Commentary Questions for Tuesday, September 5, 2006
1. Do you see yourself as having a coherent ideology
behind your beliefs and attitudes? How consistent or inconsistent are
they? Can you cite any examples?
2. What psychological functions do some of your own beliefs and attitudes serve?
3. How do you think the cultural wars are likely to be
resolved—if at all? Which side appears to have the
advantage and why
?
Commentary Questions for Tuesday, September 12, 2006
1. Now that you've read Baer/Carper article, and
the Baer-Eldridge exchange, and Hunter on schools, what is your
position on school vouchers?
2. How should controversial “Culture War” issues be dealt
with in elementary and secondary public schools. Does an “equal
time” approach seem feasible or desirable (e.g., teach both
evolution and creationism as theories)?
3. What other general reactions do you have to the Baer/Carper article
, the Baer-Eldridge exchange and Hunter's chapters on Education and the
Law?
Commentary Questions for Tuesday, September 12, 2006
Education (Continued)
1. What are your thoughts and reactions to last
week’s discussion with Professor Richard Baer? (At his
request, I send these to him—with your names removed.)
Gender
The Lenses of Gender by S. Bem is lengthy, so I would like to ensure that you attend to some of its central points.
A. You should know what the 3 lenses are. How, for example, androcentrism differs from men simply having more power than women.
B. In the Androcentrism chapter, pay most attention to the discussion of U.S. Constitutional law.
C. You should know what cultural meta-messages are. In the book S. Bem,
talks about meta-messages that implicitly teach American children about
individualism and how similar meta-messages implant the lenses of
gender into our individual beliefs and attitudes.
2. Can you think of another domain in which meta-messages play a role in enculturating us? (If not, just say so.)
3. Do you agree with S. Bem’s more radical prescription in
the final chapter that gender polarization, not just androcentrism,
ought to be abolished?
Commentary Questions for Tuesday, September 26, 2006
1. In what sense is Bem's theory of sexual orientation a “biology
in context” theory? What features of the theory are biologically
essentialist and what features are “socially constructed”?
2. Bem argues that Americans' attitudes toward homosexuality would not
be any more pro-gay if they were convinced that homosexuality was
biologically determined. Do you agree? Can you think of a
counter-argument?
3. In what sense is Rauch’s argument in favor of gay
marriage a “conservative” argument? What do you find the
most compelling arguments in favor of gay marriage? Against? What is
your own position on the issue?
Commentary Questions for Tuesday, October 3, 2006
1. Do you think that Luker is even-handed in her presentation of both the pro-choice and pro-life sides of the issue?
2. What are your own views on the abortion issue?
Commentary Questions for Tuesday, October 17, 2006
Here is a link to the midterm examination, which is due in class on Tuesday, October 17, 2006. It may also be submitted as a Word document via e-mail before then.
1. In what sense is Brumberg justified in arguing that anorexia in the
middle ages, anorexia at the turn of the 20th Century, and anorexia at
the present time are all the "same thing"?
2. What does Brumberg mean by the chapter title "The Appetite as Voice"?
Commentary Questions for Tuesday, October 24, 2006
NOTE: The following article is also assigned for this week:
Michaels, W. B., Diversity’s False Solace.
1. In her article, Crenshaw argues against Harvard sociologist
Orlando Patterson’s claim that Clarence Thomas was being
misjudged because (white) America failed to understand that he was
simply engaging in the traditional black custom of “down home
courtin’.” What do you think of his argument? In your mind,
does it challenge the progressivist’s commitment to cultural
relativism?
2. What are your views on affirmative action? Specifically, do
you agree with Stephen Carter that an institution’s concern with
“diversity” is not a valid reason for using affirmative
action?
3. Do you think that children of alumni, faculty, or financial
donors should be given any advantage in admissions to Cornell over
other applicants? Should an applicant from Colorado have a better
chance thansomeone from New York with equal credentials?
