PHIL002 Winter 2024 Contemporary Moral Issues (UC Riverside)

Overview

This course explores some moral issues that face us in contemporary life. We will focus on three moral issues that I believe are of interest to many of you, are useful for learning about a variety of topics and theories in the discipline of moral philosophy, and help you think and write precisely and clearly about contentious moral topics. The issues are: (1) the morality of your phone, (2) the morality of your carbon footprint, and (3) the morality of restrictions on speech.

(1) The morality of your phone. For many of us with smart phones, our phones are addictive— speaking either loosely or literally. That is probably bad. But in what ways? And who has a duty or responsibility to do something about it? We explore readings that provide precise answers to these questions. Perhaps surprisingly, one reading will argue that you have a moral duty to yourself to use your phone less, regardless of what social media companies or the government does or should do. The importance and nature of human rationality, freedom, and autonomy will be a big theme.

(2) The morality of your carbon footprint. Given our best current scientific understanding of climate change and its causes, it is intuitive that governments and other powerful organizations have an obligation to mitigate the effects of climate change and help us adapt to them. But do you have an obligation to reduce your individual carbon footprint, independent of what powerful organizations do or should do? One of our readings says ‘no’; another says ‘yes’. The morality of the effects, or likely effects, of our actions will be a big theme.

(3) The morality of restrictions on speech. It is intuitive that people’s ability to speak or write publicly ought to be restricted by a government and other social institutions when there is strong evidence that it would cause harm, if harm is understood narrowly to include only physical harm, substantial harm to property, and lasting, substantial psychological harm. One question we will consider is: what is the justification for this, and what does this imply that governments and other institutions should do?

But there is a more controversial set of questions we will consider: are there more restrictions on speech that are permissible other than preventing harm, understanding harm narrowly? Does hate speech cause harm on a broader understanding of harm? Should non-harmful speech sometimes be prohibited? In addressing these questions, we will discuss legal precedents pertaining to restrictions on speech in the US and other countries and pertaining to restrictions on speech at public and private universities. The notion of harm, and the relationship between harm, individual freedoms, and the common good, together constitute a big theme.

Schedule with Readings

Module 1: The morality of your phone

Week 1 (Jan 10, 12) W: Class introduction. Optional: selections from Catherine Price, How to Break Up with your Phone. F: Vikram Bhargava and Manuel Velasquez, “Ethics of the Attention Economy: The Problem of Social Media Addiction.” You need to read ONLY the first page (p. 322), Section 1 (pp. 323 to top of p. 328), and Sections 2.2 and 2.3 (bottom of p. 333 to top of p. 339)

Week 2 (Jan 17, 19): W: Timothy Aylsworth and Clinton Castor, “Is There a Duty to be a Digital Minimalist?”. Supplemental reading by me on Immanuel Kant’s views on ends and humanity as an end in itself. F: Continued

Week 3 (Jan 24, 26): W: Catch-up/in-depth discussion of issues so far, Exam 1 prep. F: Exam 1.

Week 4 (Jan 31, Feb 2): W: Bhargava and Velasquez, “Ethics of the Attention Economy: The Problem of Social Media Addiction,” Read entire paper (re-read Sections 1, 2.2, and 2.3). Martha Nussbaum, “In Defense of Universal Values,” Women and Human Development, pp. 70-83. F: Continued.

Module 2: The morality of your carbon footprint

Week 5 (Feb 7, Feb 9): W: John Broome, Climate Matters chapter 1, “Science.” Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, “It’s not My Fault: Global Warming and Individual Moral Obligations,” all but Section 6. F: Continued.

Week 6 (Feb 14, Feb 16): W: Avram Hiller, “Climate Change and Individual Responsibility.” Dale Jamieson, “Consequentialism” (short excerpt from Ethics and the Environment). [Optional: John Broome, “How Much Harm Does Each of Us Do?”] F: Continued. Optional Exam 1 essay question revisions due on Canvas.

Week 7 (Feb 21, Feb 23): W: Catch-up/in-depth discussion of issues so far, Exam 2 prep. F: Exam 2.

Module 3: The morality of restrictions on speech

Week 8 (Feb 28, Mar 1): W: John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, Chapter 1, Ch 2, Chapter 3 pp. 52-53, and Chapter 4 F: Continued.

Week 9 (Mar 6, 8): W: Jeremy Waldron, The Harm in Hate Speech, Chapter 3, “Why Call Hate Speech Group Libel?”, Chapter 4, “The Appearance of Hate” (selections), Chapter 5, “Protecting Dignity or Protection from Offense?” F: Continued.

Week 10 (Mar 13, 15): W: Catch-up/in-depth discussion of issues so far. F: Exam 3 prep.

Week 11/Exam Week. Thursday, March 21, 8:00 a.m.-11:00 a.m: Exam 3.