ethics extra credit

Philosophy Extra Credit Projects

If you wish, you can do two extra credit assignments this term, one small and one

large project. Each small project will end up as a 3-5 page paper: 1 page (or less)

summary of what you read/watched), 1-2 pages answering a few questions, and 1-2 pages

reaction to the philosophical themes of the book/movie. Larger projects are more of

same, but the themes for that project carries over into different genres (therefore, you will

have more to read watch) and are more difficult or complex (again giving you a little

more work to do).

Each little project will be worth (about) 2 points, while the larger projects are

worth 5. With partial credit, doing both projects well can (and will) shift you a whole

letter grade! But note that they are graded just like reaction papers, so if you do one,

please be sure to put a lot of energy into it, and come see me if you are having problems

with it!

Small Projects

Readings from “Harry Potter and Philosophy:” chapter 9 (Is Ambition a Virtue, Why the

Slytherins Belong at Hogwarts), chapter 2 (Dursley Duplicity), and chapter 1 (The

Courageous Harry Potter). The subtitle of “Harry Potter and Philosophy” is “What if

Aristotle ran Hogwarts,” which is why you need to read chapter 36 along with this, and

works with Aristotelian Ethics. How accurate do you think articles are to the Harry

Potter books, and do they work well with what Aristotle is trying to do? What is the

relationship between Evil (or being evil) and ethics?

Readings from “Harry Potter and Philosophy:” chapter 4 (Herminone and the Women of

Hogwarts), and Chapter 8 (Kreacher’s Lament). These chapters are (hopefully) fun

extensions of the ethics section that focus on feminist theory. How accurate do you think

articles are to the Harry Potter books, and do they do a good job of demonstrating

feminist ethics? What are feminist ethics all about, and how are they different from

“masculine theories?”

Readings from “The Matrix and Philosophy:” chapter 11 (Cypher’s Choice, Is Ignorance

Bliss?), chapter 13 (Notes from the Underground), and chapter 14 (Popping a Bitter Pill).

This is more existentialism; however, this time centered on ethics. What is Nihilism, and

is it really all that dangerous? Is ignorance bliss? Can there really be an existential

ethics?

Reading from “Batman and Philosophy”, chapter 1 (Why Doesn’t Batman Just Kill the

Joker). This is a classic philosophical question (at least for nerds). Try to use one of the

major moral theories to see what the Batman should do!

Readings from “Batman and Philosophy”, chapter 10 (Under the Mask: Can Any Person

Become the Batman), chapter 11 (Could Batman Have Become the Joker). These

chapters are all about the choices that we make and how we become moral persons.

Reading from “Star Wars and Philosophy”, chapter 5. This article is another take on

Aristotle’s virtue ethics, but from a Star Wars perspective!

Reading from “The Lord of the Rings and Philosophy”, chapters 4 (Tolkien’s 6 Keys to

Happiness) and 5 (The Quests of Sam and Gollum for a Happy Life). These chapters

deal more directly with the idea Ethics and Goodness.

Big Projects

American Beauty, director Mendes. As an opening warning, most people end up loving

or hating both of these choices. Mendes brutally attacks “Middle America” or what

Russell called the “practical man.” Neither really is easy to digest or deal with, but in the

end, what do you think their real message is? What is he trying to say about Middle

America, “the Moral Majority,” and/or “family values?” Who are the real bad guys? Are

they right?

The Life of David Gale, director Parker. A movie about the life (and death) of a

philosophy professor (so you know it has to be good) that will beat you over the head

with questions about capital punishment. What do you think of David Gale? Is he a

hero, is a fool, or is he just wrong? What do you think of his perspective on capital

punishment?

Return to Modesty, Wendy Shalit. Shalit, a conservative feminist, offers her suggestion

as to why society has gone wrong and thinks that it’s largely the fault of sexual politics

and liberality. Is she crazy? Is she right? How can she offer the claims that she is

making?

Handout, Bertrand Russell vs. George Mavrodes, these arguments center on the battle

between religious belief and ethical theories. Russell suggests that morality is separate

from religious views and even that religion can interfere with common morality.

Mavrodes states that without religion morality lacks a depth and purpose it needs. Who

do you think is right? Can we be moral without religion?