Notes

I. Introduction

Philosophy = Love of wisdom

Goal: Answer questions with an unwavering commitment to getting it right. Nothing is beyond questioning and all beliefs must be defended with reason.

Why am I doing this?

- I hit a point in my life when I needed to reassess my beliefs. I found philosophical inquiry was the best method to do this. The study of philosophy and process of inquiry provided two invaluable benefits:

1. Greatly improved my critical thinking skills and therefore my ability to solve problems. I saw many more possibilities.

2. Ideas of specific philosophers were fascinating, inspirational and provided building blocks to my own philosophy. You can do without them but you are reinventing the wheel in many cases.

Self Help though Philosophy

§ Be all you can be. You can do anything.

§ Issues: What do you really want?

What is really important to you? What are your values?

What is success?

How far are you willing to go to get what you want, i.e. morality?

Are you sure you are thinking for yourself or are you trying to please others?

What if you are wrong?

Do you have beliefs that conflict with each other?

Self help without philosophy is like a cover without the book.

Resources: Lecture series, Recommended Reading.

II. Question for Discussion: Why do we treat the elderly so badly?

§ We need to consider: Needs versus Wants and Responsibilities versus Choices -> Comes down to Core Values

§ Economic reality is that both parents need to work.

§ Old days had respect for elderly and children took care of parents.

§ But what about elderly people without children?

§ Elderly just get put away / warehoused and are often mistreated

§ The reason is the culture has changed to being materialistic with the ‘get ahead’ attitude. People have become very selfish. It not just the elderly but children who also suffer.

§ Eastern cultures treat age with respect.

§ However, in China they do treat elder with respect but also put them on a shelf out of the way. They don’t get to participate in life.

§ People live longer because of advances in medicine.

§ We need to step back and re-evaluate things. First need to acknowledge we exist.

§ Historically the shift from an agrarian society to an industrial one has changed our relationship to the elderly and how we care for them – but is it a good change?

§ You can’t go back.

§ The media keeps selling materialism and their image of life.

§ Some core moral values stay the same but many moral views change over time. For example, slavery was morally acceptable two hundred years ago but not today. Children could be abused fifty years ago and it was called discipline. Social problems get a lot of scrutiny in our society today and it may seem that the problems were much less severe in the past but that may be an illusion. We expose these things now and deal with them whereas they would have been covered up or ignored in the past.

On the positive side:

§ The government provides for the elderly. They get decent care, perhaps the best in the world.

§ Don’t want the old days. I don’t want to be a burden.

Summary: What can we draw from this?

§ There were many viewpoints but there are some patterns.

§ Economic, cultural and social change has had a big impact on how we treat the elderly.

§ It’s not all bad. In fact, it may be better but we need to consider what the effects are and be sure as a society that we are sure we are handling it the best way.

How does this relate to philosophy?

It relates in several key areas: morality, the right kind of life and the role of government were all discussed and all are major branches of philosophy. Bryan focused a bit on morality and two philosophers who had much to say on this. One was Immanuel Kant who lived in the 18^th century. He believed morality was derived from reason and that moral laws were just like physical laws. In the discussion we noted that moral values change over time but Kant did not believe this was the correct thing. He developed a concept called the Categorical Imperative which basically said when you are deciding whether something is moral or not, act in such a way as if the essence of your act were to become a universal law for all time. This is a little like what your mom might have said, “What if everyone did that?” The context is irrelevant. For example, if it is wrong to lie than it is always wrong, no exceptions.

A very different view comes from a philosophy known as Utilitarianism, as in what I useful. John Stuart Mill, a 19^th century British philosopher was the best know proponent of this philosophy. His idea was to perform the act that provided the greatest happiness. However, the results of this idea can vary depending on how long a view you take in evaluating the action. For example, if you only consider the immediate people and only a few days ahead, you may do something that has a very negative impact in the long run on a wider group of people. Also, it is hard to know what the actual effects of an act are. A key selling point to this approach is that it is very adaptable to the needs of society and the individual. Personally, I think this view of morality is very prevalent. For example, when someone lies to protect a person’s feelings, this may be the reasoning behind it.