Breakthrough Writer

1A Lesson for September 28, 2015: "How Companies Learn Your Secrets"

Option 1

Writing Assignment modified from #5 Writing in our text Acting Out Culture:

"Instead of religious sins plaguing our conscience," Asma declares," we now have the transgressions of leaving the water running, leaving the lights on, failing to recycle, and using plastic grocery bags instead of paper" (27). Write a longer essay (1,000 words) in which you identify and evaluate the comparison Asma is making here. According to Asma, what are the key differences between the "religious sins"of the past and the "transgressions" that characterize everyday life today? And what larger point is he trying to make here about the way our understanding of "sin" has changed? Then take a closer look at each of the "transgressions" he lists here. To what extent, in your view, is it valid to feel "guilty" about each? Is it helpful, necessary, and/or right for these oversights to "plague our conscience"? Why or why not?

Option 2

Essay Topic for a Cause and Effect Analysis Thesis:

Develop a thesis that answers the following question: What are the causes behind the pathological relationship between celebrities and their admirers? 

Sample Thesis

As "Faces in the Mirror" shows us, celebrity worship is a sick symbiotic relationship between celebrity and fanboy characterized by ____________, ____________, ___________, and _____________. 

Thesis that disagrees with the above:

While there may be some fanboys who take their celebrity worship too far, celebrity culture is good for us since celebrities give us necessary distractions from our boring lives, they gives us beauty and fashion for which we can aspire, they give us glamour which points to a higher reality than the plain reality society tells us we have to live in, and they give us a shared interest which allows us "normal folk" to bond with one another. 

Option 3:

Compare the themes in "The Faces in the Mirror" with the themes of celebrity in Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu's masterpiece film Birdman (2014). 

Option 4:

Support, refute, or complicate the argument that Ty Burr's "Faces in the Mirror" and Michael Sandel's "Markets and Morals" complement the theme of human degradation and "moral vacancy" in an age of excessive marketing and pathological self-promotion. 

Option 5:

Defend, refute, or complicate the assertion that critical patriotism, the kind that Dyson attributes to great African American thinkers, is a superior variety of patriotism to the white jingoism described in the essay. 

Option 6:

Support, refute, or complicate the assertion, based on the context of Brooks' essay "People Like Us", that humans are hard-wired away from diversity and toward sameness.  

Sample:

Brooks is accurate to say that we are hard-wired to live in our Same Tribe because we are a lazy people evidenced by _____________, _____________, ______________, and ____________________.

We should not denigrate ourselves for hanging out with people who are "just like us." We do so for survival reasons, which include _______________, _____________, ____________, and ______________. 

Option 7

Develop a thesis that addresses the tribalism discussed in David Brooks' essay "People Like Us" and the "scientific racism" discussed in Debra J. Dickerson's "The Great White Way." 

Option 8

Address “The Great White Way” by developing a thesis that analyzes how race is more of a social fantasy than it is an objective reality.

Sample Thesis

"The Great White Way" makes the persuasive case that race is a canard and a social construction that has nothing to do with scientific reality and everything to do with privilege evidenced by __________, ____________, ______________, and ________________. 

Sample Thesis

"The Great White Way" and the Rachel Dolezal controversy both reinforce the idea that race is an arbitrary social construction, an insane fantasy, and an anti-humanitarian fiction designed to give a false order of things, to provide a rationale for exploitation,  and to reinforce our base tendencies for tribalism. 

Related Readings

"There Is No Such Thing As Race"

"Race Is a Social Concept, Not a Scientific One"

"Race Finished"

"Does Race Exist?"

Option 9

“The Flip Side of Internet Fame” has many things in common with Ty Burr’s “The Faces in the Mirror.” Identify some of those commonalities.

Essay Prompt

Compare our obsession with celebrity and our obsession with viral videos. What common pathologies can you identify that fuel these obsessions? 

Both essays address the disparity between a real person and the public persona.

