Project Reflection
The goal of this project was to familiarize ourselves with moral and political philosophies, and be able to apply their ideas to current issues. To start, we read The Night Thoreau Spent in Jail to examine the idea of civil disobedience. We briefly examined the morality and justification of the Mexican-War in manifest destiny. Then, we were introduced to different moral dilemmas (Trolley Car Dilemma) and asked to choose a course of action based on our own personal feelings. Then, we were split into groups and given one of four moral philosophies (Deontology, John Rawls’ Justice as Fairness, Libertarianism, Utilitarianism) to examine in depth. I was assigned Deontology, created by Immanuel Kant, which valued human life above all else and argued that the only moral acts are those done for the right reasons. John Rawls based his moral philosophy on the premise of equality, and created the Veil of Ignorance (creating laws transcendent of personal bias and prejudice) to secure a more fair society. Libertarianism supports minimal to no government influence, and advocates strongly for the rights of the individual. Utilitarianism focuses on the betterment of the “greater good,” though Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mills, the primary philosophers, had two different approaches to benefitting the greater good. Bentham was in favor of sacrificing the rights of the individual to secure the community, while Mills argued that respecting individual liberties would benefit society in the long run. To connect a current issue to the idea of justice, we examined the Stop & Frisk policy in New York City and had a seminar on the proper course of action. The end activity was applying the reasoning of different moral philosophies to moral dilemmas and using the philosophies to balance welfare, freedom, and virtue. We were introduced to rhetoric and ways to analyze rhetoric to better understand how to incorporate ethos, pathos, and logos into our own work. For the exhibition of this project, we were instructed to choose a relevant issue and write an op-ed based not on our political perspective, but our idea of justice and the balance of equality, liberty, and security. We were also tasked with the creation of a visual piece that illustrated our perspective and employed at least two of the rhetorical aristotelian appeals.
This project was enlightening in a variety of ways. I learned that justice is incredibly subjective and morality is flexible to the values of the perpetrator. In the case of Stop & Frisk, it was interesting to be able to examine the political and moral motivations of the violation of American citizens in the wake of 9/11. I learned that it is important to examine political issues objectively before forming opinions. In the case of my essay, I was having a hard time deciding which side of the issue to argue because I was trying to base my opinion off of vague prior information, and my pre-existing bias skewed my ability to absorb the facts. Listening to some of my classmates’ papers, it became clear that sometimes personal bias can dictate a moral justification. Morality can be warped to support a personal opinion. For instance, cannibalism may seem immoral to some, but it can certainly be justified under either libertarian or utilitarian philosophy, depending on the circumstances. Learning about the use of rhetorical appeals has allowed me to think for myself and recognize the danger of believing everything you are told. Knowing about rhetoric makes it possible to read between the lines, and craft more meaningful arguments of my own that appeal to my audiences.
In my opinion, the strength in my op-ed lies in the moral and political philosophy content. Initially, I had a great deal of trouble connecting my argument to a moral philosophy, and the newness of the technology for genetic engineering made it difficult to apply the ideas of the Constitution. To remedy this, I focused on forming my opinion and finding evidence to support my statements, and chose a moral philosophy to apply after I had written my essay in its entirety. By using this method, I was able to craft strong moral philosophy connections in the ideas of John Rawls, and find legal connections outside of the Constitution. As I wrote, “Genetic engineering threatens the idea of justice as seen by John Rawls, who argued that the roots of justice are fairness and equality. Rawls used the idea of moral arbitrariness to define justice, stating that the treatment of an individual should not be based upon social position or physical characteristics with which they are endowed from birth. He created the Veil of Ignorance, the concept of creating laws transcendent of personal biases and prejudices. The only inequality that society should allow is that which benefits the lesser privileged.” The aspect of the project that I struggled the most with was streamlining my essay to be within the required word limit. As a writer, I have a hard time writing concisely and condensing my arguments to only the essential points. I tend to stray towards descriptive writing, which, in persuasive writing, can confuse the reader and make them less likely to agree with my argument. From my first draft to my final essay, I eliminated over seven hundred words.
If I was given another week to refine my project, I would spend more time on my painting. I was unsure of what to expect when I decided to work with skin tones. The distinctive shadows and characteristics of a baby’s face are difficult to perfect in any circumstances, but trying to execute them well in two days was quite a challenge. I would like to spend more time working on my technique of painting human anatomy to make my art piece more realistic, and ultimately more powerful. I think my op-ed could also benefit from the chance of further refinement. Streamlining my essay so quickly left me with ideas that had less evidence than I might have liked. I could use my extra time to revisit some of the ideas that I had to eliminate from my op-ed in order to meet the word requirement.
This project was enlightening in a variety of ways. I learned that justice is incredibly subjective and morality is flexible to the values of the perpetrator. In the case of Stop & Frisk, it was interesting to be able to examine the political and moral motivations of the violation of American citizens in the wake of 9/11. I learned that it is important to examine political issues objectively before forming opinions. In the case of my essay, I was having a hard time deciding which side of the issue to argue because I was trying to base my opinion off of vague prior information, and my pre-existing bias skewed my ability to absorb the facts. Listening to some of my classmates’ papers, it became clear that sometimes personal bias can dictate a moral justification. Morality can be warped to support a personal opinion. For instance, cannibalism may seem immoral to some, but it can certainly be justified under either libertarian or utilitarian philosophy, depending on the circumstances. Learning about the use of rhetorical appeals has allowed me to think for myself and recognize the danger of believing everything you are told. Knowing about rhetoric makes it possible to read between the lines, and craft more meaningful arguments of my own that appeal to my audiences.
In my opinion, the strength in my op-ed lies in the moral and political philosophy content. Initially, I had a great deal of trouble connecting my argument to a moral philosophy, and the newness of the technology for genetic engineering made it difficult to apply the ideas of the Constitution. To remedy this, I focused on forming my opinion and finding evidence to support my statements, and chose a moral philosophy to apply after I had written my essay in its entirety. By using this method, I was able to craft strong moral philosophy connections in the ideas of John Rawls, and find legal connections outside of the Constitution. As I wrote, “Genetic engineering threatens the idea of justice as seen by John Rawls, who argued that the roots of justice are fairness and equality. Rawls used the idea of moral arbitrariness to define justice, stating that the treatment of an individual should not be based upon social position or physical characteristics with which they are endowed from birth. He created the Veil of Ignorance, the concept of creating laws transcendent of personal biases and prejudices. The only inequality that society should allow is that which benefits the lesser privileged.” The aspect of the project that I struggled the most with was streamlining my essay to be within the required word limit. As a writer, I have a hard time writing concisely and condensing my arguments to only the essential points. I tend to stray towards descriptive writing, which, in persuasive writing, can confuse the reader and make them less likely to agree with my argument. From my first draft to my final essay, I eliminated over seven hundred words.
If I was given another week to refine my project, I would spend more time on my painting. I was unsure of what to expect when I decided to work with skin tones. The distinctive shadows and characteristics of a baby’s face are difficult to perfect in any circumstances, but trying to execute them well in two days was quite a challenge. I would like to spend more time working on my technique of painting human anatomy to make my art piece more realistic, and ultimately more powerful. I think my op-ed could also benefit from the chance of further refinement. Streamlining my essay so quickly left me with ideas that had less evidence than I might have liked. I could use my extra time to revisit some of the ideas that I had to eliminate from my op-ed in order to meet the word requirement.