Nussbaum presents the following list of central human functioning capabilities as attempt to specify the basic notion of the good: She believes all citizens should have these capabilities. She introduces the list as capabilities rather than actual functionings; she argues that capability should be the goal of public policy (214).
Nussbaum’s list of ten Central Human Functional Capabilities (CHFC); the first is “Life. Being to live to the end of a human life of normal length; not dying prematurely or before one’s life is so reduced as to be not worth living (215).” Nussbaum is basically saying also humans have a right to die a natural death; they have a right to not be murdered or diseased, or cause death to oneself. The second CHFC is, “Bodily health and integrity, being able to have good health, including reproductive health; being adequately nourished; being able to have adequate shelter (215).” You have a right to be healthy, you have a right to reproduce health, to be nourished in order to stay healthy, and to have shelter to keep you safe and healthy. The third is “Bodily integrity. Being able to move freely from place to place; being able to be secure against violent assault, including sexual assault, martial rape, and domestic violence; having opportunities for sexual satisfaction and for choice in matters of reproduction (215).” One has a right to stay out of harms way, to be safe of any violence; assault, rape, abuse. You have the choice to have sexual satisfaction, no one should be able to take that from you, or take away your choice to reproduce or not. The fourth CHFC is “Senses, imagination, and thought. Being able to uses the senses; being able to imagine, to think, and to reason (215).” Humans may use their senses, at their free will. They have the choice to use their imaginations to be creative, to think, humans have the choice to an education. To reason, humans have the capability to reason with one another. The fifth is “Emotions. Being able to have attachments to things and persons outside ourselves; being able to love those who love and care for us.” Humans have the right to become attached to objects; like a favorite blanket or a stuffed animal, or even to another human being, like a spouse or significant other. We have a choice to have feelings towards others. The sixth CHFC is “Practical reason. Being able to form a conception of the good and to engage in critical reflection about the planning of one’s own life (215).” Humans have the choice of understanding their rights and to interact in conversation with one another, and to reflect on one’s life goals. The seventh is, “Affiliation. To engage in various forms of social interaction. Human beings have the choice to converse with one another socially. (215).” The eighth CHFC is “Other species. (216).” Humans are able to live with the concern for other species, such as animals, plants, and other natures on earth. The ninth is, “Play (216).” Humans have to right to play, to enjoy one self, and to have laughter. The last and final CFHC is, “Control over one’s environment (216).” Humans have the right to have the choice to be involved in the govern of one’s life. Humans have to the right to political participation, the right to use freedom of speech and freedom of association.
Nussbaum, Martha C. “The Central Human Functional Capabilites.” A World of Ideas: Essential Readings for College Writers. Ed. Lee A. Jacobus. 7th ed. New York: Bedford/St. Martins, 2006. pp214-216.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Monday, October 15, 2007
John Rawls: A Theory of Justice
Rawls articulates his idea of “justice and fairness”, justices as fairness is a phrase Rawls uses to refer to his distinctive theory of justice. Justice as fairness consists of two principles, that all have the greatest degree of liberty compatible with like liberty for all, and that social and economic inequalities be attached to positions open to all under fair equality of opportunity and to the greatest benefit of the least well-off members of society (202). Rawls argues that the two principles would be chosen by representative parties in the original position, a thought experiment in which the parties are to choose among principles of justice to order the basic structure of society from behind a veil ignorance, depriving the representatives of information about the particular characteristics (such as wealth and natural abilities) of the parties that they represent (200).
Rawls is trying to relay that it is like if you were to set yourself the task of developing a completely new social contract for today's society. Now how would you do that fairly? Although you could never actually eliminate all of your personal biases and prejudices, you would need to take steps at least to minimize them. Rawls suggests that you imagine yourself in an original position behind a veil of ignorance. Behind this veil, you know nothing of yourself and your natural abilities, or your position in society. You know nothing of your sex, race, nationality, or individual tastes. Behind such a veil of ignorance all individuals are simply specified as rational, free, and morally equal beings. You do know that in the "real world", however, there will be a wide variety in the natural distribution of natural assets and abilities, and that there will be differences of sex, race, and culture that will distinguish groups of people from each other.