Both essays address our preference for public persona over reality.

Both essays suggest that there is something morally bankrupt and perhaps even insane about a culture that obsesses over false images at the expense of preserving the humanity of real people.

Both essays suggest that a certain kind of loneliness, disconnection, and lack of empathy inform the sick obsession with public or fake personas over reality.

Both essays tap into the toxic energy from the "mobocracy." A mobocracy is a mob that is so desperate for connection and unity that they will resort to irrational hatred of a scapegoat to achieve their goal. 

Both essays show that the mobocracy is a pathological juggernaut evidenced by ____________, ____________, _____________, and _______________. 

Option 10

Essay Prompt

In the context of "The Faces in the Mirror" and "The Flip Side of Internet Fame," what is the connection between how we view ourselves and how others view us? How does the Internet alter this dynamic?

Social media encourages what David Brooks calls "The Big Me," a state of self-aggrandizement that results in solipsism, narcissism, bipolar moodiness, and depression. 

Option 11

Essay Prompt

Defend, refute, or complicate the notion that online shaming is so catastrophic and prevalent that we need to add free speech restrictions that would discourage online shaming. What would those restrictions be? How would we enforce those restrictions? Would those restrictions be justified? Explain.

While I agree with those who point out the catastrophes that ensue from online shaming, it would be impractical to draw free speech boundaries on the Internet because _____________, _____________, _______________, and _________________. 

Option 12

Essay Prompt

Write a causal analysis of public shaming in the context of "The Flip Side of Internet Fame."

Option 13

Essay Option: 

Defend or refute Peter Singer’s position that there are moral grounds for infanticide or “mercy killings.” Here is how the assignment looks for a 4-page essay: 

Write a 4-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 3 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 we 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 _______________________________.  

Option 14

Essay Option

Is Virginia Heffernan's attention-span myth a confirmation or challenge of Duhigg's thesis about the power of habit? 

Sample Thesis

Heffernan's essay poses a weak challenge to Duhigg's because Heffernan fails to _____________, ____________, _______________, and __________________. 

Option 15

Addressing "Should We Ditch the Idea of Privacy," develop an argumentative thesis about how we should change our attitudes toward privacy, or not, in a world of increasing digital connectivity.  

Option 16

Comparing "The Flip Side of the Internet" and "#Me," develop a thesis that supports or refutes the authors' skepticism about the alleged benefits of social media. Develop counterarguments that you can address in the final part of your essay. 

 

 

Subordination and Coordination (Complex and Compound Sentences)

Complex Sentence

A complex sentence has two clauses. One clause is dependent or subordinate; the other clause is independent, that is to say, the independent clause is the complete sentence.

Examples:

While I was tanning in Hermosa Beach, I noticed the clouds were playing hide and seek.

Because I have a tendency to eat entire pizzas, inhaling them within seconds, I must avoid that fattening food.

Whenever I’m driving my car and I see people texting while driving, I stop my car on the side of the road.

I have to workout every day because I am addicted to exercise-induced dopamine.

I feel overcome with a combination of romantic melancholy and giddy excitement whenever there is a thunderstorm.

We use subordination to show cause and effect. To create subordinate clauses, we must use a subordinate conjunction:

The essential ingredient in a complex sentence is the subordinate conjunction:

after although as because before even if even though if in order that

once provided that rather than since so that than that though unless

until when whenever where whereas wherever whether while why

 

I workout too much.  I have tenderness in my elbow.

Because I workout too much, I suffer tenderness in my elbow.

My elbow hurts. I’m working out.

Even though my elbow hurts, I’m working out.

We use coordination to show equal rank of ideas. To combine sentences with coordination we use FANBOYS (for, and, nor, but, or, yet, so)

The calculus class has been cancelled. We will have to do something else.

The calculus class has been cancelled, so we will have to do something else.

I want more pecan pie. They only have apple pie.

I want more pecan pie, but they only have apple pie.

