Results for ETHICSOC

(Same as LAW 782) Many US human rights non-government organizations, including the US philanthropic sector, work on international human rights. The US government also engages with the private sector in "partnerships" that twins US foreign aid human rights action with corporate expertise. This weekly series will feature speakers who lead these human rights NGOs, philanthropic enterprises, and corporate partnerships, and also policy experts and scholars, to explore the pro's and con's of this scenario.

A survey of moral philosophy in the Western tradition. What makes right actions right and wrong actions wrong? What is it to have a virtuous rather than a vicious character? What is the basis of these distinctions? Why should we care about morality at all? Our aim is to understand how some of the most influential philosophers (including Aristotle, Kant, and Mill) have addressed these questions, and by so doing, to better formulate our own views. No prior familiarity with philosophy required.

A more challenging version of Phil 2 designed primarily for juniors and seniors (may also be appropriate for some freshmen and sophomores - contact professor). Fulfills the Ethical Reasoning requirement. Graduate section (270) will include supplemental readings and discussion, geared for graduate students new to moral philosophy, as well as those with some background who would like more.

How should human beings relate to the natural world? Do we have moral obligations toward non-human animals and other parts of nature? And what do we owe to other human beings, including future generations, with respect to the environment? The first part of this course will examine such questions in light of some of our current ethical theories: considering what those theories suggest regarding the extent and nature of our environmental obligations; and also whether reflection on such obligations can prove informative about the adequacy of our ethical theories. In the second part of the course, we will use the tools that we have acquired to tackle various ethical questions that confront us in our dealings with the natural world, looking at subjects such as: animal rights; conservation; economic approaches to the environment; access to and control over natural resources; environmental justice and pollution; climate change; technology and the environment; and environmental activism.

For students planning honors in Ethics in Society. Methods of research. Students present issues of public and personal morality; topics chosen with advice of instructor.

May be repeated for credit.

Limited to Ethics in Society honors students, who must enroll once in 200A and once in 200B. Students enrolling in 200A for less than 5 units must get approval from the faculty director.

Limited to Ethics in Society honors students, who must enroll once in 200A and once in 200B. Students enrolling in 200B for less than 5 units must get approval from the faculty director.

If emotions are the stuff of life, some emotions are the stuff of our moral and legal life. Emotions such as: guilt, shame, revenge, indignation, resentment, disgust, envy, jealousy and humiliation, along with forgiveness, compassion, pity, mercy and patriotism, play a central role in our moral and legal life. The course is about these emotions, their meaning and role in morality and law. Issues such as the relationship between punishment and revenge, or between envy and equality, or St. Paul¿s contrast between law and love, or Nietzsche¿s idea that resentment is what feeds morality, will be discussed alongside other intriguing topics.

War is violent, but also a means by which political communities pursue collective interests. When, in light of these features, is the recourse to armed force justified? Pacifists argue that because war is so violent it is never justified, and that there is no such thing as a just war. Realists, in contrast, argue that war is simply a fact of life and not a proper subject for moral judgment, any more than we would judge an attack by a pack of wolves in moral terms. In between is just war theory, which claims that some wars, but not all, are morally justified. We will explore these theories, and will consider how just war theory comports with international law rules governing recourse to force. We will also explore justice in war, that is, the moral and legal rules governing the conduct of war, such as the requirement to avoid targeting non-combatants. Finally, we will consider how war should be terminated; what should be the nature of justified peace? We will critically evaluate the application of just war theory in the context of contemporary security problems, including: (1) transnational conflicts between states and nonstate groups and the so-called "war on terrorism"; (2) civil wars; (3) demands for military intervention to halt humanitarian atrocities taking place in another state. Same as LAW 751.

This course investigates the relationship between science and democracy, and between knowledge and power, in the modern world. Topics covered include the epistemic properties of democratic institutions; the question of expertise in democratic politics; the role of values in science and public policy; the relationship between democracy and technology; and the relationship between democracy and the social sciences. We also analyze a number of concrete issues at the intersection of politics and science, including climate change and biomedical research. The course is interdisciplinary in method and content, with readings ranging across political theory, philosophy, history, and the social sciences.

