Breakthrough Writer

1A Lesson for “Hopelessly Hooked on Help” by Steve Salerno (543) and "Finding a Coach in the Land of Oz (278)

 

Part One. Reading Questions

1.  What does the lack of proven efficacy regarding the self-help movement say about the typical American consumer? He naively believes in the unlimited possibilities of human potential, he believes in “giftedness” and he believes that if he pays an authority enough money he can untap his genius. We can conclude, therefore, that the typical American is a narcissist who has embraced the American dogma that we can pay for anything.

2.  What is the author’s definition of self-help? The “enterprise wherein people holding the thinnest of credentials diagnose in basically normal people symptoms of inflated or invented maladies, so that they may then implement remedies that have never been shown to work.”

3.  Why has this bogus billion-dollar industry remained unexamined and under the radar? It’s either dismissed as a joke or ineffective but at least benign.

4.  What are the destructive effects of SHAM (Self-Help and the Actualization Movement)? It breeds narcissism (I am the focal point), victimization, inflated expectations, moral relativism (parsing the meanings of right and wrong). It also erodes personal responsibility and reasonable self-expectations.

5.  Why on page 548 does Salerno opine that “failure and stagnation are central to all of SHAM”? Because the guru needs you to be a cripple. He counts on you to succumb to learned helplessness and rely on his crutch forever and ever.

6.  What influence has the Recovery Movement (A.A. and other addiction treatment centers) had on SHAM? The belief that disorders can be treated when in fact no research supports such an assumption. See page 552.

 

Part Two. Why are Americans so uniquely susceptible to the B.S. of SHAM?

1.  Americans love the idea of spending money to “fix” a problem. Not just life coaches, shrinks and the like, but personal trainers, gurus, etc. “Buying” a solution rids personal responsibility and the unpleasant prospect of changing one’s character and the bad habits that spring forth from such bad character.

2.  Americans have always embraced false prophets, those snake oil salesmen, charlatans, and mountebanks who promise to cure your ailments with no fuss or pain.

3.  Unlike other cultures that are deeply influenced by the idea of fate, Americans reject fate and believe in optimistic free will or “lifting yourself up by your bootstraps.” As such, every affliction and disorder is believed to be treatable even when empirical evidence is lacking.

4.  SHAM imitates the big circus tent revivalism that is part of America’s religious history. SHAM imitates religion with its pageantry, testimonials, community bonding, team spirit.

5.  Americans hunger for complete self-reinvention and embrace any industry that promises thorough self-transformation. America is a country of immigrants who start their lives over, often from scratch.

6.  Americans love the Conquer Adversity Narrative. Just about every Hollywood film is a variation of this narrative. Why? Because it sells. American films tend to be more optimistic than films from other countries because Americans are possessed by the Conquer Adversity Narrative.

7.  There’s enough infantile narcissists in America who are drawn to an industry that says, “Your problems are not your fault. You’re a victim, you’re a damaged and precious gift. With my help, you will heal, spread your wings, and fly. And of course, you’ll conquer your enemies, all your doubters. With my help, you will enjoy vindication (proving you’re right and others, especially naysayers, are wrong).

8.  Therapy, recovery, and self-help take complicated problems and reduce them to “12 simple steps.” This is appealing to people who are scared and who feel helpless.

9.  Americans love to feel they’re buying an “edge” over their competition even if this edge is a placebo.

10.               Americans have a history of gullibility as it pertains to pseudo science and quack psychology. Kellogg’s cereal and Graham crackers are derived from “doctors” and “ministers” who believed that cereal and graham crackers soothed the soul and purified it from sinful thoughts.

 

Part Three. Essay Option.

In a page summarize the major ideas in “Hopelessly Hooked on Help.” 

A thesis might look like thus:

Salerno vividly shows an industry that thrives on the most imbecilic American characterized by _____________, _______________, _______________, __________________, and _______________________.

1A Lesson Plan for “Finding a Coach in the Land of Oz” (278)

 

Part One. Why is BS so difficult to detect and repel?

1. It is everywhere so we forget about it. It’s like background noise.
2. We take it for granted and are numb to it.
3. We accept it because often we are guilty of it.
4. Because we don’t have a firm definition of it.
5. Like I said before, for some people BS is all they know.  
6. We don't know what it is specifically.  

Part Two. What is BS?

BS is false sincerity masquerading as something that should be highly prized. Its fakery is disguised by ornate fraudulence, clever exaggeration, subtle cunning, polished style, bold extravagance. All of these qualities are designed for the BS artist to look like he is working in your best interests but in reality he is taking advantage of you.

Frankfurt is the author of BS. He adds that the BSer is different from the liar. The liar lies knowing the difference between truth and lies; the BSer on the other hand is indifferent to any difference between truth and lies. For the BSer there is no difference. 


Part Three. Why Is BS so common?

 

1. BS is common because the stalwarts of success, who brandish their trophies in the media, are usually BS artists supreme. As such they are our role models and influence us to follow their BS-ing ways.