Using FANBOYS creates compound sentences

Angelo loves to buy a new radio every week, but his wife doesn’t like it.

You have high cholesterol, so you have to take statins.

I am tempted to eat all the rocky road ice cream, yet I will force myself to nibble on carrots and celery.

I want to go to the Middle Eastern restaurant today, and I want to see a movie afterwards.

I really like the comfort of elastic-waist pants, but wearing them makes me feel like an old man.

Both subordination and coordination combine sentences into smoother, clearer sentences.

The following four sentences are made smoother and clearer with the help of subordination:

McMahon felt gluttonous. He inhaled five pizzas. He felt his waist press against his denim waistband in a cruel, unforgiving fashion. He felt an acute ache in his stomach.

Because McMahon felt gluttonous, he inhaled five pizzas upon which he felt his waist press against his denim waistband resulting in an acute stomachache.

Another Example

Joe ate too much heavily salted popcorn. The saltiness made him thirsty. He consumed several gallons of water before bedtime. He was up going to the bathroom all night. He got a bad night’s sleep. He performed terribly during his job interview. 

Due to his foolish consumption of salted popcorn, Joe was so thirsty he drank several gallons of water before bedtime, which caused him to go to the bathroom all night, interfering with his night’s sleep and causing him to do terribly on his job interview.

Another Example

Bob dropped his peanut butter sandwich in the tiger’s enclosure. He leaned over the fence to reach for his sandwich. He fell over the fence. A tiger approached Bob. The zookeeper ran between the stupid zoo customer and the wild beast. The zookeeper tore his rotator cuff.

After Bob dropped his peanut butter sandwich in the tiger’s enclosure, he leaned over the fence to recover his sandwich and fell into the enclosure during which time he was approached by a hungry tiger, forcing the nearby zookeeper to run between Bob and wild beast. During the struggle, the zookeeper tore his rotator cuff.

 

Don’t Do Subordination Overkill

After Bob dropped his peanut butter sandwich in the tiger’s enclosure, he leaned over the fence to recover his sandwich and fell into the enclosure during which time he was approached by a hungry tiger forcing the nearby zookeeper to run between Bob and the wild beast in such a manner that the zookeeper tore his rotator cuff, which resulted in a prolonged disability leave and the loss of his job, a crisis that compelled the zookeeper to file a lawsuit against Bob for financial damages.

“How Companies Learn Your Secrets” by Charles Duhigg 

One. Why is Target keenly interested in knowing which of their customers are pregnant? 

Baby time is when consumers are in a state of flux; they’re open to making significant consumer habit changes. We read that, “old routines fall apart and buying habits are suddenly in flux.” As a result, “shopping patterns and brand loyalties are up for grabs.” When you're vulnerable, you're an open target. Retailers want you now more than ever. 

Target accesses public records to find out who’s had babies, and then Target inundates these customers with ads and coupons. 

To some, Target’s customer research seems invasive, like the work of private detectives or government surveillance. 

In fact, we read that Target, like other retailers, collects vast amounts of data on its customers who have no clue that their personal information is being disclosed, mined, analyzed, and sold to the highest bidders who aren't afraid to dig into their pockets for "customer acquisition." 

Most Target customers don’t know that Target “assigns each shopper a unique code—known internally as the Guest ID number—that keeps tabs on everything they buy.”

Linked to this Guest ID “is your age, whether you are married and have kids, which part of town you live in, how long it takes you to drive to the store, your estimated salary, whether you’ve moved recently, what credit cards you carry in your wallet and what Web sites you visit.” 

Additionally, we read that, “Target can buy data about your ethnicity, job history, the magazines you read, if you’ve ever declared bankruptcy or got divorced, the year you bought (or lost) your house, where you went to college, what kinds of topics you talk about online, whether you prefer certain brands of coffee, paper towels, cereal, or applesauce, your political leanings, reading habits, charitable giving, and the number of cars you own.” 

