Thursday, December 17, 2009
See previous links at http://r-p-e.blogspot.com/2007/12/festive-philosophy.html for stories on banning Christmas, etc- expect usual tabloid versions this year too...
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Either see below or look at http://prezi.com/dcuu3lcgun15/
Thursday, December 03, 2009
Now, the headline seems wholly over the top: but maybe there is something of interest here. I forced myself to read the entry. And, there was indeed something of interest there. The blog author (Paul Hayward) notes that the French coach sees the incident as failure of the referee - and not a matter of cheating. I can see it is a mistake by the referee. To me this is the game and not cheating says the French coach.
The blog author advances more evidence of the same attitude in sport - and this leads him to the view that as far as many players and others are concerned - they should be able to do anything and it is then the job of the match officials to spot and punish rule-breaking. Paul writes:
With each swan dive, handball and feigned injury we have shuffled to the moment where the modern player thinks it is his duty to cheat, and the responsibility of the state to stop him. To Henry and Domenech, this was a failure not of spirit, of fair play or values but of governanceThis is interesting. The idea here is that you should do anything you can to win - and the game is to avoid detection. The rules, it implies, are to be enforced onto you, not something you seek to follow from an intrinsic respect for them. Is it fair to say that many feel the same about the law? If we think about a particular part of the law - motoring restrictions (against speeding, parking where we choose, etc) - I think there parallel is quite striking.
To return to sport though, does such a view not mean that cheating is impossible? If you get away with it - that is fine; if you are caught, you are punished and the rules are upheld. I wonder if I feel the same about lying, or stealing...
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Then we read in the Guardian: Uganda considers death sentence for gay sex in bill before parliament : Minimum penalty is life in jail, under anti-homosexuality bill; US evangelists are main activists behind measure - which tops off a pretty bad day for religon in the press...
anyone have any good news?
Sunday, November 22, 2009
If the video does not display above - you can go to: http://us.cnn.com/video/?/video/world/2009/11/21/mecca.streets.walk.talk.cnn
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Tuesday, November 03, 2009
Sunday, October 18, 2009
PEAsoup is good blog, which often has things of note on it - but I thought this, albeit drawn from a book (by Saul Smilansky) - was worth pointing out. I won't explain more - in the name of maintaining the suspense till you get to the actual site...
Best enjoyed in a leather armchair, with sherry and a cat while looking out at the quickening dark of the Cotswolds (or not).
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
As I said to my students in RPE101, Philosophical and Ethical Arguing (and probably scaring them a little, though that was unintentional), you have to own your own learning, by which I meant you have to transform yourself from a passive to an active learner.
Monday, October 12, 2009
Saturday, September 26, 2009
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Jedi refuses to remove hood (in Tesco): http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/18/jedi-religion-tesco-hood-jones
Are the issues the same?
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
I read this in the Guardian the other day. Though, as students in RPE 201 know (Philosophy, Science and Belief), I am not an ardent fan of his, I do believe he’s absolute right about this, when he writes about scientists,
"Scientists often disagree with one another, sometimes passionately. But they don't go to court to sort out their differences, they go into the lab, repeat the experiments, carefully examine the controls and the statistical analysis. We care about whether something is true, supported by the evidence. We are not interested in whether somebody sincerely believes he is right. There exist objective methods for discovering whether he is, as a matter of fact, right. If he is wrong, the evidence will show it, and – notwithstanding Judge Eadie – be blowed to whether he is sincere in his error or not."
Not quite sure what he means by ‘blowed’, but it’s a pretty accurate description of what scientists do as opposed to pseudo-scientists.