2. BSers enjoy reproductive and financial success so we emulate them.


3.  There is a market for BS, a huge pool of people who are willing believers.

4.  BS is easier than authenticity. 

5. When your whole life is BS, you know nothing else so you can't identify it and put a stop to it. 

Part Four. The so-called “career coach” is in truth a BS artist. The essay teaches us the distinguishing characteristics of BS.

1. BS is not lying; rather, it is blowing smoke, an attempt to impress and razzle-dazzle your audience with ornate fakery, clever exaggeration, extravagant style, and worn-out gimmicks.
2. The BSer uses creative euphemisms:  a garbage man is a garbologist or a sanitation engineer. You don't break up with someone; you "take a breather." You're fired is a "severance package"; When you haven't even started your essay, you say you're "working on it." The restaurant food is crap, but you call it pedestrian, insipid, and jejune.  You're worthless is translated "Needs improvement." You're a narcissistic nut job is "a piece of work."     
3. BS is ubiquitous, which means it is so prevalent that we take it for granted and are numb to it. Sadly, we accept BS more than we should.
4. BS extraordinaire Morton gives us a clinic in BS, which commonly is a hustle to bilk money from the innocent, the gullible, and the unsuspecting. In this case, vulnerable people, people with families who have lost their jobs and are desperate.

 

Part Five. Morton unwittingly teaches us the BS Trade:

1. Morton blames the victim by telling the victim she needs to transform her personality, which is obviously inadequate. Lucky for her, Morton has the tools to help her achieve her transformation. Morton grades her personality and focuses on her self, which is irrelevant to helping her find a job. See page 284.
2. The BS artists uses cheap sound bites that any punk can find on the Internet to establish his “expertise.” In Morton’s case, it’s the “Four Competencies”—Mobilizing Innovation, managing People and Tasks, Communicating, and Managing Self. See page 280.
3. These cheap slogans are a distraction from the painful and essential fact: Morton is worthless in his ability to help the job seeker find a job. If he can distract the job seeker with cheap slogans, he can bilk her for some cash.
4. The BS artist borrows from the wisdom of the ancients to present a pseudo-spiritual aura, which the BS artist uses to create the illusion of expertise: He presents a transparency that reads “Clear mind, skillful driver; Sound spirit, strong horse, etc.” See page 280. Again, this is a distraction from his essential worthlessness. The real question is CAN YOU MAKE ME MONEY! I DON’T HAVE TIME FOR YOUR “CLEAR MIND SKILLFUL DRIVER” SPEIL; I’VE GOT KIDS TO FEED, MORON!
5. The BS artist relies on gimmicks like dolls to act-out his psychological principles. See page 280. The scarecrow represents “The Mental,” etc. Also see page 284 in which Morton uses an Elvis doll to make some asinine point.
6. The BS artist relies on the human potential language from self-help psychology to appear valuable to his customer. See page 280 at the bottom as he discusses “personality types,” “motivation,” etc. Also see page 283 top with the intersecting circles. Complete BS.
7. The BS artist uses phony language that his customer does not understand. This phony language creates the illusion of mastery. See page 181.
8. The BS artist bilks (extracts money from) his customer by creating needs and services that are not necessary. See page 281 bottom and 282 top. See 283 top, the need for more coaching for a mere $1,200.
9. The BS artist performs an air of conviction about his opinions when he lacks the scientific data to support his positions.
10. The essence of the BS artist is the performance of sincerity when in fact the BSer is heartless and believes in nothing more than his own ability to cheat people.
11. The bull artist has no interest in the difference between falsity and truth; his only interest is in getting away with his BS.
12. The BS artist knows he is BS-ing in the beginning but there is a point where he believes in his own BS and becomes in a way insane and morally depraved. (example of a coach I used to know)

Part Six. Write a research paper in which you first define BS and provide its distinguishing characteristics. Then show how these BS traits apply to three figures in a comparison essay. After your definition of BS, you will profile a BSer you know in about 1.5 pages, showing how this person exemplifies the BSer template or model. Then you will interview someone who was duped or manipulated by a BSer and profile this BSer in another 1.5 pages, showing how this BSer, too, illustrates your BS characteristics. Finally, you will use the "life coach" in today's essay as your final example of the BSer. 

Your research sources for your Works Cited Page will include the following:

1. My blog.

2. Today's essay from Acting Out Culture

3. Your interview. 

A sample thesis might look like this:

Barbara Ehrenreich's chronicle of spending money on "career coaches" not only shows them to be a sham and a fraud but highlights the toxicity of living in a culture suffused by BS as described by Harry Frankfurt's masterpiece essay. The most salient BS ingredients found in Ehrenrich's infuriating personal narrative include _______________________________, ____________________________, ________________________________, and ______________________________. We see these characteristics exemplified in _______________, _______________, and ______________________. 

