« May 2005 | Main | October 2005 »
September 28, 2005
Presentation #1: Murder by Minors
On Feb. 15, 2003, Craig Sorger, 13, was found murdered.
It was a chilling crime. He had been beaten and stabbed. The small town of Ephrata, Wash., was stunned when his two 12-year-old playmates were arrested and then charged with murder.
So how did two boys just out of elementary school wind up charged with first-degree murder? It all began the afternoon of Feb. 15, 2003, when Lisa Sorger was home with her two sons. “There was a knock on the door. And I answered the door. There were two boys in hooded sweatshirts that asked if Craig could come out and play,” recalls Lisa. It was the first time these two boys had ever knocked on Craigs’ door. Craig was considered learning disabled and he had once been diagnosed as slightly autistic. “Craig, of course, heard, because he was sitting right there. And he goes, ‘Oh, yes, Mom. Can I go out and play please? Can I go out?’ And I said OK. No one really came over and asked him to play.” Lisa commented.
Later that evening, after Craig had not returned, Lisa began to worry and later was informed that Craig had been found on one of the trails. “He had been beaten, I believe they said approximately 16 times to the head and neck,” says Lisa. “And he had been stabbed 34 times in the head and neck. And he had eight stab wounds to his torso.”
Even though the two boys had been charged with 1st degree murder, and blood from Craig had been found on Evan’s shirt, the police couldn’t seem to find a motive. Why would these two 12-year-old boys do something so horrendous?
By most accounts, the two boys, who were family friends, got in only minor trouble at school. They weren’t obsessed with violent video games or movies. But Jake, who was sometimes picked on because of his size, couldn’t read, and was in special education classes.
Forensic psychologist Eric Johnson spent hours interviewing them for the state. He found that the boys weren’t psychopaths, and didn’t have major behavioral or emotional problems.
The two boys first declared their innocence, stating that Craig had simply fallen out of a tree. They went on to say that the blood from Craig was on them because they had checked for a pulse and heartbeat. Close to a year and a half later, Jake Eakin changed his story. He pleaded guilty to second-degree murder by complicity and agreed to testify that Evan Savoie killed Craig Sorger.
Here are a few questions to think about. Are there ever occasions where kids can make a mistake and be given another chance? Is there ever a violent crime where a child can learn from it? And, finally, what do you think, should Jake and Evan be tried as adults making them susceptible to adult size punishment?
An article about this case is here.
Posted by seschmid at 10:55 AM | Comments (33)
September 27, 2005
Religion and Its Influence on Society
Here's a recent blog posting appearing in The Leiter Report about research showing the negative effects of religion on society. While this is not exactly Kai's argument, the research supports his thesis that one can find happiness apart from God.
Religious Societies More Dysfunctional than Secular Ones, According to New Study
One suspects the 700 Club won't give this a lot of play:
RELIGIOUS belief can cause damage to a society, contributing towards high murder rates, abortion, sexual promiscuity and suicide, according to research published today.
According to the study, belief in and worship of God are not only unnecessary for a healthy society but may actually contribute to social problems....
It compares the social peformance of relatively secular countries, such as Britain, with the US, where the majority believes in a creator rather than the theory of evolution....
The paper, published in the Journal of Religion and Society, a US academic journal, reports: “Many Americans agree that their churchgoing nation is an exceptional, God-blessed, shining city on the hill that stands as an impressive example for an increasingly sceptical world.
“In general, higher rates of belief in and worship of a creator correlate with higher rates of homicide, juvenile and early adult mortality, STD infection rates, teen pregnancy and abortion in the prosperous democracies.
“The United States is almost always the most dysfunctional of the developing democracies, sometimes spectacularly so.”
Gregory Paul, the author of the study and a social scientist, used data from the International Social Survey Programme, Gallup and other research bodies to reach his conclusions.
He compared social indicators such as murder rates, abortion, suicide and teenage pregnancy.
The study concluded that the US was the world’s only prosperous democracy where murder rates were still high, and that the least devout nations were the least dysfunctional. Mr Paul said that rates of gonorrhoea in adolescents in the US were up to 300 times higher than in less devout democratic countries. The US also suffered from “ uniquely high” adolescent and adult syphilis infection rates, and adolescent abortion rates, the study suggested.
Mr Paul said: “The study shows that England, despite the social ills it has, is actually performing a good deal better than the USA in most indicators, even though it is now a much less religious nation than America.”
He said that the disparity was even greater when the US was compared with other countries, including France, Japan and the Scandinavian countries. These nations had been the most successful in reducing murder rates, early mortality, sexually transmitted diseases and abortion, he added....
