Phi 2630 1st Edition Lecture 7 Outline of Last Lecture II. John Arthur: Sticks and Stonesa. Dangers of Censorshipb. Does hate speech cause harm?III. Charles LawrenceIV. Feinberg’s Offense PrincipleV. Free Speech and PornographyVI. Principle of Legal MoralismOutline of Current Lecture VII. Nadine Strossen, Why Censoring Pornography Would Not Reduce Discrimination Or Violence Against Women.VIII. Peter Singer, “All Animals are Equal”a. Lecture Notesb. Reading NotesCurrent LectureI. Nadine Strossen, Why Censoring Pornography Would Not Reduce Discrimination Or Violence Against Women.a. Would censorship reduce sexism and violence against women? Strossen considers the following argument:i. Exposure to sexist, violent images leads to sexist, violent behaviors.ii. Effective suppression of pornography would reduce exposure to such imagery.iii. Censorship would effectively suppress pornography.iv. (Therefore) censorship of pornography would reduce sexist, violent behavior.1. Strossen questions whether we can get even this far.These notes represent a detailed interpretation of the professor’s lecture. GradeBuddy is best used as a supplement to your own notes, not as a substitute.v. This does not, however, mean that we should ban them.b. Strossen thinks all these premises are questionablei. Evidence concerning the alleged causal link between pornography and harming interests of women1. Laboratory research2. Correlational dataa. The state with the most exposure to pornography should, under the above argument, have a high number of violent sexual assaults for a strong correlation.b. However the data does not produce such, or any really, correlation. This undermines the claim that exposure to sexist violent images leads to violent sexual behavior.c. Suppose we even did find a strong correlation – concludingthat there is a causal link between the two commits the fallacy of causation from mere correlation.i. Rather, a common cause of the two could explain the correlation.3. Studies of sex offendersa. If they had certain exposure to violent and sexist imagery.b. We find no significant correlation.4. Anecdotal dataa. We need more than just anecdotal information, since it does not add up to data, to prove the argument’s conclusion.ii. The media is full of sex and violence independently of pornography.1. Even if we effectively suppress pornography we will still be exposed to a sufficient amount of violent sexual imagery in popular media.iii. Forbidden fruit – censoring pornography would not suppress it.1. Calls into question the last premise of the above argument.2. This would make it impossible or extremely difficult for people to access it or at least significantly fewer people could access it.3. Forbidding something makes people desire it more.c. She simply argues against a certain claim which is often used as a justification for banning pornography, not argued that pornography should not be banned. If your reasoning for banning pornography is the above, then you have gone wrongsomewhere.II. Peter Singer, “All Animals are Equal”a. Main Argumenti. Principle of Equal Consideration: like interests deserve equal consideration.1. Not doing so is discriminatory.ii. Nonhuman animals have an interest in not suffering parallel to that of humans.iii. Therefore, suffering of animals deserves the same consideration as does parallel suffering of humans.iv. Objection One1. Animals differ greatly from humans in relevant ways – e.g. they can express political opinions – so they don’t deserve equal consideration. 2. Singer’s Reply: these differences are only relevant to what rights get granted. But animals still deserve equal consideration of the like interests they share with human persons, such as the interest in not suffering. (Compare: men and women share an interest in suffering, but men don’t need a right to have abortions).v. Objection Two1. Humans deserve superior treatment because they have superior abilities (moral, intellectual, communicative, etc.).2. Singer’s Reply: equality within the human species is not based on any of these things. (Consider: we don’t think people with IQs less than 100 deserve superior status to those with IQs less than 100.) rather, moral equality is based simply on having interests. But humans aren’t the only beings with interests.b. Sentience: the capacity for suffering and enjoying things. Necessary and sufficient for having any interests at all.i. Necessary: hard to see how a thing could have interests if there’s nothing it’s like to be that thing.ii. Sufficient: if there’s something it’s like for a creature to feel suffering or enjoyment, it has interests in not suffering and in having its enjoyments.c. Speciesism: discrimination against the members of a species simply on the basis of species membership.i. It’s morally irrelevant to consider whether a being has an interest in not suffering on the basis of any of the following conditions1. Skin color2. Hairiness3. Length of tailbone4. Intelligence5. Rationality6. Languageii. It would be the same for anyone to discriminate against animals for these reasons.d. Argument from marginal cases: If you hold it’s permissible to ignore the animals’ interests in not suffering (Say, because they’re less intelligent, rational, etc.), you are committed to saying the same about “marginal” humans, for example, young children and the mentally disabled.i. This means that it would be morally on-par to, for example, make clothingof the skin from either a child or an animal.e. Practical Implicationsi. Factory farming and food choice1. “For the great majority of human beings, especially in urban, industrialized societies, the most direct form of contact with members of other species is at mealtimes: we eat them. In doing so we treat them purely as means to our ends. We regard their lifeand well-being as subordinate to our taste for a particular kind of dish. I say “taste” deliberately – this is purely a matter of pleasing our palate…to avoid speciesism we must stop this practice, and each of us has a moral obligation to cease supporting the practice.”2. Ethical obligation to make vegan food and clothing choices.3. “Our custom is all the support that the meat-industry needs. The decision to cease giving it that support may be difficult, but it is nomore difficult than it would have been for a white Southerner to go against the traditions of his society and free his slaves;
View Full Document
Unlocking...