 

Debating Torture Part Four

">

Debating Torture Part Three

">

Debating Torture Part Two

">

Debating Torture Part One

">

Research Link for Infanticide Topic: Hakani on ABC News

">

1A Lesson Plan for “AWOL in America: When Desertion Is the Only Option”

One: Lexicon

 

1. coercion
2. naiveté
3. conscientious objector : is an individual who, on religious, moral or ethical grounds, refuses to participate as a combatant in war
4. AWOL
5. Marginalized people: people with no education, resources, or support system who are apathetic, feeling no hope to improve their lives; consequently all their decisions are based on physical survival, nothing else.
6. Army’s manpower crisis (360) demand exceeds supply
7. Stop-loss orders (360) A commander must retain at least 85% of soldiers or he will have hell to pay.
8. Principle of Scarcity: Whenever there is a short supply of something, we lower our standards, food, mates, military, etc.
9. Docility, docile
10. Acquiescence, acquiesce, acquiescent 
11. Metamorphosis, drastic transformation for which there is often no return

 

Two. What 10 life lessons do we learn from this essay?

 

1. Morons and madmen reign in high places. Whenever you join an institution—any institution—don’t expect smart, competent, morally savory people to be on top. Expect the contrary to be true. Here you have a military system so desperate for recruits that is it yanking clueless people off the streets to fight a war that by all accounts is a catastrophic failure doomed to drain our country of all its resources and yet nearly impossible for us to leave. The Administration doesn’t even provide proper helmets, properly working gas masks, Hum-Vees and armor and parents are sending safety equipment to their children, paying out of their pockets.

 

 

2. Whenever there is a crisis, it is the clueless, helpless margins of society who get manipulated into be exploited for the uses of the higher-ups. Here we have the worse foreign policy decision every made in US history and smart people know not to get involved with it. So who gets into Iraq, mostly clueless people who don’t have the faintest idea of what they’re getting into. See page 361, top paragraph. See 361 bottom and 362 top.

 

 

3. When privileged and powerful people exploit you for their purposes, not only do the powerful not appreciate you for saving their butts, they insult you by not giving you any compensation. See page 361. Hordes of soldiers are calling hotlines for untreated injuries, mental illness, PTSD, post traumatic stress disorder, violence, suicide, etc. 60 Minutes had a story about a VA hospital with sewage leaking everywhere, rats, roaches.

 

 

4. Whenever there’s a screw up, the people on top always defer the pain and punishment to the helpless underlings who don’t have a clue of what’s going on. Rather than admit their mistakes and pull out, the Administration saves face by continuing a war that results in the deaths of thousands of people, soldiers from working class America and innocent Iraqis whose casualties number in the hundreds of thousands. Another example: We bailed out big corporations who then gave their CEOs bonuses. Absurd. 

 

 

5. Bureaucrats do whatever they have to do to save their butts, usually at the expense of doing the right thing. See page 360, bottom paragraph

 

 

6. Don’t ever make a decision based on powerful emotional longing because more often than not your decision will be irrational, misguided, and work against your best interests. Jeremiah was raised by a single mother and hungered for a father figure and a positive role model of healthy masculinity. This hunger was so powerful that it compelled him to join the military even though his personality is at odds with military culture and he’s miserable. See 363 and 364 top.

 

 

7. Related to number 6, don’t ever make a decision without doing the extensive research first because if you screw up, no one is going to bail out. You need to rely on yourself to take care of your own self-interests and you had better protect your interests ferociously and thoroughly or a heavy price will be paid. People get married without knowing what the hell marriage entails other than some sentimental image they got from watching a Hugh Grant movie or listening to some crappy love song on the radio.

 

 

8. Do be an effective killing machine in the military, you have to put on a warrior’s mask that doesn’t come off easily—if ever at all—when you rejoin civilian life. See page 364 in which the sergeant says he joined the Army because he enjoyed killing and being an effective killing machine. Also see 366. We see that being an effective soldier is all about tapping into that vein of violence that exists in all of us. It’s necessary for war, to be sure, but how do you turn it off?

 

 

9. When you’re young, there is no shortage of people who are eager and willing to take advantage of your innocence and naiveté. See 362.

 

10. There is usually a complete disconnect between an institution taking appropriate action and maintaining its official policy. See page 365 in which Jeremiah is clearly having a nervous breakdown and is not useless to the military but presents a danger to others and himself, but the bureaucracy must maintain policy; doing the right thing in this circumstance is irrelevant.

 

 

Three: Qualities of a Good Thesis:

 

1. visceral, from the gut first, the brain second
2. address a relevant topic
3. avoid the obvious and self-evident
4. develop a thesis that is an answer to a compelling question
5. make sure the reader can find the thesis in your essay
6. make sure your thesis is one or two sentences and no more
7. make sure your thesis has enough substance to cover 5 pages
8. make sure there is research material to support your thesis
9. it’s often good to focus on a controversial topic, a 2-sided argument
10. it’s often good to take a contrarian position
11. has a strong voice
12. outlines your essay by being followed with mapping components or sentences.