All of this data is further analyzed by a team of statisticians such as Andrew Pole who is discussed in the essay. 

This particular job is called predictive analytics, which is “devoted to understanding not just consumers’ shopping habits but also their personal habits, so as to more efficiently market to them.” 

I did an Internet search and found that predictive analytics has an average salary of 112K. You have to get a Masters of Science in Predictive Analytics. If you want to make even more money, closer to 175K, you study risk assessment, which is related to actuarial mathematics. 

All of this is part of “the golden age of market research,” and we read that Target is at the forefront. 

Data collecting has become a growing field over the last 20 years. Former chief scientist at Amazon, Andreas Weigend, says, “It’s like an arms race to hire statisticians nowadays.” 

Retailers cannot get enough of your personal information, and with you moving all over the Internet, you have never been so transparent. 

Two. Why are retailers so hell-bent on collecting our data? 

“One study from Duke University estimated that habits, rather than conscious decision-making, shape 45 percent of the choices we make every day.” This suggests that we are more driven by emotion than reason almost half the time. 

MIT researchers doing lab experiments with rats discovered that brain activity decreases with habit and increases when we are behaving outside of habit, which is using our critical thinking skills. 

We are hard-wired to act on habits because habits reduce thinking and reduced thinking conserves energy. We are not lazy; we are simply hard-wired to conserve energy for survival reasons. Therefore, we are inclined toward habitual behavior. 

The term for when the brain converts a sequence of actions into an automatic routing is called “chunking.” 

We are inclined to “chunking,” because limited brain strain conserves energy and we are hard-wired for energy conservation. 

Or perhaps that’s a fancy way of saying we’re lazy? 

Clearly, the more we behave out of habit, the more vulnerable we are to marketing and the more predictable we are in our behavior. Retailers can better control consumers who behave out of habit. 

Three. What is the 3-Part Process of Chunking? 

“First, there is a cue, a trigger that tells your brain to go into automatic mode and which habit to use. Then there is the routine, which can be physical or mental or emotional. Finally there is a reward, which helps your brain figure out if this particular loop is worth remembering for the future.” Over time, this loop becomes more and more automatic. 

In other words, MIT “discovered” what we’ve known all along: We’re creatures of habit. 

We read, “Habits aren’t destiny—they can be ignored, changed, or replaced. But it’s also true that once the loop is established and a habit emerges, your brain stops fully participating in decision-making. So unless you deliberately fight a habit—unless you find new cues and rewards—the old pattern will unfold automatically.” 

Four. How do exercise and Febreze habits emerge? 

A study of 256 health-insurance members took classes “stressing the importance of exercise. Half the participants received an extra session on the theories of habit formation (the structure of the habit loop) and were asked to identify cues and rewards that might help them develop exercise routines.” Those who identified cues and rewards “spent twice as much time exercising as their peers.” 

A simple cue for morning jobs is to put on your running shoes before breakfast or leave your running shoes next to your bed. Clear rewards consisted of midday treats or the pride resulting from logbook recordings. I find the midday treat questionable since the calories of that treat might be equal or more than the calories burned from the jog. 

On a related issue the author Duhigg gained 8 pounds from snacking on chocolate chip cookies at work. He realized the cue was to socialize, so he started buying apples to snack on for his “social break” and he was able to break the loop. 

With Febreze, sales didn’t go up until marketers made it part of the brain loop with trigger, routine, and reward. And to do this, they had to add a stronger perfume smell to their product. 

Five. Why is it difficult to change consumers’ buying habits? 

In addition to the strengths of old habits, it turns out that people’s “most mundane purchases, such as toiletries and cleaning products, are done with no decision making whatsoever. This means a new product promising greater performance may not change a consumer. 

The real trick is in timing. Catch a consumer during major upheaval: graduating, getting a new house, having a baby, going through a divorce, and that consumer is vulnerable to consumer change. 