Rawls, John. “A Theory of Justice.” A World of Ideas: Essential Readings for College Writers. Ed. Lee A. Jacobus. 7th ed. New York: Bedford/St. Martins, 2006. pp200-202.
Rawls is trying to relay that it is like if you were to set yourself the task of developing a completely new social contract for today's society. Now how would you do that fairly? Although you could never actually eliminate all of your personal biases and prejudices, you would need to take steps at least to minimize them. Rawls suggests that you imagine yourself in an original position behind a veil of ignorance. Behind this veil, you know nothing of yourself and your natural abilities, or your position in society. You know nothing of your sex, race, nationality, or individual tastes. Behind such a veil of ignorance all individuals are simply specified as rational, free, and morally equal beings. You do know that in the "real world", however, there will be a wide variety in the natural distribution of natural assets and abilities, and that there will be differences of sex, race, and culture that will distinguish groups of people from each other.
Rawls, John. “A Theory of Justice.” A World of Ideas: Essential Readings for College Writers. Ed. Lee A. Jacobus. 7th ed. New York: Bedford/St. Martins, 2006. pp200-202.
Monday, October 8, 2007
King: Letter from Birmingham Jail
On April 16, 1963, Martin Luther King Jr. while confined n Birmingham jail wrote a letter to his fellow clergymen. In letter Martin Luther King spoke about the injustice found in Birmingham. Those coming from outside the city of Birmingham automatically labeled you as an “outsider” by the people of Birmingham (173). When you move into a new city or state people should welcome you and treat you with respect, sure it may take some time to warm up, but the way the people were treated in Birmingham was with such a lack of respect, people were seen as outcast and looked down upon. They were welcomed or invited over for a cup of tea or a friendly neighbor get together. Instead they were called names, made fun of, talked down to.
Martin Luther King Jr. came to Birmingham because there was injustice there; he came to solve the problem and to show that we the people are all equal. He went to rid Birmingham of unjust. King was only lead to disappointment and broken promises. Given the chance to speak with Birmingham’s economic community, they negotiated promises with certain merchants, “to remove the stores humiliating racial signs and in return Reverend Fred Shuttlesworth and the leaders of Christian Movement for Human Rights agreed to a moratorium on all demonstrations (King 175).” It was only several weeks they had realized they’d become victims of broken promises, a few signs were removed for a short period of time, returned, and many others still remained (175).
King also many blacks the victims of poverty; this was because the colored people did not have the privilege to uphold a well paying job as the white people. Colored people had to unwilling explain to their children why “Fun town” was closed to colored children. If a colored person was to travel cross-country, they would have the uncomfortable luxury of curling up in the corner of their car because motels denied colored people a vacant room. Colored people had to live with the humiliation of their first names being replaced as “nigger” their middle name became “boy” and their last name became “John”. Their wives were never granted with the respectful title of “Mrs.” They were constantly tormented with nagging signs reading “white” only or “colored” only (178). King went there to end this madness and although he didn’t achieve it when his presents was still with us, it was definitely accomplished it after his death.
King Jr., Luther, Martin. “Letter from Birmingham Jail.” A World of Ideas: Essential Readings for College Writers. Ed. Lee A. Jacobus. 7th ed. New York: Bedford/St. Martins, 2006. pp173-178.
Martin Luther King Jr. came to Birmingham because there was injustice there; he came to solve the problem and to show that we the people are all equal. He went to rid Birmingham of unjust. King was only lead to disappointment and broken promises. Given the chance to speak with Birmingham’s economic community, they negotiated promises with certain merchants, “to remove the stores humiliating racial signs and in return Reverend Fred Shuttlesworth and the leaders of Christian Movement for Human Rights agreed to a moratorium on all demonstrations (King 175).” It was only several weeks they had realized they’d become victims of broken promises, a few signs were removed for a short period of time, returned, and many others still remained (175).
