In my dissertation, Anthropocentrism as Environmental Ethic, I defend a worldview that I refer to as ecological anthropocentrism. The central concern of such an anthropocentrism is the indefinite evolutionary success and flourishing of Homo sapiens and its successors. I argue that the appropriate scale to morally evaluate individual and collective human actions is both spatially and temporally geologic. Only at this scale, encompassing the entirety of our planet and its history, can the tragedy of anthropogenic extinctions and ecological degradations be fully ascertained. I argue that such acknowledgment is a plausible reason for experiencing immense existential regret. Despite misanthropic rhetoric from self-proclaimed nonanthropocentrists that the Earth would indeed be better off without humans, however, such regret does not preclude them from tolerating and favoring our species’ continued existence. I argue that this demonstrates that anthropocentrism is an inherent component of any rationally defensible environmental ethic. I also argue that when coupled with a not-so-ignorant,  intertemporal Rawlsian veil, existential regret can be a useful tool for determining what current environmental policies and sociocultural practices rational environmentalists of the indefinite future would universally condone or condemn. I suggest that here one discovers a negative, contextual formulation of the categorical imperative. Instead of morally permissible actions being those that proceed according to maxims that would be condoned by all rational beings regardless of context, morally permissible actions are those that, considered within their contexts, would not be condemned by all rational beings.

My next research project will involve the intersection of ethics, philosophy of biology, cognitive science, and philosophy of mind. I will explore the ethical implications of a post-Darwinian conceptual revision of mind and value. I am particularly interested in questioning the evolutionary continuity of perceptually-based social engagements, from microbes to mammals, and the possibility that such engagements are an enactment of a continuum of values—moral and otherwise—that differ not in kind but by degrees.

Graduate Certificate in Cognitive Science, University of Kentucky (Lexington, KY), 2011.

In this course students will actively explore the philosophical aspects of that wonderful genre known as science fiction.  Works of science fiction have the capacity to inspire an audience to ask questions about the most basic aspects of existence—to ask the same sorts of questions that eternally transfix philosophers.  Confrontations with the alien other, the alien self, or the alien environment inevitably engender deep and desperate questions.  For some thinkers, of course, philosophy is not the first thing that comes to mind upon being exposed to science fiction’s enacted thought experiments.  Yves Chevrier, for example, in analyzing Ridley Scott's film, Blade Runner, called "inescapable" the "puerile intrigues and infantile philosophical messages" of science fiction film.  He stated, "Blade Runner's story is likewise impudently dull and conventional, and its metaphysics aren't worth a plug nickel" (1984:51).  At least he held the film’s imagery in high regard.  It is often the subtle or unspoken messages of science fiction which make the genre amenable to philosophical speculation, however.  The attentive viewer/reader is called upon to ask the questions that implicitly arise as the story unfolds.  Critics such as Chevrier, Mark Rowland writes, "wouldn't recognize a complex philosophical point if [they were] pissing on it" (2003:x).  Science fiction and its metaphors can easily allow one to, from a safe distance perhaps, entertain questions like:  Who or what is the ‘I’. . . really, and where exactly is. . . it?  Do I have a free will, or am I only deluded into thinking that I do?  Can the senses ever be trusted, or is my life necessarily some kind of dream?  Can a robot or a computer program have an ‘I’ that is genuinely comparable to mine, provided that I indeed have one?  Could I somehow transfer my consciousness into a human-engineered receptacle and essentially become immortal?  Could there be an infinite number of alternate selves out there, each convinced that it is I?  Major themes to be explored this semester include:  personal identity, free will, artificial intelligence, dystopia, absurdity, and possible worlds.

Below you will find links to the course syllabus and the assigned PDF readings.

SYLLABUS.

The Experience Machine - Robert Nozick

Brains in a Vat - Hilary Putnam

Brains in a Vat: Different Perspectives - Yuval Steinitz

We Can Remember It for You Wholesale - Philip K. Dick

The No-Self Theory: Hume, Buddhism, and Personal Identity - James Giles

The Simplicity of the Soul - Jonathan Bennett

The Library of Babel - Jorge Luis Borges

Time and Personal Identity in Nietzsche's Theory of the Eternal Recurrence - Scott Jenkins

The Impossibility of Moral Responsibility - Galen Strawson

I Could Not Have Done Otherwise--So what? - Daniel Dennett

Against Neural Chauvinism - Tom Cuda

Is the Brain a Digital Computer? - John Searle

Artificial Intelligence and Personal Identity - David Cole

Adaptive Flight Control with Living Neuronal Networks on Microelectrode Trays - DeMarse & Dockendorf

Ethical Robots in Warfare - Ronald C. Arkin

Why I Want to Be a Posthuman When I Grow Up - Nick Bostrom

The Artificial Alien: Transformations of the Robot in Science Fiction - Morton Klass

Trying to Plug In: Posthuman Cyborgs and the Search for Connection - Melissa Colleen Stevenson

Sex and the Single Cyborg: Japanese Popular Culture Experiments in Subjectivity - Sharalyn Orbaugh