If you want to read more go to http://tinyurl.com/nok3ur
Monday, September 21, 2009
Friday, September 18, 2009
- business ethics by looking at a 1970s article by economist Milton Friedman, "The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits" (in other words the business of business is business), and a short story by B. Traven, "Assembly Line"
- political philosophy by reading Machiavelli's The Prince and Thoreau's Civil Disobedience
- Herman Melville's short story Bartleby the Scrivener in tandem with Emerson's The Transcendentalist (which is considered the inspiration behind Bartleby)
- Dostoyevsky's The Brothers Karamazov, studying the two famous chapters "Rebellion" and "The Grand Inquisitor"
- Paul Caddle, one of our members, led a meeting on paradoxes, which generated a rousing round of comments
- Christopher Norris, a philosopher from the University of Cardiff, who gave a paper entitled, "The New Musicology: What's it all about?", followed by a lively discussion
- Robert Ellis, another guest speaker, who gave a paper, "Moral Objectivity and the Middle Way". For more information, you can look at Robert's web-site at this address: http://www.moralobjectivity.net/
- the philosophical themes underpinning the two films Arlington Road and Primer
For our October meeting we are reading "Before the Law" from Kafka's The Trial found at this address: http://records.viu.ca/~Johnstoi/Kafka/beforethelaw.htm. Also, if you are interested in further study, please read Derrida's "Law of Genre" found at this address: http://mission17.org/documents/Derrida_LawOfGenre.pdf.The Philosophy Society meets (usually) on the first Thursday of every month at 7pm in The Gallery Room above the SU Bar at Park Campus. However, I am still uncertain whether the meeting will be on the 1st or 8th of October. I will post and send emails with this information in due course.
If you have any queries about The Philosophy Society please contact Shelley Campbell firstname.lastname@example.org
There were some really exciting ideas in the presentations this morning - and there is a forum for discussion of them on the RPE ning... (where there are more photos)
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
If you're keen to get going this term - you could head to the Columbia Society for Comparative Philosophy and get the podcast of an intriguing talk: Owen Flanagan (Duke University). The lecture was entitled "Buddhist Ethics and Moral Modularity" and the respondent was Professor Wayne Proudfoot.
The podcast is HERE - enjoy!
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
If I have missed anyone - just email me from your glos account and I'll add you...
Friday, September 11, 2009
Enjoy induction week, and all the RPE staff look forward to seeing you in class.
More details of induction week can be found at:
Oh, and for Wednesday evening for the Project, the website for the Exmouth Arms can be found at: http://theexmouth.co.uk/
Friday, August 28, 2009
The Single Honours Philosophy map is now online. Be AMAZED by the new modules; be ASTOUNDED by the route requirements and compulsory courses; be slightly troubled by the enthusiasm of the staff...
In case you can't wait to click through... here it is:
Philosophy (Single Honours Degree) Course Map
To achieve your award you must pass the correct number of CAT points at each level and meet all award requirements (see UMS Regulations) as well as passing ALL compulsory and core requirements, including:
Level I: RPE101, RPE102, RPE107 and PHI190 plus either RPE104 or RPE105
Level II: RPE207
Level III: RPE307 and PHI333
Level I Modules:
|Code and Title||CAT |
| PHI190: Studying The Humanities: Learning And Personal Development |
Restrictions: Cannot be taken with EX160, or any other module coded 190
|RPE101: Philosphical And Ethical Arguing||15||SEM1|
|RPE102: Religion In The Contemporary World||15||SEM1|
|RPE103: Contemporary Ethical Issues||15||SEM2|
|RPE104: Introducing Islam||15||SEM2|
|RPE106: New Religious Movements||15||SEM2|
|RPE107: Western Philosophy||15||SEM2|
|RPE108: Greek Philosophy||15||SEM1|
| RPE136: Overseas Study Visit |
Restrictions: Cannot be counted with OTC136 Overseas Study Visit or OTC116 Overseas Study Visit
Level II Modules:
|Code and Title||CAT |
|PHI201: The God Of Philosophy||15||N/A|
|PHI202: The Rationalists||15||N/A|
|PHI204: Critical Philosophy||15||N/A|
|PHI299: Scholarly Project||15||N/A|
| RPE201: Philosophy, Science And Belief |
Prerequisites: Pass RPE101
| RPE206: Ethical Traditions |
Prerequisites: Pass RPE101
|RPE207: 20th Century Western Philosophy||15||SEM1|
| RPE209: Philosophy Of Mind |
Prerequisites: Pass RPE101
| SPX208: Ethics And Morality In Sport I |
Restrictions: Cannot be taken with SV201
| SY232: Social Theory: Major Shifts In Modern Society |
Restrictions: Cannot be counted with SY227 or SY228
Level III Modules:
|Code and Title||CAT |
| PHI301: Buddhist Philosophy |
Restrictions: None. However, students are strongly advised to familiarise themselves with the basic teachings and practices of Buddhism before the start of the module.
