During the start of class week four we started our discussion on the reading, The Apology, by Plato. We brought up some key points to pay attention for when reading, and also some vocab words to help us better understand the text. One of the words we mentioned was exordium, and how the goal of this action was to gain your attention. Focusing more on the reading we discussed how Socrates age should have played a “trump” card in his trial. In some cultures age is well respected, and elders of that culture are not question or held liable for certain actions. We also discussed Calicles thoughts on Socrates. Calicles thought Socrates to be useless and even ludicrous, seeing he was unable to provide good things for his family and also his friends.
…show more content…
He posted a picture of a white bowl with Skittle inside. The post read something similar too, if three of these Skittle were going to kill you, would you eat them? We used the Gordon Knot as a metaphor to this post. The Gordon Knot was a knot known for being so complex and difficult to untie that no one could, and it was prophesized the individual who could, would have great things in store for him or her. The tale goes that Alexander the Great was the one who was able to untie the Gordon Knot and was able to do so by cutting through it with his sword. We related the Twitter post by comparing the knot to it saying, should we try and unravel this to get a better understanding and clear answer to this problem, or simply say its bogus and leave the knot tied seeing it would be too complex to try and unravel. We took on the task of trying to unravel the knot. We started by using an analogy of a balance beam with a weight stuck to one end and on the opposite end 1001 children. Under the balance beam would be over an abyss. The beam is learning towards the abyss potentially endangering the lives of all 1001 children. So we raised the question, do you throw one off to save them all or let them all fall off? We had to ask ourselves was this a matter of consequence or of principle? In a utilitarian argument them would state to do what was needed to save the greatest number of children. Then based on peoples answer on what they would do we composed to more questions. Are you a deontologist, or a consequentialist? A deontologist is someone who would base their answer on rationality, or rule base ethics. A consequentialist believes that the morality of their actions would be judges based on the consequences. I found myself learning towards the consequentialist argument based on the fact I find myself to be a
He posted a picture of a white bowl with Skittle inside. The post read something similar too, if three of these Skittle were going to kill you, would you eat them? We used the Gordon Knot as a metaphor to this post. The Gordon Knot was a knot known for being so complex and difficult to untie that no one could, and it was prophesized the individual who could, would have great things in store for him or her. The tale goes that Alexander the Great was the one who was able to untie the Gordon Knot and was able to do so by cutting through it with his sword. We related the Twitter post by comparing the knot to it saying, should we try and unravel this to get a better understanding and clear answer to this problem, or simply say its bogus and leave the knot tied seeing it would be too complex to try and unravel. We took on the task of trying to unravel the knot. We started by using an analogy of a balance beam with a weight stuck to one end and on the opposite end 1001 children. Under the balance beam would be over an abyss. The beam is learning towards the abyss potentially endangering the lives of all 1001 children. So we raised the question, do you throw one off to save them all or let them all fall off? We had to ask ourselves was this a matter of consequence or of principle? In a utilitarian argument them would state to do what was needed to save the greatest number of children. Then based on peoples answer on what they would do we composed to more questions. Are you a deontologist, or a consequentialist? A deontologist is someone who would base their answer on rationality, or rule base ethics. A consequentialist believes that the morality of their actions would be judges based on the consequences. I found myself learning towards the consequentialist argument based on the fact I find myself to be a