Target workers like Pole find out who’s pregnant and send that woman, or high school student as we see in one case, a barrage of coupons for baby clothes and cribs. In fact, one father discovered his high school daughter was pregnant because of Target coupons sent to his home. 

Target won’t talk about Pole or other employees who do his kind of work. But we do know that since Pole was hired,  Target’s revenues have grown from 44 billion to 67 billion (2002-2010). 

 

 

“The Attention-Span Myth” by Virginia Heffernan” 

One. What is Heffernan questioning about our collective attention span? 

She questions that there is a universal attention span. She claims some people have long attention spans and that others have short ones. We’re unfairly demonizing the Internet for shortening our attention spans. 

She writes that Nicholas Carr, author of The Shallows and “Is Google Making Us Stupid” that he is exaggerating his claim about the Internet’s effect on our brains, which practically causes “brain damage.” 

Two points: Is she twisting Carr’s argument by using the term “brain damage” and is she addressing the scientific brain studies Carr cites for brail altering due to Internet us? 

Another criticism: Heffernan uses a child who prefers drums to reading the novel The Sun Also Rises. But is that example a specific refutation of the biological and scientific evidence that shows the brain has changed due to Internet use? 

Heffernan is then arguing that we place too much admiration and emphasis on a long attention span. Why is it “humankind’s best moral and aesthetic asset”? 

No one said it was, but what some are saying is that a compromised attention span is not good for learning and intelligence. Twice in two pages Heffernan has used the Straw Man logical fallacy, creating a false argument to counter-argue.  

Essay Option

Is Virginia Heffernan's attention-span myth a confirmation or challenge of Duhigg's thesis about the power of habit? 

Sample Thesis

Heffernan's essay poses a weak challenge to Duhigg's because Heffernan fails to _____________, ____________, _______________, and __________________. 

McMahon Grammar Exercise: Parallelism

 

  

Correct the faulty parallelism by rewriting the sentences below. 

One. Parenting toddlers is difficult for many reasons, not the least of which is that toddlers contradict everything you ask them to do; they have giant mood swings, and all-night tantrums. 

Two. You should avoid all-you-can-eat buffets: They encourage gluttony; they feature fatty, over-salted foods and high sugar content. 

Three. I prefer kettlebell training at home than the gym because of the increased privacy, the absence of loud “gym” music, and I’m able to concentrate more.  

Four. To write a successful research paper you must adhere to the exact MLA format, employ a variety of paragraph transitions, and writing an intellectually rigorous thesis. 

Five. The difficulty of adhering to the MLA format is that the rules are frequently being updated, the sheer abundance of rules you have to follow, and to integrate your research into your essay. 

Six. You should avoid watching “reality shows” on TV because they encourage a depraved form of voyeurism; they distract you from your own problems, and their brain-dumbing effects. 

Seven. I’m still fat even though I’ve tried the low-carb diet, the Paleo diet, the Rock-in-the-Mouth diet, and fasting every other day. 

Eight. To write a successful thesis, you must have a compelling topic, a sophisticated take on that topic, and developing a thesis that elevates the reader’s consciousness to a higher level. 

Nine. Getting enough sleep, exercising daily, and the importance of a positive attitude are essential for academic success.

Ten.  My children never react to my calm commands or when I beg them to do things. 

  

 

 

Grammar: Dangling Modifiers 

Rewrite the following sentences to correct the dangling modifiers:

1. Larded with greasy fries, the waiter served me a burnt steak.   

2. Mr. McMahon returned her essay with a wide grin.  

3. To finish by the 4 P.M. deadline, the computer keyboard blazed with the student's fast typing fingers. 

4. Chocolate frosted with caramel sauce, John devoured the cupcakes. 

5. Tapping the desk with his fingers, the school clock's hands moved too slowly before recess.  

6. Showering the onion rings with garlic salt, his sodium count spiked.  

7. The girl walked her poodle in high heels.  

8. Struggling with the tight jeans, the fabric ripped and made an embarrassing sound.  

9. Turning off the bedroom lights, the long, hard day finally came to an end.  

10. Piled high above the wash machine, I decided I had better do a load of laundry.  

11. Standing on the hotel balcony, the ocean view was stunning. 

12. Running across the floor, the rug slipped and I collapsed.  

13. Writing anxiously, the essay looked littered with errors.  

14. Mortified by my loss to my opponents, my baseball uniform sagged. 

15. Hungry after a day of football, the stack of peanut butter sandwiches on the table quickly disappeared. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1A Lesson for September 23, 2015

  

 

"How One Tweet Blew Up Justine Sacco's Life" in NYTimes

“The Flip Side of Internet Fame” by Jessica Bennet

One. What is scary about a video, Facebook message, or tweet about you going viral?

For one, the information may be inaccurate.

For two, the information may be taken out of context.

For three, the infraction may be minor, so that the punishment is disproportionate to the infraction.

For four, a person may have manipulated or tricked you into “going public.”

For five, ubiquitous smart phones leave you vulnerable to be videotaped when you are unaware.

For six, you may have an enemy who enjoys cowardly hiding behind the anonymity of the web to lie about you, and if your enemy is clever enough his lie can gain traction and smear your reputation.

For seven, if you are a shaming victim, you will find you have little or no legal recourse. You would have to subpoena an anonymous IP address for starters. And cunning enemies can slip out of one IP address to another.

For eight, there is a new environment for shaming; it's called social media, and the social media community acts like a mob and too often goes into a feeding frenzy when it smells blood in the water. 

For nine, it's easy to be a self-righteous lazy activist on Twitter since tweeting does not take an investment of time or energy. 

For ten, tweeting can be impulsive with no filters and even if the accuser has regrets later, it's too late. 

But even with all of the above conditions met, a viral video becomes a frenzied false kind of “truth” that defies reality.

This frenzied false kind of “truth” destroys your reputation, incites others to harass you, blacklists you from job opportunities, stigmatizes you in areas of romance, and generally paints you as a demon homunculus who may be forever incapable of redemption.

In the digital age, people are so eager to find connection through viral videos and tweets that they discard the moral component, empathy, to the target of the frenzy.

The speed of which this demonization can occur has no historical precedent. In less than a day, a life can be ruined.

 

Two. “The Flip Side of Internet Fame” has many things in common with Ty Burr’s “The Faces in the Mirror.” Identify some of those commonalities.

Both essays address the disparity between a real person and the public persona.

Both essays address our preference for public persona over reality.

Both essays suggest that there is something morally bankrupt and perhaps even insane about a culture that obsesses over false images at the expense of preserving the humanity of real people.

Both essays suggest that a certain kind of loneliness, disconnection, and lack of empathy inform the sick obsession with public or fake personas over reality.

Both essays tap into the toxic energy from the "mobocracy." A mobocracy is a mob that is so desperate for connection and unity that they will resort to irrational hatred of a scapegoat to achieve their goal. 

Essay Prompt

Compare our obsession with celebrity and our obsession with viral videos. What common pathologies can you identify that fuel these obsessions?

Both essays show that the mobocracy is a pathological juggernaut evidenced by ____________, ____________, _____________, and _______________. 

Essay Prompt

What is the connection between how we view ourselves and how others view us? How does the Internet alter this dynamic?

Social media encourages what David Brooks calls "The Big Me," a state of self-aggrandizement that results in solipsism, narcissism, bipolar moodiness, and depression. 

Essay Prompt

Defend, refute, or complicate the notion that online shaming is so catastrophic and prevalent that we need to add free speech restrictions that would discourage online shaming. What would those restrictions be? How would we enforce those restrictions? Would those restrictions be justified? Explain.