| PHI302: Islamic Philosophy |
Restrictions: None. However, students are strongly advised to familiarise themselves with the basic teachings and practices of Islam before the start of the module.
|PHI398: Indpendent Study||15||N/A|
|RPE301: Love, Sex And Death||30||YEAR|
| RPE304: Ethics And Reason |
Prerequisites: Pass RPE201, or RPE207, or SY22x
| RPE305: Philosophy And Literature |
Prerequisites: Pass RPE2XX, or EX2XX
|RPE307: Philosophical Close Reading||15||SEM1|
| SY319: Research, Epistemology And Philosophy |
Restrictions: Cannot be taken with SY310
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Some minor changes to the RPE Course have taken place, and we have also launched a straight Philosophy programme as well.
The role of Course Leader has passed from myself to Dr Roy Jackson - who now takes on the role - and good luck to him with all those annual reports, programme change committees and student questions...
In addition to that - we have a new member of staff as well. Dr William Large has joined us and will be teaching from Spetember. I expect Will to introducue himself on here soon, but if you can't wait his profile at his previous job is still live HERE - but probably not for long...
Tuesday, June 09, 2009
You may also enjoy the wide range of comments that have been posted (!)
Monday, May 18, 2009
Sunday, May 17, 2009
"Fredrick M. Smith from the University of Iowa presented his talk on "Indian Buddhist Sociolinguistics and Buddhist Notions of Possession: A Fragment from the Mañjuśrīmūlakalpa" on April 30, 2009 as part of the Columbia University Buddhist Studies Seminar series."
The podcast is at http://www.cbs.columbia.edu/files/cbss_podcast_smith.mp3
The Centre for Buddhist Studies at Columbia University (New York) has some excellent material online - start at its blog at http://www.cbs.columbia.edu/weblog/
Friday, May 01, 2009
Thursday, April 30, 2009
The review [click HERE] raises some issues about detachment, and the nature of the images, and whether the gallery actively promotes Buddhist values - so may well be of interest...
Also see http://www.rhfamilyfoundation.org/manyfaces for the Many Faces of Buddhism webpages, for events in London at present..
Monday, April 27, 2009
Thursday, April 23, 2009
10.15 – 10.45 Registration and Coffee
10.45 Welcome: Dr Shelley Saguaro, Head of Department of Humanities, University of Gloucestershire
10.50 – 11.35 Rt. Rev. Prof. Kenneth Cragg (Oxford),
Why the Early Emergence of the Shi’a from within Sunni Islam?
11.40 – 12.25 Dr Arzina Lalani (Ismaili Institute, London),
The Shi’i Tradition in Islam
12.35 – 1.10 Shazim Hussayn (al Mahdi Institute, Birmingham),
The concept of the Mahdi in Shi’ism
Women, Wealth and Inheritance under the Fatimids
1.10 – 2.00 Lunch
2.05 – 2.50 Dr Moojan Momen (Wixamtree),
Undercurrents in Shi`i Esotericism from the Thirteenth to the Nineteenth Century
Dr Theodore Gabriel, (University of Gloucestershire),
Shi’ism and Christianity
3.00 – 3.45 Saleem Khan (Pakistan & London Metropolitan University)
Accommodating Sectarian Diversity in Pakistan
3.45 Vote of thanks: Dr Theodore Gabriel
FEES: £16 (£8 for students and the unwaged; £5.00 for students of University of Gloucestershire). Tea/Coffee will be served morning and afternoon.
