I’m a moral philosopher- AMA

[randommorning]

I don’t know whether anyone would find this interesting but, as the title indicates, I am an academic who specialises in moral philosophy (ethics). People have seemed to find this interesting at various points - AMA!

Hi :) what's your view on eating animals out of choice?

That’s a good question! It’s a huge area of debate and I think that you can make a respectable argument in favour of both eating meat or not eating it. I think that much can come down to the variables - what alternatives do you have? What kind of meat do you have access to (there is an argument that catching and eating wild meat could be more ethical than farming), the treatment of the particular animal you are eating and how it died. It’s possible to make arguments related to carbon footprint, the treatment of animals, sustainability, the value of life and what counts as a life. I personally don’t eat meat but my reasoning mostly focuses on the type of meat I have available to me.

What do you think about the level of debate on here? I find myself getting very frustrated by posters who construct straw men, insist on black and white answers for everything or make illogical arguments. I think my head might explode if I was actually a professional in thinking through difficult ethical questions.

Same question wrt society in general.

To be honest, my AMA is partly due to a frustration with certain topics. I’m afraid I think that as a society, our ability to reason and debate is poor. Black and white answers is one of my pet hates! There is almost always a very large grey area to be explored. I think that people want quick and clear answers when often there aren’t any. People seem to want to find the ‘right’ answer instead of being willing to sit with uncomfortable choices or positions. I never engage with ethical debates here or Fb, Twitter etc as I dislike all the shouty behaviour. And I’m not convinced that anyone would be interested in my arguments as they wouldn’t necessarily support a clear position. I think that people are not very good at making the links between ideas and so don’t realise the repercussions of what they are arguing. I personally believe that philosophy and logic should be taught in school to help us develop a culture of critical thinking and open debate.

Is it necessary to explore all of the shades of grey for every topic or are there topics that we are allowed to be black and white on in your opinion say for example what are the grey areas worth exploring on child abuse?

Is it possible to develop and teach a framework of ethics for the public sphere that draws on but is separate from particular religious/spiritual/philosophical traditions, or are ethics so tightly bound up with the latter that, for an individual (of faith), it would be almost impossible to run two operating systems?

Or, is ‘ethics Esperanto’ a nice idea, but not a workable one?

What does your job consist of and do you think it ever influences ethical decisions in the real world?

Do you ever find it exhausting thinking through things in such a way, or is it just a part of how you operate now? (Think it sounds fascinating!)

Did you relate to Chidi in the Good Place? 😁

Sorry, was managing bedtimes! Will work through now

How much do you publish, and do you think that the output from moral philosophers (or any other type of philosopher) has any impact on the world and on society?

What’s the £££?

What's your favourite question or statement to ponder?

Oliviastwisted - I think most topics have something to thinks about. So we might start with a statement like ‘child abuse is wrong’. Now most of us are going to immediately want to agree with that. But it does open up questions: what is child abuse? Does everywhere, everyone and every time have the same idea of what child abuse is? If not (and the answer is that these standard vary) what does that tell us about moral standards? Can we be certain what is right here? And if we can be certain that a particular act is wrong, what does that tell us about the nature of an immoral act? Is then possible to say that another place or time is wrong? What are the repercussions of that? We might also want to consider what the implications of saying something is wrong are. Do we hold the individual responsible? Did they have free will? Do any of us? Why did they act in the way they did? Does it matter?
So basically, although I would agree that child abuse is wrong as a general comment, you can break down pretty much any judgement and it will expose other issues.

Slightly entranced by the idea of ethical Esperanto: I have considered Confucianism and utilitarism as the epitome of sensibly moral behaviour since my late teens. Now, the world seems to think a more extreme stance on anything is preferable. Where would you place yourself along the spectrum, as ethics is a code for living rightly?

Something once - I think that in terms of coming to understand your own position, it is important to understand how it fits into your overall worldview, which of course is going to be linked to our religious standpoints. I think that it is absolutely possible to teach it (after all, we teach ethics in universities) and to teach it without pushing students in a particular spiritual direction. One issue though that I see in online debates from non-professionals is that people don’t always understand how their views fit into that worldview. So you will see people making arguments that assume atheism whilst claiming to be religious and vice versa.

@randommorning

To be honest, my AMA is partly due to a frustration with certain topics. I’m afraid I think that as a society, our ability to reason and debate is poor. Black and white answers is one of my pet hates! There is almost always a very large grey area to be explored. I think that people want quick and clear answers when often there aren’t any. People seem to want to find the ‘right’ answer instead of being willing to sit with uncomfortable choices or positions. I never engage with ethical debates here or Fb, Twitter etc as I dislike all the shouty behaviour. And I’m not convinced that anyone would be interested in my arguments as they wouldn’t necessarily support a clear position. I think that people are not very good at making the links between ideas and so don’t realise the repercussions of what they are arguing. I personally believe that philosophy and logic should be taught in school to help us develop a culture of critical thinking and open debate.

Like a balm to the soul reading this. I couldn't agree more.

Marine bio - I’m an academic working in a university. I mostly teach and write.
Mumteedum - yes definitely! Students often start out thinking philosophy is about holding strong opinions but many of us spend our time worrying over the details of minor actions. I definitely overthink things!

Fandangles - Philosophy is a passion for me. I think it’s a bit of a habit in many ways. I think most academics have a passion for their subject or we wouldn’t be there. I’m certainly not in it for the money!

What are your thoughts on human transgenderism and it's impact on our established society and culture? I have a friend who thinks its a tool being exploited for destabilising and distraction purposes.

Do you think your field has value for the wider world, or do you see it as a way to earn a living doing work you enjoy - or both?

Rosesinthehospital - I am currently in a more teaching role so don’t publish a huge amount (currently part time due to kids). I am working on two papers at the moment that I want to finish over the summer.
I think it does have an impact - eventually! I think there is a trickle down effect - an example might be the issue of animal rights. The conversations around animal rights and environmental responsibilities have been around for many years and whilst most of the conversations that happen in the journals etc don’t appear in the press and so forth, those ideas do gradually work across. I bet someone here will have heard of Peter Singer, well although they may not have read the replies to him, he mentions them and so the ideas do drift across.

I enjoyed studying philosophy with the OU (PPE) but find it really difficult to read on my own (‘The Idea of Justice’ is still sat on a shelf, for example). Any suggestions on how to get back into it?

Have you ever been invited to a mysterious island by an elderly and wealthy man to consider the morality of genetically engineering and effectively bringing dinosaurs back from extinction?

Academic salaries aren’t fab! The moneys in writing textbooks but I don’t think I’d be very good at that!
I don’t think I have a single quote that I turn to. I’m a big Kant fan (although I don’t agree with him on everything). I think the question of moral properties is one which is really interesting.