While I agree with those who point out the catastrophes that ensue from online shaming, it would be impractical to draw free speech boundaries on the Internet because _____________, _____________, _______________, and _________________. 

Essay Prompt

Write a causal analysis of public shaming in the context of "The Flip Side of Internet Fame."

Whenever an instructor gives you a causal analysis assignment, she is asking you to analyze the causes for something. For example, a causal analysis of California's water shortage would focus on global warming, carbon emission, and lackluster water-saving measures. 

When an instructor gives you causal analysis essay, either typed or in-class, you want to develop a clear strategy to explore the topic.

According to The St. Martin's Handbook, you need to match a series of questions for the type of essay you've been asked to write. 

We read, "Originally developed by Aristotle, the following questions can help you explore a topic by carefully and systematically describing it:"

What is it? Public shaming

What caused it? Social media

What is it like or unlike? Public shaming moves so quickly that we have no cultural precedent. 

What larger system is the topic a part of? Public shaming is part of a larger social pathology: bullying, cowardice (hiding behind the anonymity of the Internet), and the hunger for power ("look what I can do!").

What do people say about it? Many feel safe, but others, with good reason, feel vulnerable. Public shaming could happen to anyone. 

When your instructor asks you to write an argumentative essay, you ask a series of different questions:

What claim are you making about your topic?

What good reasons support your claim?

What valid underlying assumptions support the reasons for your claim? In argument, the assumption is the logic you use to connect your support to your claim. 

What backup evidence can you find for your claim?

What refutations of your claim should you anticipate?

In what ways should you qualify your claim? When you qualify a claim, you set conditions. 

 

“Unspeakable Conversations” by Harriet McBryde Johnson 

One. How does Johnson effectively get our attention in her essay’s introduction? 

“He insists he doesn’t want to kill me.” 

Two. What kind of hubris (excessive pride) and arrogance inform Singer’s philosophy to kill deformed babies? 

He seems to know that the “suffering” disabled babies go through, and the parents’ suffering, justifies killing them. 

Is there a definitive suffering scale, and even if there were, would such a scale justify the killing of certain kinds of babies? 

Additionally, Singer argues that “individuals with cognitive impairments so severe that he doesn’t consider them persons” should not live. 

Again, how do we definitively measure such perceived impairments, and even if such a measurement were available, could we justify this practice of killing people? 

Again, his insanely mathematical formula used to justify infanticide is an oversimplification. As HMJ writes, “the presence or absence of a disability doesn’t predict quality of life.” Her brother Mac who is not disabled has flaws and gifts “that cannot be measured on the same scale.” 

For Singer, a disabled baby is “worse off” than a healthy baby so the disabled baby should be killed. But what does it mean to say someone is “worse off”? What about a healthy baby who as a toddler proves that he is a sociopath who tortures cats and dogs? He gets to live? 

At another point of debate, Singer says healthy children can have fun at the beach but disabled children cannot and therefore they should be put to death. Does this make sense? “You, child, are unable to have fun. Now die.” 

I’m less shocked by the stupidity and evil of the argument (because there will always be madmen spewing made theories) than by the fact that Singer is a venerated philosopher who is a hired professor at Princeton. 

Three. How does HBJ's appearance present challenges, some of which are for her insufferable? 

People assume she needs pity. 

They assume her life is horrible. 

They assume she is in immense pain. 

They assume she needs to be treated like a child or patronized like a slow person. 

They don’t see her. They see stereotypes based on her appearance. 

 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 of Rethinking 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,  basketball player 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 hemophiliac 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, and 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. 

Essay Option: 

Defend or refute Peter Singer’s position that there are moral grounds for infanticide or “mercy killings.” Here is how the assignment looks for a 4-page essay: 

Write a 4-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 3 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 we 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 _______________________________.  

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” 

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).  

