Philosophical Community Service Assignment

I try to teach an "Introduction to Philosophical Ethics" course in an interactive, discussion-based and skills-focused manner.

If you understand something, then you explain it to an appropriate audience: you can teach them something. Their final assignment involves students sharing their moral reasoning skills with an audience of people not in our class. Students have to show this audience how to rationally evaluate moral arguments, using examples they provide, and then teach the audience some basic skills at doing this, involving arguments that the audience provides. I call this "philosophical community service."

Here is the assignment (more details and backstory asap):

Philosophical Service Project

For this assignment, you will perform some "philosophical community service." The service you will provide is demonstrating to the community how to think critically about moral issues using the logical methods we've practiced in this class. So, you will model thinking in systematic ways about moral issues, engage some arguments from your audience and help them evaluate these arguments.

Writing Coach

If you are seeking someone to help you with your writing, I am available as a "writing coach" or consultant: I can help you plan, get organized and stay on task. I'm also available as editor, for anything from "big picture" organizational guidance to a detailed review of your manuscript.

I'm happy to help you make any writing project more clear, vivid and concise.

To get a better sense for whether I can help you, you might want to read some of my writings to get a sense for my writing style. You could also check out the more recent essays at 1000-Word Philosophy: I've helped guide the production of the last 30 or so essays.  And here are three posts on better writing:

·         Organization and Clarity in Writing: Seeing the Forest Through the Trees

·         Writing Tips

·         Essay Evaluation Sheet

Please contact me to discuss your needs. Thank you!

Keywords: philosophical writing coach, humanities writing coach, social science writing coach, non-fiction writing coach

On the Moral Status of Non-Human Animals and Vulnerable Human Beings

Draft of a chapter here; comments and suggestions are welcome and would be appreciated! The Google Doc here allows for comments; there is an Academia.edu session also.

On the Moral Status of Non-Human Animals and Vulnerable Human Beings

Abstract: What do the reasons given for and against various moral views about many non-human animals imply or suggest for moral views about human beings in all their varieties, especially “vulnerable” human beings? And what do the reasons given for and against various moral views about the variety of human beings imply or suggest for our moral views about many animals? Some people are offended by some of these claims and arguments, but which are genuinely offensive? These and related questions are discussed and answered here.



1. Introduction 1

2. Moral Epistemologies for Animals 2

2.1. “Intuition” 2

2.2. Arguments from Non-Species Specific Properties 3

2.2.1. The Argument for Animal Rights 4

2.2.2. The Argument against Animal Rights 5

2.3. Arguments from Animals’ Relations to Human Beings 7

2.3.1. Arguments from Human Beings “In General” 7

2.3.2. Arguments from All Human Beings 8

2.3.2.1. Is the Argument Offensive? 10

2.3.2.2. A Dangerous Argument? 10

2.3.2.3. An Unsound Argument? 13

3. Moral Epistemologies for Human Beings 18

3.1. “Intuition” 18

3.2. Arguments from Non-Species Specific Principles 18

3.3. Rationality-Requiring Theories of Rights 18

3.4. Theories of Rights based on Relations to (Rational) Human Beings 18

3.5. From Animal Rights to Human Rights 19

3.6. Other Arguments 19

4. Conclusions: What Should We Think? What Should We Do? 20

4.1. Animal Advocates 20

4.2. Human Rights Advocates 20

4.3. Foes of Human and Animal Rights 21

4.4. Advocacy 22

Second Conference on Bioethics Issues in Minority Health and Health Disparities Research

Second Conference on Bioethics Issues in Minority Health and Health Disparities Research
January 23-25, 2019

Call for Abstracts and Manuscripts

Philosophy at HBCUs

Phhilosophy programs at HBCUs (Historically Black Colleges and Universities)

Decatur FM

Reply to Christopher Tollefsen on Abortion

Reply to Christopher Tollefsen on Abortion

Abstract: Are you the same thing as your body? Did you begin at conception? Do you have a rational and free “nature” or “essence”? Some answer ‘yes’ to all and argue that this means that abortion is wrong: 

your "essence" is that of a free and rational being; that essence *makes* it wrong to kill you; you have always existed whenever your body existed; your body began at conception; and so you existed at conception and were wrong to kill; and the same is true for all other human fetuses. 

This argument is discussed here. 

For Ethics: Left and Right, edited by Bob Fischer (Oxford University Press, 2019). By Nathan Nobis. Below is a response to Christopher Tollefsen’s essay on abortion, which is a perspective from “the Right.” Please see my contribution from a perspective from “the Left,” “Early and Later Abortions: Ethics and Law.”