A sandwich lunch (to include sandwiches, crisps, cookies, fruit and coffee/tea) will be available if ordered when your booking is made. The cost for this is £5.50 and should be sent with your conference fee (or email Patricia to arrange)
Monday, April 20, 2009
Tuesday 12th May: (Last Debate in the current Café Scientifique Series) On Artificial Intelligence
Arrivals: from 7:15pm for 7.30pm kick off, finish around 9:30ish
Location: The Pavillion (in the gardens of The Royal Oak pub) 42, The Burgage, Prestbury, Cheltenham GL52 3DL
(plenty of parking opposite and in street)
Dr David Biggs, the University of Gloucestershire's Post Grad Director in Occupational Psychology will be discussing amid other things, the pending release of Terminator 4 which in turns sparks debate about the varying forms of artificial intelligence and expert systems writing out psychometric profile reports for people from ethnic minorities... More information to follow, but for now, please pencil this date in your diaries!
• Open to all — bring a friend/neighbour!
• Admission is free
• Bar food available
• First drink is kindly sponsored by The University of Gloucestershire.
Café Scientifique has become a regular event in the county as part of the University’s commitment to public engagement and all age learning.
To find out more about the Café Scientifique network visit www.cafescientifique.org or to join us online for regular updates and reminders join The Café Scientifique Cheltenham group on Facebook,
or for more information email Emma Heathcote-James
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Monday, April 13, 2009
Wednesday, April 08, 2009
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Thursday, March 26, 2009
In March the successor to Nigel Scotland’s long-standing Rome trip took place. This involved Roy, Shelley and myself taking 21 students (5 of them 2nd years, the rest level 1 – all RPE students) to Cordoba in Andalucía, Spain. This trip was to explore the period of Islamic rule, the philosophers who emerged from it, the relation of faiths in that period (and the claims of a Golden age of religious tolerance that surround the period), the route of Greek ideas (such as those of Aristotle) into Europe, and the Christian re-conquest of the area.
Wednesday – a mid afternoon coach whisks us to Birmingham airport for a glamorous, jet-set flight with RyanAir to Malaga.. We are (much to my relief) met at the airport by another coach and driven to Cordoba, where we are dropped only a 5 minute walk from the hotel.
We arrive at Los Patios (http://www.lospatios.net/ ) around midnight – relieved that despite only having one star the hotel is friendly, clean and incredibly well-situated (it turns out to be a great place – with nice staff, night porters to let late students in, good food, and more – we hope to use it again next year).
Thursday – after a lie in – we have an orientation walk to Plaza de las Tendillas, so that students can find non-tourist shops, supermarkets, and the like. We then have lunch and cross the newly restored Roman Bridge to the new Torre de la Calahorra museum: this tower features a history of Andalucian life in the Islamic period – with models, speaking statues, and wireless headphones.
Here we began to understand the situation that prevailed in Cordoba during the Andalusian Umayyad dynasty, which lasted from 756 to 1031: often referred to as a ‘Golden Age’ of religious tolerance. While this is a simplification, the idea of an accommodation that allowed Muslim, Jews and Christians to live in relative peace, within part of Europe, is a compelling area to study – and this proved a good place to start.
More at http://www.torrecalahorra.com/
Some felt the museum might be a rather smoothed out account of the history – but it was good as an introduction to the relationship between Judaism, Christianity and Islam in the region. Many of us were glad to get out onto the roof terrace of the museum..
This museum also had a model of the large Mosque in Cordoba – now a Cathedral – which we were to visit the next day – as it would have been in its heyday, rather than as it is now (where there is now a huge Cathedral sticking out the middle of it – a very striking image if you are able to view it from above).