King also many blacks the victims of poverty; this was because the colored people did not have the privilege to uphold a well paying job as the white people. Colored people had to unwilling explain to their children why “Fun town” was closed to colored children. If a colored person was to travel cross-country, they would have the uncomfortable luxury of curling up in the corner of their car because motels denied colored people a vacant room. Colored people had to live with the humiliation of their first names being replaced as “nigger” their middle name became “boy” and their last name became “John”. Their wives were never granted with the respectful title of “Mrs.” They were constantly tormented with nagging signs reading “white” only or “colored” only (178). King went there to end this madness and although he didn’t achieve it when his presents was still with us, it was definitely accomplished it after his death.
King Jr., Luther, Martin. “Letter from Birmingham Jail.” A World of Ideas: Essential Readings for College Writers. Ed. Lee A. Jacobus. 7th ed. New York: Bedford/St. Martins, 2006. pp173-178.
Thoreau: Civil Disobedience
The kind of government that Thoreau feels would be most just is a government which governs the least (Thoreau 137). If a government is consistently getting in the way and ruining what the people have or are hoping to accomplish, he is only going to lose his respect and proper title with the people. No body wants someone always nagging them to do this or do that, or telling them they are wrong or at fault. The people want to be able to have control over their own actions and responsibilities without the constant nagging and this is exactly what Thoreau is trying to get across. Thoreau believes the power should be placed in the hands of the people.
The American government is a tradition; government was created when laws were created. There has always been one single man in power. Thoreau feels we the people should hold the power. When government stays out of the way people are able to accomplish more, more important things that the government does not do, such as; keeping the country free, settling the West, and educating (Thoreau 138). Thoreau explains in wonderfully why the people have a better chance at power, then the government, “After all, the practical reason why, when the power is once in the hands of the people, a majority are permitted, and for a long period continue, to rule is not because they are most likely to be in the right, nor because this seems fairest to the minority but because they are physically strongest (Thoreau 138).” I believe that statement wraps it up beautifully; the people are to hold the power because the people are the strongest.
Thoreau, David Henry. “Civil Disobedience.” A World of Ideas: Essential Readings for College Writers. Ed. Lee A. Jacobus. 7th ed. New York: Bedford/St. Martins, 2006. pp137-138.
The American government is a tradition; government was created when laws were created. There has always been one single man in power. Thoreau feels we the people should hold the power. When government stays out of the way people are able to accomplish more, more important things that the government does not do, such as; keeping the country free, settling the West, and educating (Thoreau 138). Thoreau explains in wonderfully why the people have a better chance at power, then the government, “After all, the practical reason why, when the power is once in the hands of the people, a majority are permitted, and for a long period continue, to rule is not because they are most likely to be in the right, nor because this seems fairest to the minority but because they are physically strongest (Thoreau 138).” I believe that statement wraps it up beautifully; the people are to hold the power because the people are the strongest.
Thoreau, David Henry. “Civil Disobedience.” A World of Ideas: Essential Readings for College Writers. Ed. Lee A. Jacobus. 7th ed. New York: Bedford/St. Martins, 2006. pp137-138.
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Carter: The Separation of Church and State
The First Amendment states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” The First Amendment clearly protects religion by separating it from state. The First Amendment is not only protecting religion it is also protecting the people’s religious freedom, to choose and practice any religion they wish. It protects religion from the control of government. “The Supreme Court has said many times that a government may neither “advance” religion nor engages in an “excessive entanglement” with it (Carter 104).” This proves that the First Amendment protects religion because a government is not to encourage religion nor partake in any involvement of religion. Carter says it in The Separation of Church and State, that “for most of the American history, the principal purpose of the Establishment Clause has been understood as the protection of the religious world against the secular government (104).” The Establishment Clause in the First Amendment was created for this reason; throughout history it has served the purpose of protecting religion from government. Without the Establishment Clause the government would have the power to intervene with the religious world. Before the First Amendment was created the state was able to prescribe a prayer to start the school day and or pick a holy book where the prayer would be chosen from, religion clauses were written to forbid this (105).