Word count: 999

"Cultural Relativism" or "Moral Relativism" or "Ethical Relativism" or "Relativism"

Here is a short writing to better understand a moral theory called "Cultural Relativism" or "Moral Relativism" or "Ethical Relativism." See below the fold for the details:

"Don't Hide your Light Under a Bushel" - On Trying to be a Scholar for the Public

1. "Don't hide your light under a bushel"



See below the fold for more:

Decatur FM

A version of this will be out in the October Decatur Focus. Need something written? Contact me!

“Good morning, DE-CA-TUR!!!”

Where do you get your Decatur news? Blogs? City publications? Facebook? Talking to people?

There’s a new option in town: radio!

Organization and Clarity in Writing: Seeing the Forest Through the Trees

Philosophy papers, or philosophical presentations (talks or lectures, audio or video presentations, which are usually based on something written in preparation for the talk), typically attempt to do a number of things, such as:

1. State a view or claim.
2. State and explain a view or claim. 
3. State and explain a view or claim, and explain an argument(s) or reason(s) given in its favor, e.g., that the view is true or reasonable to believe, or state and explain a view or claim, and explain an argument(s) or reason(s) given against it, e.g., that the view is false or unreasonable to believe.  
4. State and explain a view or claim, and explain an argument(s) or reason(s) given in its favor or against it, and state and explain some objection(s) to that (or those) argument(s) - that is, a reason to think that the initial argument is somehow faulty - and explain whether that objection(s) is strong or not.  

And there are other tasks that one might do in a philosophy paper or presentation. It's important that whatever you decide you are going to do, you do it. See below the fold for more:

Moral Experts, Deference & Disagreement

I (we) have a chapter in this book "Moral Experts, Deference & Disagreement": 

Moral Expertise: New Essays from Theoretical and Clinical Bioethics

Editors: Watson, Jamie Carlin, Guidry-Grimes, Laura K. (Eds.)

• Contains all new essays that engage with a growing body of scholarly literature on moral expertise
• The first anthology on moral expertise since Lisa Rasmussen’s excellent 2005 collection, Ethics Expertise
• Brings together both academics and clinical ethicists on the contentious question of moral expertise

Fall Classes

Intro to Philosophical Ethics - 44370 - HPHI 302G - 01 SYLLABUS
Associated Term: Fall 2018 Registration Dates: Apr 09, 2018 to Aug 24, 2018 Levels: Undergraduate 3.000 Credits Scheduled Meeting Times Type Time Days Where Date Range Schedule Type Instructors Class 10:00 am - 10:50 am MWF Sale Hall 105 Aug 15, 2018 - Dec 07, 2018 Lecture Nathan M. Nobis (P)
Intro to Philosophical Ethics - 44371 - HPHI 302G - 02 SYLLABUS
Associated Term: Fall 2018 Registration Dates: Apr 09, 2018 to Aug 24, 2018 Levels: Undergraduate 3.000 Credits Scheduled Meeting Times Type Time Days Where Date Range Schedule Type Instructors Class 11:00 am - 11:50 am MWF Sale Hall 105 Aug 15, 2018 - Dec 07, 2018 Lecture Nathan M. Nobis (P)

Topic:Metaphysics - 45789 - HPHI 475 - 07 SYLLABUS
Associated Term: Fall 2018 Registration Dates: Apr 09, 2018 to Aug 24, 2018 Levels: Undergraduate 3.000 Credits Scheduled Meeting Times Type Time Days Where Date Range Schedule Type Instructors Class 1:00 pm - 1:50 pm MWF Sale Hall 109 Aug 15, 2018 - Dec 07, 2018 Lecture Nathan M. Nobis (P)

Laptops and Phones in classrooms

Andrew Mills has compiled a nice overview of the research on the typical educational impact of phone and laptop usage in classrooms: 

What this suggests is that students need some special reason for any phone and laptop use to be justified.

Early and Later Abortions: Ethics and Law

Early and Later Abortions: Ethics and Law

Early Abortions Are Not Wrong, Late Abortions Could Be Wrong,

but probably All Abortions Should Be Legal

For Ethics, Left and Right, edited by Bob Fischer (Oxford University Press, 2019)

For a reply to the "opposing side" essay, see my (9/26/18) "Reply to Christopher Tollefsen on Abortion"

Nathan Nobis; Philosophy, Morehouse College; nathan.nobis@gmail.com

Draft 7/31/18 ; Google doc; Also available at Academia.edu and Dropbox

Abstract

Most abortions occur early in pregnancy. I argue that these abortions, and so most abortions, are not morally wrong and that the best arguments given to think that these abortions are wrong are weak. I also argue that these abortions, and probably all abortions, should be legal.