Commentary Questions for Tuesday, October 31, 2006
Deaf Culture
In The Mask of Benevolence, Harlan Lane argues
strongly against cochlear implants. Much of his argument hinges on how
well they work. But for the sake of argument, suppose that the
technology got to the point where they worked well. Would you advocate
that deaf children be given them? What about deaf parents who do not
want to lose their children to the “hearing” culture?
Should they be required to use such implants?
Now compare your responses to this question
with other “conditions” that might be correctable. What
about children who are intersexed, that is, whose genitalia are
ambiguous? Up until now, such children have been surgically treated so
that they are clearly one sex or the other. Suppose one could identify
and change a child’s eventual homosexuality. Should parents be
given the power to make that decision for their young children? What
about gay parents who would like their children to be gay—for the
same reason that deaf parents prefer their children to be part of deaf
culture? What about Christian Scientist parents who would choose not to
intervene medically to treat a child with a medical disorder.
In other words, I am interested in knowing if
you have a consistent position on these matters. How do you distinguish
between conditions that you would give the parents the right and the
power to change, those you would not, and those you would actually hold
parents accountable if they did not choose to have their children
“treated”?
Commentary Questions for Tuesday, November 7, 2006.
Warning: This week’s
assignment is more difficult than previous ones and requires close
attention. Leave yourself enough time to read and understand
Singer’s very controversial arguments.
Review your response to last week’s question about Deaf Culture in light of the video Sound and Fury. Think
about whether it has led you to reconsider your position. [You
don’t need to discuss this in your written commentary. Just be
ready to do so in class.]
Singer, P. Practical Ethics (2nd edition). Preface and Chapters 1 – 7.
Pollan, M. "An
Animal's Place"
McBryde
Johnson, "Unspeakable Conversations"
Picture of
Harriet McBryde Johnson
Questions
1. Singer’s
primitive value axioms, his starting point, the basis on which he
builds his ethical arguments can be classified as a version of
Utilitarianism. What is your understanding of his
“primitives”? Do you agree with them?
2. On what basis does Singer argue for treating non-human animals
and humans the same way with regard to ethical treatment? Do you agree
with his argument? What about his arguments about vegetarianism?
Do you agree with Pollan’s counterarguments?
3. Do you agree with Singer’s views on the sanctity of
human life with regard to infanticide, the disabled, and the terminally
ill? If not, why not. Is there something wrong with his reasoning?
Commentary Questions for Tuesday, November 7, 2006.
Science & Religion
1. What is the difference between an agnostic and an atheist? How would you characterize Sam Harris’s beliefs?
2. Do you see any inconsistency between Harris’s attack on
traditional religious beliefs and his own views discussed in Chapter 6
and 7?
3. Describe your own religious beliefs. If you believe in an
Abrahamic God (i.e., the God derived from Jewish, Christian, or Islamic
traditions), how could you justify your beliefs in the face of Sam
Harris’s critique? If you are an agnostic, an
atheist, or subscribe to some other kind of religious or
quasi-religious belief, what is the basis for your belief system?
If you have no religious beliefs, explain.
Commentary Questions for Tuesday November 21, 2006
Here are the links to the two additional readings:
Rauch: “Bipolar Disorder”
Steinhorn: “Scrooge’s Nightmare”
1. When the Ellen DeGeneres’ character came out as a lesbian on
her TV sitcom (at the same time that Ellen herself came out), some
groups on the religious right began a boycott of sponsors of the show.
Similarly, when Dr. Laura Schlesinger made comments on her radio show
about gay men and lesbians being “unnatural,” some gay
activists tried to organize a boycott of her sponsors. What is your
position on such boycotts?
2. Reconsider the question asked early in the course: Who do you think
has the advantage in the Culture-War debate, the Orthodox or the
Progressives and why?
3. What were the major “aha” experiences you got out of the
readings and discussions this semester? Did you change your
beliefs or attitudes substantially on any of the issues?
Review for Final Exam will be found here
Return to Homepage