The Justices made a wise decision to forbid the state from choosing the religious materials used in school and from forbidding religion to be taught in the classroom. It protects those of all religions and protects those who chose not to practice religion because neither are forced to participate in something they wish not to.
Carter L. Stephen. “The Separation of Church and State.” A World of Ideas: Essential Readings for College Writers. Ed. Lee A. Jacobus. 7th ed. New York: Bedford/St. Martins, 2006. pp 104-105.
The Justices made a wise decision to forbid the state from choosing the religious materials used in school and from forbidding religion to be taught in the classroom. It protects those of all religions and protects those who chose not to practice religion because neither are forced to participate in something they wish not to.
Carter L. Stephen. “The Separation of Church and State.” A World of Ideas: Essential Readings for College Writers. Ed. Lee A. Jacobus. 7th ed. New York: Bedford/St. Martins, 2006. pp 104-105.
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Arendt: Total Domination
In Total Domination, Hannah Arendt an important political philosopher wrote about the totalitarian institution of the concentration camp in which human dignity is destroyed. I chose to focus on the question “What happens to human beings in concentration camps?” I chose this question because in the past years I have taken a grave interest in the Holocaust and the Nazi Conscience. I have learned a lot about it in these past school years, whether I took the time to research for myself or was taught in class. To me it is one of the most horrible events in history, for the outside world to be so blind-sited while people were being gruesomely executed by the German people, those known as the Nazi party.
The human beings in the concentration camps were treated worse than animals. Human beings were used in laboratory experiments of every kind to exterminate and degrade them. Some experiments were to transform human beings into mere creatures (88). The Nazis transformed men were transformed into “uncomplaining animals”. Human beings were isolated from the world outside (89). These innocent human beings became nothing, as if they never existed in this world. No names just numbers tattooed on their forearm.
The Nazis used a system called the “Final Solution”, the final solution was the Nazi’s plan to eliminate Jews, Russians, Polish, and Ukrainians .The final solution consist of three independent systems; the first system sentenced human beings for limited periods. The second system consisted of concentration camps “which human material is ruthlessly exploited and mortality rate is extremely high, but was essentially organized for labor purposes (Arendt 94)”. The third system consisted of the annihilation camps in which the inmates are systematically wiped out through starvation and neglect (94).
Survivors of the torture endured in concentration camps had it worse off then those who died. Instead of being at peace they were cut off from the world because the dismay caused oblivion. Arendt said that life and death are obstructed equally effectively in concentration camps (94). She also states “There are no parallels to the life in the concentration camps. Its horror can never be fully embraced by the imagination for the very reason that stands outside of life and death (Arendt 94).” She is simply saying the events that occurred in the concentration camps are of nothing like any that has occurred in history since. Those who haven’t experienced it first hand could never imagine or endure anything like this.
Arendt, Hannah. “Total Domination.” A World of Ideas: Essential Readings for College Writers. Ed. Lee A. Jacobus. 7th ed. New York: Bedford/St. Martins, 2006. pp88-94.
The human beings in the concentration camps were treated worse than animals. Human beings were used in laboratory experiments of every kind to exterminate and degrade them. Some experiments were to transform human beings into mere creatures (88). The Nazis transformed men were transformed into “uncomplaining animals”. Human beings were isolated from the world outside (89). These innocent human beings became nothing, as if they never existed in this world. No names just numbers tattooed on their forearm.
The Nazis used a system called the “Final Solution”, the final solution was the Nazi’s plan to eliminate Jews, Russians, Polish, and Ukrainians .The final solution consist of three independent systems; the first system sentenced human beings for limited periods. The second system consisted of concentration camps “which human material is ruthlessly exploited and mortality rate is extremely high, but was essentially organized for labor purposes (Arendt 94)”. The third system consisted of the annihilation camps in which the inmates are systematically wiped out through starvation and neglect (94).