Following this we went to Cordoba’s archaeological museum – where much of the city’s Roman heritage is on show – which is significant and very visible around the city. There is also material here from the Visigoth period that came before the arrival and dominance of Moorish culture.
Friday was a busy day – dominated, as is the city, by the Mezquita – the grand Mosque that is now a Cathedral. Our guide, Imma, took us round the Jewish quarter and a Synagogue before we entered the hugely impressive Cathedral/Mosque.
The building still inspires strong feelings, and there was a lot to reflect on after and during this visit. The Catholic Church offers a very particular view in the leaflet that you collect as you enter – which implies that the place was a Christian place of worship (due to the presence of a Basilica prior to the Mosque) and that the re-conquest and consequent building of the Cathedral was merely a reclaiming. This seems, at the least, a simplification.
The building itself left us all with some sense of awe, but also perhaps with more troubling feelings regarding its history and claims made about it. We were also told that Muslims have often requested that Catholic authorities allow them to pray in the Mezquita/Cathedral – but that they are always turned down.
Some info HERE might be of interest..
On Friday evening we all went to the Plaza de la Corredera for a drink, followed by a meal at the Hotel – and an early night before Saturday.
Saturday began with a 6.30am alarm call… As is that was not enough of a shock for students, we then walked 25 minutes to Cordoba train station for the early morning train to Seville. Arriving at 8.30, and after a breakfast, we set off to find the Alcazar (Alcázares Reales de Sevilla) – which is a fortress with the most amazing, extensive gardens.
The place looks Moorish in style, and was mostly made by Moorish workers, but despite smaller earlier buildings, much of this Alcazar was built in the 1360s for King Pedro (the Cruel). Some argue that the Islamic buildings here were even built on the site of Visigoth buildings. However, this mix of claim and confusion over historical buildings seems not uncommon in a region where what may seem a matter of dusty history still has the power to cause passionate disagreement and dispute.
This was followed by the Cathedral in Seville – also on the site of a Mosque – the spire contains much that was a minaret and there are small parts of the arches of the mosque still intact if you look hard enough. You can climb the spire to get stunning views of the city – as we did, but this was another to chance to reflect on the purpose of the trip, in coming to an understanding of the way in which religions in this region have interacted.
Some students (and staff) also managed to find Flaherty’s bar and catch a Liverpool victory over Man Utd….
After a late night back, Sunday began with the Cordoba Alcazar – the Alcázar de los Reyes Cristianos (Spanish for "Alcázar of the Christian Monarchs"), – with huge Roman mosaics, and yet more elaborate gardens, – and then coach-plane-coach journey to Cheltenham, arriving at FCH in the early hours of Monday morning….
While formal student evaluations are a matter for exciting places like Course Boards – early informal reports suggest that this was a great way for students to learn, to get to know each other and to acquire more general life-skills and confidence. We hope to repeat it next year – and hope that more Humanities students will opt for the module (to be known as RPE136 in future) – or to attend as part of an Independent Study module.
Oh- a prize (coffee from the refectory?) for anyone (not on the trip) who can tell me what these fine gentlemen are doing… (and yes, it is religious)
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Monday, March 16, 2009
Well - as we got back to Cheltenham about 1.45am, a proper update may have to wait a day or two - but after our adventures in Cordoba and Seville - with Cathedrals, Alcazars, Mosques, Synagogues, Spanish trains, and more - I'm glad to repeat that all were counted out and counted back - much to my relief...
click the picture to the right to enlarge it...
Sunday, March 08, 2009
Monday, March 02, 2009
So in December we asked for submissions for our Britain’s Worst Argument competition. As you can see from the comments left on the blog – we had a lot of response – and lots of submissions also came by email. The one that received the most comment was the Atheist’s Nightmare – possibly due to the comic connection of fundamentalist creationism and a banana – but this was American and not eligible. We did have quite a crop of submissions relating to creationism and the Design Argument (for God’s existence), but most of these were from across the Atlantic.