Refiguring the Radical Cyborg in Mamoru Oshii's Ghost in the Shell - Carl Silvio

Transhumanism - Francis Fukuyama

Transhumanism, Metaphysics, and the Posthuman God - Jeffrey Bishop

Blade Runner; or, The Sociology of Anticipation - Yves Chevrier

Ideology as Dystopia: An Interpretation of Blade Runner - Douglas E. Williams

Blade Runner and Sartre: The Boundaries of Humanity - Judith Barad

Entering the Posthuman Collective in Philip K. Dick's Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? - Jill Galvan

Do Androids Pulverize Tiger Bones to Use as Aphrodisiacs? The Tragedy of Extinction - Simon A. Cole

Vicious Circle Principle (selections from Too Smart for Our Own Good: The Ecological Predicament of Humankind) - Craig Dilworth

Republic (selections from Book V) - Plato

The Survival Lottery - John Harris

Why the Numbers Should Sometimes Count - John T. Sanders

The Gene Regime - Francis Fukuyama

The Identity of Clones - Kathinka Evers

Human Cloning: Three Mistakes and an Alternative - Francoise Baylis

Self and Other in Alien Encounters - Carl D. Malmgren

Possible Worlds - Robert C. Stalnaker

Counterparts of Persons and Their Bodies - David Lewis

Beyond the Earth Charter: Taking Possible People Seriously - Robin Attfield

The Theologian's Nightmare - Bertrand Russell

The Absurd - Thomas Nagel

Please refer to the site of the most recent semester for information regarding my current (or most recent) PHI 130 course.  (Below is a link to the outdated syllabus.)

SYLLABUS  [OUTDATED]

Anthropogenic Mass Extinction - Homo sapiens and the Evolution of the Biosphere since the Pleistocene - ISHPSSB July 2011

No Place Like Home - Invasional Meltdown in the New Pangaea - PEWG DOPE April 2012

For Love of the Frivolous - Lifeboat Earth and the Myth of Anthropocentrism - PEWG DOPE Feb - March 2013

Ted Schatzki

Arnold Farr

Clare Batty

Lynne Rieske-Kinney

What exactly is morality?  Is there such a thing as an objective right or wrong?  How is it possible to determine whether an action is (or should be) permissible, forbidden, or obligatory?  How can one determine the makeup of the moral community—i.e., who or what has rights or responsibilities?  Philosophers have long held disparate beliefs about the nature of value and its place in our lives, and their weighty opinions have helped shape the widespread assumptions accepted (or rejected) by individuals across cultures as well as subcultures.  Without the shared beliefs and practices of a community’s members, particularly those regarding notions of right and wrong behavior, the emergence of complex social and political structures would be unlikely, if not impossible.

In this course, we will examine some of the most prevalent ethical theories that have emerged in the West and explore the implications of adopting these theories in response to contemporary ethical issues.  By the end of the semester, students are expected not only to attain a practical understanding of moral philosophy as it has evolved in the West but also to critically evaluate and clarify their own positions on various ethical issues in a dialogue with the ethical frameworks encountered in the assigned material.

SYLLABUS

ETHICAL ISSUES ALBUM HANDOUT

SAMPLE ALBUM ENTRY WITH COMMENTS

MIDTERM EXAM STUDY GUIDE

Below are some of the presentations given in class.  Students are encouraged to emulate or improve upon these examples for the presentations they have chosen.  Keep in mind, however, that these files do not adequately represent the presentations given since the in-class presentations were accompanied by lively discussions and critiques. . . .

What Is Morality? - James Rachels & Stuart Rachels

Does Morality Depend on Religion? - James Rachels & Stuart Rachels

The Challenge of Cultural Relativism - James Rachels & Stuart Rachels

Subjectivism in Ethics - James Rachels & Stuart Rachels

Ethical Egoism - James Rachels & Stuart Rachels

The Social Contract - Thomas Hobbes

Letter from a Birmingham Jail - Martin Luther King, Jr.

The Categorical Imperative - Immanuel Kant

[NOTE:  Concise PowerPoint presentations for the articles in Exploring Ethics can be found here on the text's companion website.]

Death is a phenomenon that has transfixed and inspired humanity for as long as humans have walked the Earth.  Art, religion, and philosophy are some of humanity’s most profound responses to the inevitability of death.  We are all too aware that our breaths are numbered, so we strive to live well, to die well, to achieve something significant, profound, or lasting before our final exhalation.  Or, identifying with Sisyphus, we may surrender to the unbearable weight of absurdity and despair.  On the other hand, we may simply deny death altogether.

This semester we will examine a host of questions about life, death, living, and dying.  We will undertake a philosophical and interdisciplinary investigation of a cluster of prominent issues about the meaning of life and death—for individuals as well as for species.  Among the topics covered are death definitions and criteria, abortion, euthanasia, killing and letting die, suicide, the rights of the dying, the rights of future beings, life extension, transhumanism, posthumanity, and extinction.