Survivors of the torture endured in concentration camps had it worse off then those who died. Instead of being at peace they were cut off from the world because the dismay caused oblivion. Arendt said that life and death are obstructed equally effectively in concentration camps (94). She also states “There are no parallels to the life in the concentration camps. Its horror can never be fully embraced by the imagination for the very reason that stands outside of life and death (Arendt 94).” She is simply saying the events that occurred in the concentration camps are of nothing like any that has occurred in history since. Those who haven’t experienced it first hand could never imagine or endure anything like this.
Arendt, Hannah. “Total Domination.” A World of Ideas: Essential Readings for College Writers. Ed. Lee A. Jacobus. 7th ed. New York: Bedford/St. Martins, 2006. pp88-94.
Monday, September 17, 2007
Machiavelli: The Qualities of the Prince
Machiavelli praises skill in warfare in his opening pages because as he states in the first paragraph “it is evident that when princes have given more thought to personal luxuries than to arms, they have lost their state (Machiavelli 38).” My interpretation of this is that in order for a prince to maintain his leadership status and power of his state he must be skilled in his art of arms, in other words his art of warfare. Machiavelli says “being disarmed makes you despised; this is one of those infamies a prince should guard himself against (38).” The prince could never be disarmed, for then he would be disarmed and not in his state of war.
A prince must always be focused on the thought of war, even when there is no war the prince must train himself and his soldiers for war. Machiavelli states the skills a prince needs to acquire can be done in two ways one by action and the other by mind. A prince by action keeps his soldiers well disciplined and trained and must always be hunting. By using his mind he must learn the nature of the terrain, know mountains slope, how valleys open, how plains lie, and must understand the nature of rivers and swamps (Machiavelli 38).
These skills help to aid the prince by allowing him to gain the knowledge of his country and how to defend it. The prince is also gaining the knowledge and experience of the terrain; one can easily comprehend the characteristics of any other country that may need to be explored. These skills teach a prince to be track out enemies, to choose a safe campsite, lead troops, organize them for battle, and besiege towns to their own advantage (39). As Machiavelli claims, a prince who lacks these abilities lacks the most important quality in a leader. A leader must posses great leadership skills; you can’t just be given the title of prince without proving yourself to your people or to your royal family. By having the ability to always be on alert and ready for war would take a lot from someone, you can’t just train yourself over night, this kind of commitment takes months maybe even years to master.
Machiavelli, Niccolo. "The Qualities of the Prince." A World of Ideas “Essential Readings for College Writers”. Ed. Lee A. Jacobus. Trans. Stephen Mitchell. 7th ed. New York: Bedford/St. Martins, 2006. pp. 38-39.
A prince must always be focused on the thought of war, even when there is no war the prince must train himself and his soldiers for war. Machiavelli states the skills a prince needs to acquire can be done in two ways one by action and the other by mind. A prince by action keeps his soldiers well disciplined and trained and must always be hunting. By using his mind he must learn the nature of the terrain, know mountains slope, how valleys open, how plains lie, and must understand the nature of rivers and swamps (Machiavelli 38).
These skills help to aid the prince by allowing him to gain the knowledge of his country and how to defend it. The prince is also gaining the knowledge and experience of the terrain; one can easily comprehend the characteristics of any other country that may need to be explored. These skills teach a prince to be track out enemies, to choose a safe campsite, lead troops, organize them for battle, and besiege towns to their own advantage (39). As Machiavelli claims, a prince who lacks these abilities lacks the most important quality in a leader. A leader must posses great leadership skills; you can’t just be given the title of prince without proving yourself to your people or to your royal family. By having the ability to always be on alert and ready for war would take a lot from someone, you can’t just train yourself over night, this kind of commitment takes months maybe even years to master.
Machiavelli, Niccolo. "The Qualities of the Prince." A World of Ideas “Essential Readings for College Writers”. Ed. Lee A. Jacobus. Trans. Stephen Mitchell. 7th ed. New York: Bedford/St. Martins, 2006. pp. 38-39.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)