I think one of my favourites, and it was sent anonymously so I cannot say where it hails from, was:
I got this one from a hairdresser when inquiring about a shampoo against hairloss:
Hairdresser: "It has been thoroughly tested and it works on 30%"
Me: "Well,... that sound good, but do you have one with more percentages?"
Hairdresser: "No,... but think again, there's a fifty-fifty percentage change that it will work on you?"
Me: (I teach statistics)"How's that?"
Hairdresser: "Well, that's obvious, either it works on you, or it doesn't!"
No need to say, I bought the shampoo right away.
This makes a great point about people’s (mis)understanding of probability and statistic, and also really made me smile. However – this is a competition – and needs a winner… (drum roll…) – and I think the worst argument we encountered (from more than one submission) is the nationalistic deployment of bifurcation. It was captured by Shelley Campbell (one of our postgraduate students) when she wrote (in response to the original post):
Politicians use this one - if we are not heart-throbbing nationals then we are traitors. For example, "If you are not for us, you are against us."
Bifurcation is where you present the reader/listener with only two alternatives, and imply that if they reject/are not aligned with one, they agree with/are aligned with the other alternative by default.
I could speak to a student: are you going to do that essay today, or be a life-wasting loser who never achieves anything? It is not uncommon in many settings, and is a way of trying to preclude the discussion of other possibilities (are you going to give up your job, or do you not love me? - there are states of affairs that might combine some of the two? or third options?).
The argument is more sinister though when used to dismiss political views by claiming they are insufficiently patriotic / pro-British (in this case). In the recent discussion of 'British Jobs for British Workers' it was hard (should one have wished to do so) to criticise the protesters without seeming unpatriotic or anti-British: in cases of war, this can lead not only to faulty reasoning - but to death and loss of life...
What is so bad about bifurcation?
• It is effective – in the heat of an argument we often fall for it: thinking that if there are only two options, we must defend one – even if absurd – rather than allow the one we dislike to dominate.
• Often the person using it does not really see things in such stark terms themselves.
• It is ‘bad’ because it is used effectively all the time in politics – witness the scramble to prove oneself patriotic in the US elections.
• Beyond nationalism, bifurcation impoverishes political debates all around us: “if you disagree with me, you are an extremist of some sort” – this is a common, dangerous and fallacious strategy: the worst argument (in the broadest sense) that we came across…
Friday, February 27, 2009
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Please try and get your presentation groups and topics to me ASAP...I would like to start the presentations next week (Week 9) but this might be unrealistic. If we only start in Week 10, all of you must be ready to present by that stage. Some of you have requested specific weeks to present in, and that is fine...if you have not made such a request, I expect you to be ready to present in Week 10.
Some people seem to be struggling with time committments, and have therefore requested to do a second essay instead of the presentation. This is okay, but you need to speak to me to clarify your reasons for not being able to do the presentation. There are good reasons ("I am going to be in New Zealand") and there are bad reasons ("I don't feel like doing a presentation"). If we have decided you can do the second essay, you can use the essay topics in the module guide, or clear a topic with me.
Next week's (Week 9) reading is Thoreau's "A life without principle". See post below.
Saturday, February 21, 2009
Anslem's Ontological Argument: http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/anselm-critics.html
Thoreau's "Life without Principle" and "Civil Disobedience": http://thoreau.eserver.org/
Nietzsche "On the Origin of Good and Evil": http://malaspina.edu/~johnstoi/Nietzsche/genealogytofc.htm [or] in the Learning Centre
Schopenhauer "On Religion": http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/s/schopenhauer/arthur/religion/chapter1.html [Yes, this is long. It is also very good. Stop moaning. You're big boys and girls now, so read it.]
Friday, February 13, 2009
Remember that you are being “examined” on your ability to draw out the central claims and conclusions, and the movement from claim to conclusion (i.e. the ARGUMENTS) in the text…you are then required to evaluate these arguments and to give supporting/counter arguments where appropriate. So you must clarify the stance being taken in the piece, and then take your own stance on it. This can be done, as previously discussed, any way you like (visual aids, drama etc) as long as it is clear what you are up to.
