Truman lived under a paper moon

One of my all time favorite movies is Paper Moon. While Nat King Cole sings it best it is the lyrics that really embed the meaning. (worth looking up for those interested - movie and lyrics)

What is real to us? Do we ever truly know our friends or acquaintances? How do we verify if our surroundings are even concrete? Just because we can touch, feel, see - are we actually experiencing reality? Or is it just a fleeting glimpse of someone else's design? And if so, who? What? These questions have been pondered by some of the greatest minds that have ever pondered. But are we any closer to the answers??

Truman was brought up to think his world was real. His entire 'reality' as he knew it was a construct of his creator, Christof. Christof designed this elaborate world to disguise the outside REAL world from Truman. Truman could even taste the salty air surrounding his menagerie, and yet it wasn't true. So eloquently put: "We accept the reality of the world in which we are presented," responded Christof in interview. If Emerson were alive today, I think he would have retorted with one of his lines: "The mind does not create what it perceives, anymore than the eye creates the rose." R.W. Emerson

What are your thoughts?

Morals of money Part I

This clip is essentially a bit of a slight of hand trick mixed in with just enough jabber to confuse anyone trying to count out bills. In life - and especially in the South during Great Depression - you can never know who to trust. Watch as Moses Pray pulls one over on an unsuspecting shopkeeper. He makes it out with a free ribbon (for Addie) and some dough along the way... $5 for $10

Welcome to Ethics and the Environment, 2010!

Hi everyone,
welcome to the class blog for NTRES 3320.  Have fun with posting items of interest and discussion of issues that relate to the course.

Jim

Angry Mermaid Award!

Vote for which corporations have made the greatest effort to sabotage the prevention of climate change! Keep in mind, each of these listed corporations have made "bullshit" proposals to help battle climate change that end up being much more profitable than effective!

Angry Mermaid Nominees!

Optional Paper topics

Hey Everyone,

So I'm thinking about the optional paper topics and I want to write about the ethics of reading, and draw heavily from Thoreau's essay in Walden on reading. It was a close call between that and plastic trees. I was wondering what other people picked for a third topic, and, would it be possible for us to put our third papers online or something for the whole class to see? It might be fun to just see the variety of specific things that interest different people. If you don't like the idea, feel free to veto it.

-Arjun

PS--I haven't done the Blog so far b/c I thought I was bad with computers, but this is pretty easy.

New National Park Service Director

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=113697978

Here's a link to an interview with the new director of the National Park Service. Pretty short, but mentions restrictions on snow mobile use in Yellowstone.

-Dana

Life After People

We were talking about anthropocentrism in class today. Many people are concerned about how the environment will change but is this really about how the environment will change the lives of human beings? What about life after people?

The History Channel made a film about this (link below)

Life After People

Hope you enjoy it!

Child Labor in Uzbek: Repercussions of Speaking Out

This is going back to the 11/10 lecture and the article referring to examples of paternalism... I'm wondering if the individual who divulged the information to BBC would have changed his mind if he knew he was going to be harmed out of his attempt to help others.

Activist 'beaten' after BBC story

Groundhog Day

For anyone interested in watching part or all of Groundhog Day, here is the link to Part 1 of ten on youtube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MoOvPIuKAY&feature=related

A Series of Great Films to Accompany Great Literature

We have been reading a lot of thought-provoking material in the past weeks on various ethical issues and approaches to core ethical question of "How should one live?"   There seem to be a number of films coming out that deal with ethical issues we are discussing in class.  Adding to the post before mine, there are a few films that are out in theaters in the coming weeks that may be worth your time. 

In addition to"The Invention of Lying" (which was very thought-provoking - is the world actually made better if there is no lying?), there is also "Surrogates," "Where the Wild Things Are," and "The Box" (coming out November 6).  "The Box" poses the following moral dilemma: pushing a button will instantly earn you one million dollars, but will also kill someone you do not know; do you push it?

"Where the Wild Things Are" does not necessarily fit in the category of dealing with ethical issues, but is in the broader category of how should one deal with issues in general, and the foundation of a person's character.  I wanted to share a link to a NY Times Opinion article related to the movie that I found to be very well-written on this subject of morality:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/20/opinion/20brooks.html

- Jess

"The Invention of Lying" On the Topic of Lying vs. Bullshit

I just saw this preview for "The Invention of Lying" recently and thought it'd be interesting to share with all of you considering it's fairly pertinent with what we had been discussing just a week ago. It's literally about a man who stumbles upon the ability to lie in a world where no one has ever lied before, and how he exploits it. Enjoy.

