed?  Or perhaps the reasonable and the social are inter-entailing and ‘co-dependent’ in some way.  The objective of the show is to gain a better understand Marcus Aurelius’ view of the relationship between the ‘reasonable’ and ‘social’ aspects of human nature and how this facet of Marcus Aurelius’ philosophy connects with his metaphysical views about the nature of the universe and the ‘human commonwealth’

In this show, we sit down with Caitlin Cheevers (President) and Randi Shaffer (Promotional Manager) of the Central Michigan University Chapter of Invisible Children.  Caitlin and Randi will discuss the hugely successful KONY 2012 campaign from the inside.  Our objective is to provide our listeners with a deeper understanding of the Kony 2012 campaign - its overall aims, and the challenges it has faced.  Additionally, both Caitlin and Randi will talk about how this campaign has changed the nature of their leadership positions (both have been working with Invisible Children for a number of years, well before KONY 2012 put Invisible Children on the radars of young people).   If you are intrigued by Invisible Children and the Kony 2012 campaign, tune in!

In this show, we introduce the listener to 'Atrocity Law' - the legal framework which saw a growth spurt with the historic Nuremberg trials of Nazi Germany.   But atrocities also occurred in World War 1 - including atrocities against the Armenian people - a Christian minority  living within the then Ottoman Empire - which is currently Turkey.  While Turkey does not want to label what happened to the Armenians as "genocide" - many scholars and politicians nevertheless do.  In this show, we focus on the tragedy of the Armenians in order to talk about what it means -legally- to classify an atrocity as "genocide".  We will also discuss different "labels" -some legal, some moral- ("Crimes Against Humanity", "violation of Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights"), which may be used to classify such tragedies.

On March 8-9, 2012, The International Criminal Court Student Network (ICCSN), with generous support from Central Michigan University, convened an historic conference in The Hague, Netherlands, on the eve of the The International Criminal Court's first verdict which will be delivered on March 14, 2012, in the case of The Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo.  In this show, special guest Megan Blue interviews Hope Elizabeth May, who help organized the conference, and Erica Maylee who not only worked behind the scenes at the conference, but also delivered a paper on restorative justice.  The aims of the show are two: to have the listener appreciate and understand one way in which education about human rights can be practiced, and that education about human rights consists not just in words, but also in actions - in activity and practice.  

In her 1892 address to the U.S. Judiciary, Elizabeth Cady Stanton developed a profound argument about the importance of  educational development and political equality to solitude and the proper use of one's "birthright to self-sovereignty".  In this show, we focus on Elizabeth Cady Stanton's "The Solitude of Self" and its connection to the development clause of Article 26(2) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which states that "education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms."

We continue to discuss the “development clause” of Article 26(2) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) which states that  "Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms".  As we will discuss, the development clause should be read in conjunction with Article 1 of the UDHR which states that “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.” How is "full development of the human personality" connected with “reason,” “conscience” and “the spirit of brotherhood”? Why is education aimed at "full development" so important as to be classified as a human right?  In order to shed light on some possible answers to these questions, we will turn to Elizabeth Cady Stanton's 1892 address to the U.S. Judiciary, The Solitude of Self.

Article 26(2) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that  "Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms".  In this show, we discuss this article, focusing on the "development" clause.  What might "full development of the human personality" look like?" and why is education aimed at "full development" so important as to be classified as a human right?  In order to shed light on some possible answers to these questions, we will turn to Elizabeth Cady Stanton's 1892 address to the U.S. Judiciary, The Solitude of Self.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly as both a response to World War 2 atrocities and a means to "reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person".  In this show, we explore this document by focusing not only on some of its articles, but also by discussing how it connects to global justice and the rule of law.

In tonight's show, we focus on society’s search for happiness through material objects. To what extent (if any) are material objects relevant to happiness?  If material objects are irrelevant to happiness, then what are the non-material components of happiness?  Our discussion will incorporate some recent concepts found within the domain of positive psychology such as "the hedonic treadmill".

In his Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals, Kant famously claims that morality cannot be based on anything outside of the will.  Rather, the source of morality is within the individual herself.  In this show, we try to get clear on the inner resources that Kant believes are essential to moral action.  To what extent is reason involved in moral action?  To what extent are emotion, fear and desire involved?   We will focus on these questions in this week's episode of Ethics Talk.

The historic trials of high ranking Nazi officials after World War 2 introduced "crimes against humanity" to the list of international crimes.  In this show, we focus on "crimes against humanity" and the debate surrounding this category of crime.  At the heart of this debate is the philosophical question about the nature of morality, and its relationship to the law and state sovereignty.  Do other countries have the duty and the right to hold leaders accountable if they commit atrocities against their own people ?  Were the Nuremberg trials simply another instance of the claim that justice and morality are nothing but "the interest of the stronger"?   By focusing on the Nuremberg trials and the charge of  "crimes against humanity," we will show how this philosophical debate has unfolded and implicated the international justice system. 

In November 1945 the victors of World War 2 commenced the historic "Nuremberg Trials" - in which a number of defendants including high ranking Nazi officials like Hermann Goering (commander of the German air force or "luftwaffe") and Rudolph Hess (the deputy fuhrer) were tried for crimes against the peace, crimes against humanity and war crimes.   In 1948, the U.S. conducted a second set of trials ("the subsequent Nuremberg trials") in which judges, doctors and businessmen were tried.  In this show, we will focus on the trial of the judges - the "Alstotter trial" or "Justice" case - on which the award winning film "Judgement at Nuremberg" is based.  By focusing on the Justice case, our aim is  to have the listener appreciate the philosophical, moral and legal significance of the Nuremberg trials.

In this week's show, we continue discussing Tolstoy’s views on alcohol, focusing on Tolstoy’s arguments for complete abstinence in his essay “ "Why do People Stupefy Themselves." Tolstoy claims that even moderate drinking is profoundly harmful.  But why?  Are there not occasions when having a drink is indeed the right thing to do? This week's episode of Ethics Talk focuses on this question, the applicability of Tolstoy’s argument to college life, and its relevance (if any) to today.

   In his "Why do People Stupefy Themselves," Leo Tolstoy writes "men drink and smoke, not to keep their spirits up, not for gayety's sake, not because it is pleasant, but in order to stifle conscience in themselves."  Written at the time when the U.S. was awash in the temperance movement (but about 30 years before the passage of the 18th amendment), Tolstoy claims that even moderate drinking is profoundly harmful.  This week's episode of Ethics Talk, focuses on Tolstoy's 1890 essay, its applicability to college life, and its relevance (if any) to today.