Aristotle - Nicomachean Ethics, Book 1, Chapters 1 – 7 (Internet Classics Archive text, NOT the ILT Digital Classics text) @ http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/nicomachaen.1.i.html
David Hume – An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, “On the origin of ideas”, @ http://www.bartleby.com/37/3/2.html
William James – What Pragmatism Means @ http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/us/james.htm
John Stuart Mill – On Nature @ http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mill-john-stuart/1874/nature.htm [OR] On Liberty @ the Learning Centre
Bertrand Russell – In Praise of Idleness @ http://www.zpub.com/notes/idle.html [OR] Ideas That Have Harmed Mankind @ http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Oracle/2528/br_ideaharm.htm
Jean-Paul Sartre – Existentialism is a Humanism @ http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/sartre/works/exist/sartre.htm
Peter Singer – All Animals Are Equal @ http://www.animal-rights-library.com/texts-m/singer02.htm
These are all interesting pieces that require thought and reflection. So get cracking.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Are there any ethical problems here?
- Is there a case for a large family in global challenges of overpopulation, environmental impact and a possible reliance on a concaving social service?
- In cases of IVF, there is a procedure of selective reduction, in other words, aborting fetuses above four to reduce risk of losing all and enhancing the chances of those remaining. This was not followed here. Also, given Ms. Suleman's age, there should have been no more than two embryos implanted according to The American Society of Reproductive Medicine (ASRM). What happened here?
- The role of doctors - surely the doctors would have disagreed with Ms. Suleman's decision to risk all eight embryos?
- IVF is a self-funded intervention - does this provide a buffer between the will of the patient and the responsibility of the doctor?
Although a story of strong emotional impact, is there a clear ethical position?
Friday, February 06, 2009
Nonetheless, the results of the 'Worst Argument' competition will be announced on this blog in the next few days...
Wednesday, February 04, 2009
Look forward to a lively debate then!
click to enlarge map
Tuesday, February 03, 2009
If you have not received the full details by email by Wednesday 4th Feb - email email@example.com and ask Patricia to send them to you...
THIS TRIP HAS NOW HAPPENED: see http://r-p-e.blogspot.com/2009/03/cordoba-field-trip.html
links here to lots of pictures...
Monday, February 02, 2009
Sunday, February 01, 2009
Friday, January 23, 2009
This year the topic is:
The event will be held at:
TC001 - Tiered Lecture Theatre, FCH Campus, Swindon Road, Cheltenham.
Contact firstname.lastname@example.org for details: Full Programme to follow shortly - all welcome (including students!)..
You can book HERE
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Hope this is useful - and that you enjoy the visit of today's meditation teacher...
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Monday, January 19, 2009
We will be looking at the film The Seventh Seal in class today.
Look at http://course1.winona.edu/pjohnson/h140/seal.htm for some ideas (see list of questions near base of the page) - and make comment via this blog post.
Other ideas are at http://r-p-e.blogspot.com/2008/02/seventh-seal.html
Prefer the Bill and Ted version? see
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
I have pasted below the initial questions I have asked the RPE187 class - and await the answers with interest. [Other readers of the blog are welcome to join in!]
So: why study philosophy
1 – Pragmatic:
What skills can you take from the subject? What else (if anything) will it make you good at?
2 – Social / Political:
Does a philosophical education make you a more aware citizen – who makes better choices?
Are you more moral as a result of the study of ethics?
Is a society with more philosophers in it, more or less likely to be:
- Smooth functioning?
- Well organised?
- Argumentative and disputatious?
3 – Personal
Has your study so far impacted upon you as a person?
Is this a subject which changes people – unlike, perhaps, some other subjects (can you think of an example of a subject which doesn’t change people?)?
If it does bring about personal change – what is the nature of this change?
Other: Are there other reasons?