Throughout the semester, students will critically reflect upon their attitudes and opinions about life and death in an ongoing dialogue with a number of fascinating readings and classic films (perennial as well as modern), and in response to points raised during classroom discussions.

Students will divulge their conclusions in presentations and paper assignments.
 

SYLLABUS

Midterm Paper Assignment - Handout

PRESENTATIONS

Death - Thomas Nagel

The Termination Thesis - Fred Feldman

STUDENT PRESENTATIONS (unedited)

Death: A Propitious Misfortune - William Ferraiolo (Christina Precious)  [002]

Death: A Propitious Misfortune - William Ferraiolo (Creighton Sullivan)  [001]

Death's Distinctive Harm - Stephan Blatti (Michala Handy)  [002]

Death's Distinctive Harm - Stephan Blatti (Selena The)  [001]

A Defense of Abortion - Judith Jarvis Thomson (Ashley Baxter) [002]

A Defense of Abortion - Judith Jarvis Thomson (Heather Mangione) [001]

On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion - Mary Anne Warren (Abby Spalding) [002]

On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion - Mary Anne Warren (Meredith Morey) [001]

Why Abortion Is Immoral - Don Marquis (Christina Precious) [002]

Why Abortion Is Immoral - Don Marquis (Elena Jones) [001]

What Is So Wrong with Killing - Robert Young (Hali Slone) [001]

PHI 100 (008) - Knowledge & Reality - Fall 2014

PHI 334 (002) - Business Ethics - Fall 2014

Do I exist?  If so, what am I?  And what does it mean to exist or to be?  What is reality?  What is truth?  What does it mean to have meaning?  How can I know what is real or true?  Is knowledge even possible, or are truth and objectivity merely constructs of beings like us?

In this course, we will delve into these sorts of questions and analyze the responses that influential philosophers have offered over the years.

There will be a moderate amount of reading assignments.  If at first the readings seem dense and impenetrable, don’t despair.  Students who approach the readings with patience—willing to reread, pause, and reflect—will have the best chance to get it.

By the end of the semester, students are expected to attain, through thoughtful and careful consideration, a practical understanding of the foundations upon which the bulk of current knowledge and reality has been built.  Students who successfully complete this course will be able to articulate well-informed responses of their own to the deep sorts of questions that beings like us are wont to ask from time to time.

SYLLABUS

MIDTERM EXAM STUDY GUIDE

PAPER ASSIGNMENT HANDOUT

FINAL EXAM STUDY GUIDE

An introduction to moral problems that arise in contemporary business practice and the ethical frameworks proposed to resolve them. Topics will include areas such as truth-telling and integrity; social responsibility; property rights and their limitations; and justice in personnel and labor practices.  Particular emphasis will be placed on environmental issues and the role of the consumer.

Because we live in a world that is increasingly interconnected through trade, many of our everyday activities utterly depend on the production, transportation, and consumption of goods and services from all over the globe.  The practices of businesses and consumers are far-reaching and can be, in a manner of speaking, Earth-shattering.  Corporations, although afforded the legal status of persons, are typically not held to the same ethical standards as actual persons.  In a similar manner, consumers who are actual persons are not blamed for the human exploitation and environmental degradation associated with their purchases.  In this course, we will attempt to correct such oversights as we consider the ethical responsibilities of both businesses and consumers.

SYLLABUS

MIDTERM PAPER HANDOUT

FINAL PAPER HANDOUT

SYLLABUS (Section 010)

SYLLABUS (Section 019)

MIDTERM EXAM STUDY GUIDE

FINAL EXAM STUDY GUIDE

“Logic is the analysis and appraisal of arguments.  When you do logic, you try to clarify reasoning and separate good from bad reasoning.”  (Gensler 2010:1)

In this course, students will attain a practical understanding of logic and its application in critical thinking about everyday and philosophical issues.  Students will learn to utilize the logician’s toolkit in order to distinguish good arguments from bad ones—with the aim being to inculcate standards of good reasoning, e.g., clarity, consistency and validity.  The text and its accompanying software will help students become adept at analyzing the strength or soundness of the ideas that are presented to them every day from various sources.  Consequently, students are expected to better understand the logic behind their own thoughts and actions—and to apply principles of logic in their reasoning.

“Why study logic?  I can think of three main reasons.  First, logic is important because reasoning is important.  Reasoning and general analytical skills are important in law, politics, journalism, education, medicine, business, science, mathematics, computer science, and most other areas.  Second, logic can deepen your understanding of philosophy.  Philosophers ask questions like ‘Why accept or reject free will?’ or ‘Can one prove or disprove God’s existence?’ or ‘How can one justify a moral belief?’  If you don’t know any logic, you’ll have only a vague grasp of such issues; and you’ll lack the tools needed to understand and evaluate philosophical reasoning.  Finally, logic can be fun.  Doing logic is like playing a game or doing puzzles; logic will challenge your thinking processes in new ways.  The rigor of logical systems will likely fascinate you.”  (Gensler 2010:1—2)