 

 

 

Broad

 

Dobie is too harsh on the military

Going AWOL is a bad thing.

Sometimes going AWOL is okay.

 

 

Students will write a thesis for today’s essay:

 

Specific

 

The military will enhance its strength and morality if it pardons those who want to quit because __________________, _________________, _________________, and _____________________.

 

Dobie’s argument that special cases should be pardoned for committing AWOL would pose certain dangers to the military, namely, ___________________, _________________, __________________, and _________________________.

 

The Assignment As It Appears on Your Syllabus:

Write a 5-page defense or refutation of the use of enforcing AWOL laws. In your first 2 pages, explain the position of your opponents and the justifications they use to defend their position. Then in the next 3 pages, argue, point by point, why your opponents are wrong. You must use a Works Cited page that has no fewer than 4 sources.

1A Lesson Plan for “Watching Torture in Prime Time” by Anne-Marie Cusac (109)

 

 

 

Part One. Lexicon for Torture Debate

 

 

1. The Hawk Approach to torture: Be aggressive and use traditional methods of pain.
2. The Dove Approach to torture: Be cautious and emphasize psychology and persuasion while avoiding physical abuse.
3. Torture Lite, also called stress interrogation: relies on sleep deprivation, confusion, discomfort, solitary confinement, mind deception games, sensory deprivation, LSD and other drugs.
4.  “Severe” torture: any torture that results in organ failure
5.  Define your terms: are you arguing for or against all-out torture and torture lite?
6. Geneva Convention: terrorists are excluded from war prisoner rights
7. Unlawful combatant
8. Abu Ghraib: the abuses at this torture center are an exercise in stupidity, cruelty, sadism, sexual humiliation; techniques proved to harm US interests around the world; we looked like brutes.
9. Shaking: putting a dirty stinking bag over someone’s head; part of torture lite
10. Efficacy argument: different studies give different results; it all depends on the expertise of the torturer and the person being tortured; no one size fits all rule applies and this is the problem of the torture debate; sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn’t. It appears torture worked against the Algerian Liberation Front but it also appears it was ineffective against the Viet Cong.
11. Duress argument; people under duress will say anything.
12. Reciprocity argument; if we torture captives, our enemy countries will do the same to us.
13. Rendition: outsourcing our prisoners to other countries to be tortured so we can officially say we don’t torture while paying other countries to do so under the radar. This is an argument against torture. Why?
14. Torture as social control in Naomi Klein’s article.
15. Anti-democracy argument; torture can be used to intimidate those who oppose the government policies
16. Lazy argument; there are more efficient ways of getting information than torture
17. Fear argument (from Mark Bowden) fear works more than pain; the torturer must use psychological cunning in addition to physical pain.
18. Language and Deception argument (fake an alliance with prisoner’s friends)
19. Good Cop/Bad Cop
20. Morons and Madmen argument; can we trust people in high power to be moral and competent?
21. Sadism argument; sadistic people are drawn to jobs that may require torture
22. Either/or fallacy to support torture

 

 

 

Part Two. Traditional Arguments Against Torture

 

1. Coercion often results in the suspect appeasing the torturer with made-up information to simply stop the torture.
2. Sadists are often drawn to the job of torturer.
3. An infinitesimal amount of people who go into the torture profession have the skill level and expertise to implement torture effectively and within the guidelines. Most in fact are incompetent butchers.
4. There is no way of knowing that the Intel was helpful or accurate until long after it was extracted, rendering it useless.
5. Governments use torture to intimidate the citizens from having contrary opinions and free speech. This is called the slippery slope argument.
6. Torture may start off with guidelines and controls but soon it becomes an uncontrollable juggernaut. Abuse is inevitable.
7. The government can widen the definition of a “terrorist suspect” to include anyone they want.
8. Torture is state-sponsored terrorism that lowers us to our enemies’ level.
9. Emphasis on torture distracts us from real solution to terrorism, which is prevention. I will use the cancer analogy.
10. Cover-ups are commonplace in torture abuses.
11. Torture is a violation of human rights.
12. There is the retaliation factor: “We torture them; now they torture us.”
13. Torture results in an anti-American sentiment which reduces international cooperation.
14. Non-torture methods are proven to be as or even more effective.
15. Terrorists will choose death over capture (knowing they’ll be tortured) and wreak more havoc—resulting in more death and bloodshed—as they fight to the death.

 

Part Three. Common Arguments That Support Torture

1. The Ticking Bomb Scenario
2. Abuse of X should not result in its elimination. Do we eliminate priests, marriage, and other things when abuses occur?
3. Proven terrorists waive their human rights.
4. “We have the right to save our lives and country by any means necessary.”
5. We accept collateral damage when we drop bombs; the same should be tolerated when we torture.
6. Unlawful combatants don’t have the same rights as do captured prisoners.
7. We have a body of evidence that shows we have gained life-saving Intel from the use of torture.