The Invention of Lying

-Brian Han

The rights of nature

The Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund (CELDF) is a Pennsylvania nonprofit dedicated to asserting the rights of nature and having such rights codified into law. Check out their website at:

http://www.celdf.org/Home/tabid/36/Default.aspx

How far do rights go?

Here's a clip from Ghost in the Shell that made me think of class today (9/29), how far do we go with rights? Like other sci-fi robot films (AI or iRobot), what rights do they have? They can think and act, even independently, so what rights do they have. So if a robot has rights, can the earth??? How far do we go with rights?

Austin Powers: is this international man of mystery doing or allowing harm?

You decide: is Austin Powers doing or allowing harm?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLlUgilKqms

Interview with Harry Frankfurt on bullshit

Here is an interview with Harry Frankfurt that can help you with understanding his essay on bullshit.

originally posted 9/21/07

Soda Tax

While reading the NY Times today, I ran across an article (found online at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/17/business/17soda.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=soda&st=cse) on the front page of the Business section about how a tax should be imposed on sugary beverages like soda. This, supporters argue, would help fight obesity and raise funds for the health care reform. As someone who doesn't drink soda, I can honestly say I am biased in favor of such a tax, but what do you think? Is it right for the government to influence what we drink?

Neurath's boat

There are many references to Neurath's boat in various places on the web, and one nice paper that relates to ethics is by Gilbert Harman of Princeton University. "Three Trends in Moral and Political Philosophy" is available as a pdf file and may be of interest to some of you.

for more on Apollo 13:

Welcome to Ethics and the Environment, Fall 2009 version

Hi everyone,
glad to get the class started today. Enjoy the blog, and please do share items that you run across that relate (however broadly) to the subject matter of the course.

Jim

Recreation in the National Parks

From a long time ago, but I just figured out how to post as a new blog, rather than a comment!

After talking today in class about what forms of recreation in the national parks are intrinsically better than another it got me thinking of a personal story from this past summer, that I included in my Mill v. Sax Paper, but I think everyone might find it interesting:

"In defense of Sax’s position that the parks should be kept as natural as possible, I recall a personal anecdote from my family trip to Alaska this past summer. Denali National Park is a six million acre preserve originally set aside as a national park in 1917. Set in the heart of Alaska, Denali is a majestic park that I have always been enthralled with since I was a young child. To me, it seemed as though Denali was one of America’s last great wildernesses; a place where grizzly bears and moose far outnumbered people. All this set against the backdrop of Mount McKinley, the highest, and perhaps most spectacular peak in North America. Denali was one of the last places my family visited on our two-week trip to Alaska and I was effervescent with anticipation until the moment we arrived there.
Our tour bus pulled up to the Princess™ “Wilderness” Lodge right outside of the park boundary and I was appalled at what I saw. This “wilderness” lodge was more like a Disneyworld resort, packed full of tourists who seemed as though they had taken a wrong turn somewhere and ended up in the middle of Alaska. Across the street from the resort there was a “scenic” cable car ride that took you to the top of a nearby mountain, as well as a strip mall crammed with restaurants, souvenir shops and even a Harley Davidson Motorcycle outlet! The physical and symbolic scar that was left on this landscape by human development was palpable. It felt like a bad dream, all my life I had envisioned Denali as an unspoiled, expansive wilderness, and here I was, standing outside a McDonald’s only feet from the Denali park border. I was dejected. Technically, this development was allowed because it was mere feet outside of the park’s borders, but that didn’t change my opinion of it. The over-development of such a wonderful natural area detracted from my personal experience while visiting the park."

Any thoughts or comments?

-Matt

Ethics of Hunting

From a long time ago, but I just figured out how to post as a new blog, rather than a comment!

I found the discussion of bear hunting with hounds and jelly donuts today in class especially interesting, particularly when the issue was raised: is it unsportsmanlike to hunt in such a manner and if so, should that be penalizable? It was brought up that in sports such as basketball and football that acting in a respectful "sportsmanlike" manner is a personal decision, which not everyone chooses to follow. If a person chooses to act unsportsmanlike this doesn't get penalized. The problem I had with that is in sports such as football, basketball or baseball that's simply not true. If an athlete acts unsportsmanlike in any way he is subject to consequences such as penalties for his team or being ejected from the game. So taking it back to the bear hunting argument, if it is indeed a sport like basketball and football, shouldn't hunters be held accountable if they behave in ways that are deemed unsportsmanlike by their specific sport? Not to say I believe this, I am merely playing devil's advocate and offering up some food for thought

P.S. I found some interesting bear hunting video's with hounds on YouTube; you decide if its ethical or not.

http://video.google.com/videosearch?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=1G1GGLQ_ENUS292&q=bear+hunting+with+dogs&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=X&oi=video_result_group&resnum=4&ct=title#