I begin by observing that people sometimes respond to the issue by describing the circumstances of abortion, not offering reasons for their views about those circumstances; I then dismiss “question-begging” arguments about abortion that merely assume the conclusions they are given to support; most importantly, I evaluate many arguments: both common, often-heard arguments and arguments developed by philosophers.

My defense of abortion is based on facts about early fetuses’ not yet possessing consciousness or any mental life, awareness or feeling, as well as concerns about rights to one’s own body.

How to Deal with Kant's Racism—In and Out of the Classroom

Victor Fabian Abundez-Guerra's, "How to Deal with Kant's Racism—In and Out of the Classroom," Teaching Philosophy, Volume 41, Issue 2, June 2018, Pages 117-135. 

A follow-up article:

Responding to Morally Flawed Historical Philosophers and Philosophies by Victor Fabian Abundez-Guerra and Nathan Nobis, at 1000-Word Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology.

"Responding to Morally-Flawed Historical Philosophers and Philosophies"

A new paper!

Responding to Morally Flawed Historical Philosophers and Philosophies by Victor Fabian Abundez-Guerra and Nathan Nobis, at:

Summer class

Syllabus and Notes Intro to Philosophical Ethics - 42527 - HPHI 302G - 01
Associated Term: Summer 2018 Registration Dates: Apr 09, 2018 to Jul 13, 2018 Levels: Undergraduate Morehouse College Campus Lecture Schedule Type 3.000 Credits View Catalog Entry Scheduled Meeting Times Type Time Days Where Date Range Schedule Type Instructors Class 10:30 am - 11:50 am MTWRF Brawley Hall 206 Jun 05, 2018 - Jul 13, 2018 Lecture Nathan M. Nobis (P)

A Rulebook for Students

I would like to complete this A Rulebook for Students: Success in College & Beyond book and I'm seeking co-authors to help me complete it. 

Information on the book and its current status is here:

http://rulebookforstudents.blogspot.com/

As I see it, completing the project would involve (a) elaborating on the "rules" and (b) adding any additional material and discussion that's needed. It would then be posted as an open-access e-book, as well as a low cost paperback on Amazon. 

If you are interested in helping with this, please let me know. Here are some contributor guidelines I just developed, since some of my students expressed interest in helping with the project:

. . .I'm trying to assemble a list of guidelines to help students be more successful students. My motivation here is that sometimes students don't do as well as they should and that sometimes seems for reasons that are pretty easy to address, at least in theory. So what to do about that? One response is a (free) book like this, although this surely is not a complete response: other interventions and guidance are needed. 

I've put the file here and I've set it to allow 'comments.' That will result in any changes you make being 'tracked' and then I can accept the changes after reviewing them. If your name doesn't show up automatically, please add your name in a note by what you add, using Google Doc's feature to do that, so you can be credited as a contributor or co-author. 

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZcSff0NjsVN6Br3oKlpoVwfWDs88g3WNgKTNeM1Z_8o/edit?usp=sharing

You can also add additional 'rules' using the headings feature: heading 1 is big sections, heading 2 is for particular rules. These can then be integrated into the table of contents. (If you don't know how to use the headings and table of contents features in Word or Google docs, you should learn, since it's really helpful). The table of contents is important, since my hope is that someone could even just read the table of contents and get a lot of good advice and reminders. 

So eventually when this is "done enough" I will format it and make it available on Amazon, in addition to a free e-book in a variety of formats.  

OK, again, thank you for your offers to help with this project! And if you have ideas for how to change the project to make it better, in any way, please share those thoughts. 

Thank you,

NN

nathan.nobis@morehouse.edu ; nathan.nobis@gmail.com 

Introduction to Ethics

Here I briefly sum up my basic goals and strategy in my Introduction to Philosophical Ethics course. 

My approach is: 

• interactive and discussion-based,
• skills-of-reasoning-focused, with the hope that students retain these basic skills and attitudes and apply them to future ethical questions, 
• built on a foundation of "data" -- concerning the reasons given about various issues -- gathered from everyday observations, asking people questions (informal surveys) and, potentially, internet research, and so
• not readings-based: most readings augment the process; they aren't essential. 

My overall goal is: 

• to show students that we can systematically reason about moral issues, and teach them how to do that, to develop their skills at doing that. Here's the summary:

See below for the details!