 

 

 

Part Four. Reading Questions

 

One. What do Jack Bauer and many Bush Administration officials have in common? 109

 

Two. In one word, what is the appeal of the TV show 24? See 110 top.

 

Three. In what 2 ways is 24 in conflict with reality? See 110 (impending disaster) and 111 (the efficacy of torture)

 

Four. Why does Cusac praise 24? See 110 bottom.

 

Five. What anti-humanistic and pro-humanistic messages hum through the show? 111

 

Six. Is 24 a powerful influence on Americans’ attitudes toward torture and the rules of war in general? Explain. See 112 top. 

 

 

Essay Options:

Write a 5-page defense or refutation of the use of torture. In your first 2 pages, explain the position of your opponents and the justifications they use to defend their position. Then in the next 3 pages, argue, point by point, why your opponents are wrong. You must use a Works Cited page that has no fewer than 4 sources.

 

A pro-torture thesis with concession clause might look like this:

 

While torture entails many abuses, torture is justified in certain situations, including _________________________, _____________________, ________________________, and _________________________.

An anti-torture thesis might look like this:

While the pro-torture debaters are good at drumming up all sorts of scary scenarios, their arguments for torture collapse under the weight of several fallacies, myths, and misconceptions, which include _____________________, ________________________, ________________________________, ________________________, and _____________________________. 

 

 

A thesis that “rides the middle” might look like this:

 

To embrace a “pro-torture” or “anti-torture” is over simplistic nonsense. The potential for abuse in the realm of torture is huge, to be sure. But sometimes there are in fact extreme conditions that warrant torture. Therefore, torture should be allowed in the most narrow of circumstances and stringent conditions, which include ____________________, ____________________________, _________________________, _____________________________, and __________________________________.

Suggested Essay Structure

In your first two pages, summarize the major arguments for and against torture so your reader knows you considered both sides of the issue. Then in a thesis, you might write something like this:

Having considered both positions, I feel compelled to argue that torture is (is not) viable because ____________________________, _________________________, ___________________, and ___________________________________.

1A Research Links for the Torture Debate

The Dark Art of Interrogation

Torture: The Slippery Slope

Amnesty International and Counterarguments

Torture As Policy

Balanced Politics

Torture Paper

The Torture Myth

The Argument for Torture

In Defense of Torture

In Defense of Torture from The Atlantic

The Truth About Torture

1A Lesson Plan for “Unspeakable Conversations” (92)

 

Part One. Lexicon of Terms Pertinent to Peter Singer’s Moral Philosophy.

 

One. Utilitarianism, the philosophy that we should sacrifice the individual for the greater good of the collective whole.

From Economy: Definition: Utilitarianism is a moral philosophy, generally operating on the principle that the utility (happiness or satisfaction) of different people can not only be measured but also meaningfully summed over people and that utility comparisons between people are meaningful. That makes it possible to achieve a well-defined societal optimum in allocations, production, and other decisions, and achieve the goal utilitarian British philosopher Jeremy Bentham described as "the greatest good for the greatest number."

 

This form of utilitarianism is thought of as extreme, now, partly because it is widely believed that there exists no generally acceptable way of summing utilities across people and comparing between them.

Two. “quality of life” argument: human life is only valuable if a certain “quality” can be achieved; otherwise life is better off destroyed.

Three. “normal children”: They can achieve a “quality of life” and should take priority over “abnormal children” who should be euthanized.

Four. “infants are replaceable”: we should replace abnormal infants with normal ones for the “greater good.” The moral imperative is that we are reducing suffering and adding more productive citizens to society as opposed to citizens who put a burden on society.

Five. Eugenicist, one who defends the idea that we should select what humans are desirable based on genetics and which ones should be replaced, that is euthanized, for the betterment of society. The eugenicist also develops the criteria for making these choices.

Six. Nebulous definition of “personhood.” The ability to imagine the future. What does that mean?

Seven. Intrinsic value of human life, called the sanctity of life vs. conditional value of human life based on “quality of life.”

Eight. Apologist for eugenics. An apologist takes controversial or unpopular ideas and makes them appealing by defending their validity and showing why those views are correct.

Nine. Peter Singer is an advocate for genetic re-engineering.

Ten. Market-driven and peer-pressure-driven forces for genetic re-engineering. The result will be a loss of diversity. Most women will like Salma Hayek and Beyonce while most men will look like Will Smith and Brad Pitt. See the New Eugenics. 

 

Part Two. Peter Singer’s Major Arguments

 

One. Peter Singer’s quality of life argument for infanticide:

His stated reason, rather, is that such children have diminished prospects of eventually enjoying an adequate "quality of life", in his words, and to allow them to live would take away resources from what Singer calls "normal" children. He therefore advocates killing "disabled" infants, if the parents so choose, and replacing them with "normal" ones. The terminology of "replacement" is Singer's own; his philosophy "treats infants as replaceable", in his words (Practical Ethics p. 186).