Is it possible for a deeply committed religious person to be a good citizen in a liberal, pluralistic democracy? Is it morally inappropriate for religious citizens to appeal to the teachings of their tradition when they support and vote for laws that coerce fellow citizens? Must the religiously committed be prepared to defend their arguments by appealing to 'secular reasons' ostensibly accessible to all 'reasonable' citizens? What is so special about religious claims of conscience and expression that they warrant special protection in the constitution of most liberal democracies? Is freedom of religion an illusion when it is left to ostensibly secular courts to decide what counts as religion? Exploration of the debates surrounding the public role of religion in a religiously pluralistic American democracy through the writings of scholars on all sides of the issue from the fields of law, political science, philosophy, and religious studies.

How should human beings relate to the natural world? Do we have moral obligations toward non-human animals and other parts of nature? And what do we owe to other human beings, including future generations, with respect to the environment? The first part of this course will examine such questions in light of some of our current ethical theories: considering what those theories suggest regarding the extent and nature of our environmental obligations; and also whether reflection on such obligations can prove informative about the adequacy of our ethical theories. In the second part of the course, we will use the tools that we have acquired to tackle various ethical questions that confront us in our dealings with the natural world, looking at subjects such as: animal rights; conservation; economic approaches to the environment; access to and control over natural resources; environmental justice and pollution; climate change; technology and the environment; and environmental activism.

If emotions are the stuff of life, some emotions are the stuff of our moral and legal life. Emotions such as: guilt, shame, revenge, indignation, resentment, disgust, envy, jealousy and humiliation, along with forgiveness, compassion, pity, mercy and patriotism, play a central role in our moral and legal life. The course is about these emotions, their meaning and role in morality and law. Issues such as the relationship between punishment and revenge, or between envy and equality, or St. Paul¿s contrast between law and love, or Nietzsche¿s idea that resentment is what feeds morality, will be discussed alongside other intriguing topics.

SAME AS LAW744. Recent psychological advances in our understanding of the cognitive and social origins of morality cast a new light on age-old questions about ethics, such as: How did our moral sense evolve in our species? How does it develop over our lifetime? How much does our culture, religion, or politics determine our moral values? What is the role of intuition and emotion in moral judgment? How "logical" is moral judgment? How do other people's moral choices affect us? Does character matter or is behavior entirely dictated by the situations we find ourselves in? If it is purely situational, are we morally responsible for anything? How far will we go to convince ourselves that we are good and moral? Barbara Fried and Benoit Monin will review empirical answers to these questions suggested by behavioral research, and lead discussions on their implications for ethics. Students enrolled in the course will be selected through an application process. The application can be found at http://web.stanford.edu/~arnewman/MoralMinds.fb, and is due at 11:59 p.m. on November 14, 2014.

War is violent, but also a means by which political communities pursue collective interests. When, in light of these features, is the recourse to armed force justified? Pacifists argue that because war is so violent it is never justified, and that there is no such thing as a just war. Realists, in contrast, argue that war is simply a fact of life and not a proper subject for moral judgment, any more than we would judge an attack by a pack of wolves in moral terms. In between is just war theory, which claims that some wars, but not all, are morally justified. We will explore these theories, and will consider how just war theory comports with international law rules governing recourse to force. We will also explore justice in war, that is, the moral and legal rules governing the conduct of war, such as the requirement to avoid targeting non-combatants. Finally, we will consider how war should be terminated; what should be the nature of justified peace? We will critically evaluate the application of just war theory in the context of contemporary security problems, including: (1) transnational conflicts between states and nonstate groups and the so-called "war on terrorism"; (2) civil wars; (3) demands for military intervention to halt humanitarian atrocities taking place in another state. Same as LAW 751.