“The non-religious, proevolution democracies contradict the dictum that a society cannot enjoy good conditions unless most citizens ardently believe in a moral creator. The widely held fear that a Godless citizenry must experience societal disaster is therefore refuted.”
Of course, correlation is not causation...
The full text of the article, summarized above, is here.
September 27, 2005
Posted by seschmid at 09:28 PM | Comments (4)
Prisoner's Dilemma
You have just been arrested for committing a horrible crime. Arrested at the same time and for the same crime is your associate. You are both being interrogated separately and neither of you knows what the other is saying.
You and the other suspect both know that if neither of you confess, the case is weak and each of you will receive a minor sentence on lesser charges. In this case, the sentence is only 5 years in prison.
If you both confess, then you will be convicted of the crime and each will receive 20 years in prison.
If only one of you confess and testifies against the other, the one who did not cooperate will get life in prison and the one who confessed will go free.
What would you do? Would you confess? What is in your best interest? What is in your associate's best interests? What course of action would result in the least prison time for both of you?
Posted by seschmid at 02:34 PM | Comments (7)
September 25, 2005
Cultural Relativism
The reading for the next class, "What's Culture Got To Do With It?," can be a difficult piece to read.
What are your initial reactions to the practice of female circumcision?
Do you ever think that right and wrong actions are determined by a society or culture? If so, then do you think that practices like female circumcision ought to continue? What justification can you give for continuing this practice?
We often hear that we ought to be tolerant of other cultures? Should we be tolerant of all of a culutre's actions? Are some practices really not ethically significant and we should practice tolerance in these cases? Do you have any examples?
Posted by seschmid at 05:15 PM | Comments (9)
September 21, 2005
Mike's Challenge to Kai's Argument
Mike brings up a good challenge to Kai's argument. In particular, Mike takes issue with the premise that if one is not controlled by impossible expectations, then one can find happiness. Kai goes on to argue that only a secularist is not controlled by impossible expectations. So, only a secularist or one with a secular view can find happiness. Mike disagrees. As I understand Mike, a religious moralist can find happiness, too. (Kai's argument is on p. 591)
The "impossible expectations" of there being "one big thing" contrasts with what Kai thinks is the case in human happiness. Kai thinks happiness is achieved through many different avenues and none of these depend on being religious. On this point Kai writes, "The sources of human enjoyment are obviously too numerous to detail. But all of them are achievable in a Godless universe" (p. 591). The impossible expectation of there being "one big thing" exists for the religious moralist, Kai argues, because the religious moralist is commited to happiness deriving purely from belief in God, following God, or something along these lines.
What do you all think? Do you all agree with Mike that one can be happy even if one holds "impossible expectations?" Do you disagree with Kai's conception of happiness? If so, how does one find happiness?
Mike, thanks for the comment. I think I've correctly characterized your challenge to Kai. Let me know if I have not.
Posted by seschmid at 10:27 AM | Comments (7)
September 19, 2005
Ethics without God
Here's a debatable question: Can one live an ethical and moral life without God? Can one find meaning in one's life without appeal to religion and religious faith?
What do you think? What does Kai think?
Posted by seschmid at 10:42 AM | Comments (6)
September 15, 2005
Questions on Euthyphro and the Divine Command Theory
Euthyphro is a very wise man, or so he thinks. What is Socrates trying to learn from him?
What is Euthyphro's answer?
Substitute for “piety” the word “just” or “good”. And for “impiety” substitute “unjust” or “bad”. Does this make the argument easier to understand?
Suppose God were to say it is permissible to torture babies for fun? Would torturing babies for fun really be permissible? How must Euthyphro answer this question?
Posted by seschmid at 02:51 PM | Comments (9)
September 09, 2005
Welcome to Ethics
Welcome to the UW-Rock County Ethics class blog. This blog page is intended for students enrolled in the Fall 2005, PHI 241 Ethics class.
The purpose of this blog page is to provide a place for class announcements, clarifications of lectures and assignments, and discussion of issues raised in and out of class. Students can comment on any of the postings or to any of the comments. This blog page is also where you are to make your pre-presentation responses.
This is a great tool for learning more about and doing philosophy by discussing philosophical issues with your peers. I strongly suggest that you visit this blog page on a regular basis--preferably the day before each class so you are prepared for the next day's lecture and discussion.
Information about the course is available in the class syllabus. Also, access to class notes, philosophy resources, and the class blog page is on the class page.
Posted by seschmid at 09:17 AM | Comments (4)