 

Why, then, does Singer argue that infants born with this condition can justly be killed? Because they are "abnormal" and do not have "good prospects" (Rethinking p. 214). This notion of "prospects" runs like a mantra through Singer's discussion of Down syndrome children: "the future prospects of life may be so bleak" (211), "the prospects are clouded" (213), and so forth. But what sort of prospects does he have in mind? On p. 213 ofRethinking he lists several activities which a person with Down syndrome will supposedly never be capable of: "to play the guitar, to develop an appreciation of science fiction, to learn a foreign language, to chat with us about the latest Woody Allen movie, or to be a respectable athlete,  basketballer or tennis player." This list reads like a parody of bourgeois myths of achievement, success, and respectability. To Singer, however, these are legitimate reasons for killing a newborn. After all, if you can't do your own financial planning, why should you be allowed to live?

 

Two. Peter Singer’s utilitarian argument for infanticide:

What counts as a "severe disability" for Singer? He intentionally leaves the term vague to allow for a broad range of parental discretion, but he has discussed a number of specific examples, both hypothetical as well as actual cases. The conditions he has explicitly named as sufficient justification for active infanticide include Down syndrome, spina bifida, and hemophilia. Here is Singer's reasoning on the latter condition, taken from his popular textbook Practical Ethics (P. 186): "Suppose a woman planning to have two children has one normal child, then gives birth to a haemophiliac child. The burden of caring for that child may make it impossible for her to cope with a third child; but if the disabled child were to die, she would have another. . . . When the death of a disabled infant will lead to the birth of another infant with better prospects of a happy life, the total amount of happiness will be greater if the disabled infant is killed. The loss of happy life for the first infant is outweighed by the gain of a happier life for the second. Therefore, if killing the haemophiliac infant has no adverse effect on others, it would, according to the total view, be right to kill him."

 

Three. Peter Singer’s definition of a “person” or someone who is worthy of the label “personhood”:

a conscious being,  a creature who has the capacity to imagine the future. This definition can apply to humans, animals, an creatures. A “person” should not be killed, but a human baby suffering severe retardation or some other handicap is not a “person.”

 

Four. Utilitarian Slippery Slope:

If we agree that we should aim for the greatest good for the greatest amount of people and that handicapped people burden the “greatest good,” at what point do we stop at defining who constitutes a “burden”? Smokers, the obese,  criminals, the handicapped, the autistic? Where do we stop?

 

Five. Peter Singer’s “Worse Off” Argument:

Disability makes a person worse off and therefore that person should be killed. And Peter Singer is comfortable judging who’s “worse off” and who’s not, a very subjective condition. See page 97 and page 106 top.

 

Six. Peter Singer’s Eugenicist Position:

The eugenicist position endorses selection according to desirable and undesirable genetic traits, and favors the elimination of the latter. Singer's argument sorts people into two categories, "normal" and "abnormal", and declares the ostensibly abnormal ones fair game at birth. He doesn't even bother to try to provide "objective" grounds on which to classify some human physical or mental conditions as "defective" (a term he used in earlier editions of Practical Ethics) and contrast them with "healthy" ones. Instead he simply welcomes whatever arbitrary social norms happen to prevail, thus turning his argument into a vehicle for prejudice. But of course there is no perfect, flawless version of the human form against which putatively "inferior" specimens could be measured.

 

Seven. Harriet McBryde Johnson’s quality of life argument:

Studies show that the public underestimates the quality of life for most handicapped people based on stereotypes. See 104 top.

 

Part Three: Essay #3 Option:

Defend or refute Peter Singer’s position that there are moral grounds for infanticide or “mercy killings.” Here is how the assignment looks on our syllabus:

Option 1: Write a 5-page critique of Peter Singer’s philosophy as rendered in “Unspeakable Conversation” (92). In your first page, explain Peter Singer’s philosophy and the methods he uses to defend it. Then in your next page, begin a thesis paragraph that defends or refutes Singer. You must use a Works Cited page that has no fewer than 4 sources.

 

Refutation of Peter Singer: Thesis One:

While Singer’s argument for infanticide is consistent with his utilitarian worldview, his position collapses under the close eye of scrutiny in which detect huge holes or flaws in his reasoning. These flaws include __________________________, ___________________________, ____________________________, and __________________________.

Refutation of Peter Singer: Thesis Two:

If we accept Peter Singer's utilitarian argument as a just rationale for infanticide, then we are paving the way for genetic re-engineering as a tool to create a Super Baby that all parents will be forced to breed. This forced breeding of the Super Baby will result from ______________________, __________________________, ______________________, and ____________________________________. 

 

Defense of Peter Singer: Thesis Three:

McMahon has treated Peter Singer’s infanticide argument with gross unfairness. While McMahon is correct that Singer needs to tidy up some of his vague definitions, Singer’s general argument can be ethically defended as actually helping the human race when we consider _________________________, _______________________, ___________________________, and _______________________________. 

Part Four. Some Salient Titles

Must I Conform to Peter Singer's Definition of Happiness So I Can Live?

Be Happy Singer's Way . . . Or Die

Let Go of the Stale Past and Become New and Improved, Peter Singer Style

We Limit Ourselves By Dismissing Peter Singer So Quickly

McMahon Commentary on “Unspeakable Conversations” (92)

Peter Singer’s theories of “selective infanticide” insulate him from the reality of flesh and blood:

His theories are abstractions and as he percolates his ideas behind the university walls, he loses touch with reality. Specifically, Singer does not see the human face of “disability” and this human face is Harriet McBryde Johnson. According to Singer’s theory of eugenics, HBJ’s parents had the right to kill her since someone with her disabilities could not lead a “quality of life” and as such she doesn’t deserve the title of “person.” Nor does she possess, to use Singer’s term, “personhood.”

 

To the contrary, HMJ has a lot of richness in her life that defies the stereotypes too many people have about people with disabilities. Part of HMJ’s gifted life is her intellect, which allows her to see the “bone-chilling” theories of Peter Singer for what they are: monstrous. For example, Singer believes in “selective infanticide” under the guise of “preference utilitarianism” (96), which states that disabled babies are disposable and that is preferable to replace them with healthy babies who have a better change for a flourishing existence.

One of the horrifying qualities of Peter Singer is that during his debate with HMJ he remains affable, lucid, and logical. We can infer that Singer has succumbed to his abstractions so fully that he has lost his humanity and his sanity. He is clearly an congenial monster, polite on the outside, roiling with his murder doctrine on the inside.

One of the striking inadequacies of Singer’s theory, we read on page 97, is his belief that someone like HMJ is “worse off” (106) as he projects condescending pity for the disabled based on his ignorance and stereotypical beliefs (104). 

Research Links for "Unspeakable Conversations" (92)

">

Since your research paper for this reading focuses on the ethics, or lack thereof, of Peter Singer's eugenics argument, the following links are directed to eugenics and the worthiness of Singer's defense of eugenics. 

More Research Links

Institute for Social Ecology

Club 166

Happy Nevertheless

Peter Singer's Bold Defense of Infanticide

Dutch ethicists defend infanticide

Missionaries accuse Brazil of allowing infanticide

Infanticide in Brazil Highlights Culture War

Journal Entry:

Write a thesis that agrees or disagrees with Singer's belief that we should use infanticide when the quality of life and personhood is not viable, according to Singer's definition. Support your thesis with 4 reasons. 

1A Lesson Plan for Add Cake, Subtract Self-Esteem 217

One. Principle of the Successful Thesis: A strong thesis is the answer to a compelling question.

 

Two. Why is starvation an addiction for Caroline Knapp and perhaps for others?

 

One. She retreats from life and withdraws into a sense of calm. She feels safe, but she is not living. When we retreat from life to defend our self, we choose death over life. I’m thinking of the woman whose husband left her and she became bitter and “undateable.” See page 217.

 

Two. Rigid routine makes her feel safe from wanton, self-destructive behavior. Of course, she’s blind from the fact that the rigid routine is a form of self-destruction.

 

Three. Starvation becomes a “silent protest” against ridiculous feminine ideals that are forced upon women. Starving both aspired to the ideal and “mocks” it. See page 218. Also see page 223 in which the Kate Moss look replaces the Marilyn Monroe look.

 

Four. Starvation alleviates the discomfort of “inhabiting the female body.”

 

Five. Starvation is an attempt to invert the food obsession as a positive symbol of nurturing and care-taking; in its place, starvation is about self-rejection and “self-inflicted cruelty.” See page 218.

 

Six. Starvation becomes a way of avoiding self-recriminations: “I’m such a hog” for having eaten that chocolate cake. See page 219.

 

Seven. Starvation has become a Faustian Bargain, a deal with the Devil, in which women trade eating satisfaction so that they can enjoy self-esteem. See page 220.

Eight. Mastering and controlling one’s appetites becomes a way of feeling empowered. This empowerment becomes a form of compensation for feelings of loneliness, self-doubt, and consuming dread and desperation. See page 221 bottom.

 

Nine. Starvation becomes a way of surrendering to the “backlash” against the rise of feminine power. See 223 and 224.

Ten. Starvation is a reaction to an unnatural hatred of fat. See page 224 and 225.

 

Eleven. Starvation is an attempt to withdraw from the overwhelming choices that are part of a woman’s new freedom: See page 227.

Twelve. Starvation is a reaction to a woman’s new freedom on the one hand and her lack of political power on the other. See page 228.

Thirteen. Starvation is a reaction to a world that “mobilizes in the service of male appetite.” See page 228.

 

Three. Lexicon

1. Addiction to starvation 217 first paragraph

2. Obsessive compulsive rituals second paragraph

3. Anorexia 217 bottom and 218 top

4. Silent protest 218 top

5. Core cause of anorexia 218 middle and 221 second paragraph and 223 top paragraph and 225 middle paragraph

6. Internalized caveats and rules 218 and 219 top 2 paragraphs and 221 middle paragraph

7. Female math 220 top

8. Dangerous form of hunger 222 top

9. Cardinal violation of appetite 222 bottom

10. New female aesthetic 223 second and third paragraph; Marilyn Monroe trumped by Kate Moss

11. Backlash against feminine strength 223 bottom and 224 top

12. Visceral knee-jerk hostility to fat women and people in general 224 bottom and 225 top

13. Buffet hostility 225 bottom and 226 top

14. Buffet as metaphor or microcosm for Knapp's neurosis 230

  

Four. Study Questions

 

One. What is the "lure of starving"? 217

 

Two. What contradiction does Knapp identify on page 217? 

 

Three. What made Knapp feel safe? 217

 

Four. What does Knapp mean when she writes that anorexia both "capitulates to the ideal and also mocks it" in the context of idealized feminine beauty? 218

 

Five. What overwhelming anxiety do anorexics suffer from? 218, 221, 223

 

Six. Why does Knapp make the distinction between "female hunger" and "male hunger"? (Good essay topic, 218)

 

Seven. Describe the "dance of vigilance and self-restraint" on page 219.

 

Eight. Explain the essay's title. 220

 

Nine. What gives Knapp a "perverse sense of pleasure"? 220 bottom.

 

Ten. How does dieting make us go crazy? 222 top and bottom.

 

Eleven. What happens when hunger is "divorced from the body"? 223 top.

 

Twelve. What does caloric intake have to do with a woman's "self-worth and power and identity"? 223, 227, 228

 

Thirteen. What is represented in the shift of feminine ideal from Marilyn Monroe to Kate Moss? 223, 224

 

Fourteen. Do you agree with Knapp that the obsession with hating fat is a "gender issue" or does the body image obsession afflict both men and women equally? To answer, consider the term "bigorexia."

 

Part Five. Reviewing Major Points 

 

1. anorexia is a "silent protest" against the draconian ideal of female beauty

2. the love of rules as a way of soothing anxiety and overwhelming fear of one's appetites (223 top)

3. an obsession with "math" that makes one calculate calories in and calories out (220 top)

4. the loss of balance between gluttony and restraint (222 and 226 top)

5. a sense of "confused hunger" (222 bottom)

6. fear of food becomes a metaphor for the fear of freedom (223 and 227 and 228-230)

7. the Kate Moss look became an unconscious way for men to control women when they were enjoying their new freedom (223 bottom and 224 top)

8. peer pressure among women, veering on meanness, to be thin (224 and 225 top)

9. self-disgust (227)

 

 

Part Six. McMahon’s Commentary on “Add Cake, Subtract Self-Esteem” by Caroline Knapp

 

Whether they are bingeing or purging, irrational eaters are in a most damnable condition--the state of having no self-control and being helpless and fearful in the face of overwhelming appetites. These inflamed irrational passions are so devastating that binge eaters must tiptoe through life fearing that at any moment they will fall into the abyss of their avarice.

 

Most irrational eaters, especially the women described by Knapp, suffer shame for several reasons, including a sense of anxiety over the disparity of their new freedoms but limited power; their internalized "theme of vigilance and self-restraint" that often backfires and is counterbalanced by compulsive appetites that eradicate all the "gains" rendered from the meticulous adherence to eating rules; the state of hunger that "becomes divorced from the body" and becomes "loaded with alternative meanings" that have to do with unfulfilled emotional longings; and their knowledge that violating the slender female aesthetic will cause them to be held in tacit contempt by both men and women alike.  

 

 

This sense of shame and self-loathing becomes exacerbated when obesity is looked at through a religious prism which would have us condemn over-eaters as gluttons, sinners indulging their appetites, reprobates putting their desires before God, miscreants violating our space with their grotesque corpulence. 

 

Scapegoated by society for putting an undue strain on medical costs, despised for taking up our space, an unloved for not inciting the kind of desire that we associate with Kate-Moss slenderness, fat people represent the possibility of human failure and rejection that we fear in ourselves. Thus many of us, overreacting to our fears, develop a myriad of eating disorders so chronic that once ensnared in these irrational eating habits, it is nearly impossible for many of us to free ourselves from them and lead relatively normal lives. 

Seven: Back to Your Essay

As the essays in the "How We Eat" Chapter attest, I am, like most Americans, susceptible to a cycle of pathological eating evidenced by ___________________, ___________________, _____________________, ________________________, and ___________________________. 

 

Consider

One. The bad habit of consuming processed food products instead of real food.

Two. Yo-yo dieting

Three. Food industry uses aggressive marketing to children, which creates habits the are life-lasting.

Four. Eating healthy, organic foods is expensive. People get discouraged and just say “the hell with it,” languishing in apathy.

Five. People don’t have the time or will to learn how to cook delicious meals for themselves so they rely on getting punk-fed by fast-food diners, processed food products and a myriad of “punk foods.”

Part Eight. Journal Entry for Your Introduction:

Write about a person with bad eating habits.