 

 

Avoid Dangling Modifiers

 

Rewrite the following sentences to correct the dangling modifiers:

1. Larded with greasy fries, the waiter served me a burnt steak.  

2. Mr. McMahon returned her essay with a wide grin. 

3. To finish by the 4 P.M. deadline, the computer keyboard blazed with the student's fast typing fingers.

4. Chocolate frosted with caramel sauce, John devoured the cupcakes.

5. Tapping the desk with his fingers, the school clock's hands moved too slowly before recess. 

6. Showering the onion rings with garlic salt, his sodium count spiked. 

7. The girl walked her poodle in high heels. 

8. Struggling with the tight jeans, the fabric ripped and made an embarrassing sound. 

9. Turning off the bedroom lights, the long, hard day finally came to an end. 

10. Piled high above the wash machine, I decided I had better do a load of laundry. 

11. Standing on the hotel balcony, the ocean view was stunning.

12. Running across the floor, the rug slipped and I collapsed. 

13. Writing anxiously, the essay looked littered with errors. 

14. Mortified by my loss to my opponents, my baseball uniform sagged.

15. Hungry after a day of football, the stack of peanut butter sandwiches on the table quickly disappeared. 

 

 

 

 

Subordination and Coordination (Complex and Compound Sentences) 

Complex Sentence 

A complex sentence has two clauses. One clause is dependent or subordinate; the other clause is independent, that is to say, the independent clause is the complete sentence. 

Examples: 

While I was tanning in Hermosa Beach, I noticed the clouds were playing hide and seek. 

Because I have a tendency to eat entire pizzas, inhaling them within seconds, I must avoid that fattening food. 

Whenever I’m driving my car and I see people texting while driving, I stop my car on the side of the road. 

I have to workout every day because I am addicted to exercise-induced dopamine. 

I feel overcome with a combination of romantic melancholy and giddy excitement whenever there is a thunderstorm. 

We use subordination to show cause and effect. To create subordinate clauses, we must use a subordinate conjunction: 

The essential ingredient in a complex sentence is the subordinate conjunction:

 

after although as because before even if even though if in order that

once provided that rather than since so that than that though unless

until when whenever where whereas wherever whether while why

 

 

 

I workout too much.  I have tenderness in my elbow.

 

Because I workout too much, I suffer tenderness in my elbow.

 

My elbow hurts. I’m working out.

 

Even though my elbow hurts, I’m working out. 

We use coordination to show equal rank of ideas. To combine sentences with coordination we use FANBOYS (for, and, nor, but, or, yet, so) 

The calculus class has been cancelled. We will have to do something else. 

The calculus class has been cancelled, so we will have to do something else. 

I want more pecan pie. They only have apple pie. 

I want more pecan pie, but they only have apple pie. 

Using FANBOYS creates compound sentences 

Angelo loves to buy a new radio every week, but his wife doesn’t like it. 

You have high cholesterol, so you have to take statins. 

I am tempted to eat all the rocky road ice cream, yet I will force myself to nibble on carrots and celery. 

I want to go to the Middle Eastern restaurant today, and I want to see a movie afterwards. 

I really like the comfort of elastic-waist pants, but wearing them makes me feel like an old man. 

Both subordination and coordination combine sentences into smoother, clearer sentences. 

The following four sentences are made smoother and clearer with the help of subordination: 

McMahon felt gluttonous. He inhaled five pizzas. He felt his waist press against his denim waistband in a cruel, unforgiving fashion. He felt an acute ache in his stomach. 

Because McMahon felt gluttonous, he inhaled five pizzas upon which he felt his waist press against his denim waistband resulting in an acute stomachache. 

Another Example 

Joe ate too much heavily salted popcorn. The saltiness made him thirsty. He consumed several gallons of water before bedtime. He was up going to the bathroom all night. He got a bad night’s sleep. He performed terribly during his job interview.  

Due to his foolish consumption of salted popcorn, Joe was so thirsty he drank several gallons of water before bedtime, which caused him to go to the bathroom all night, interfering with his night’s sleep and causing him to do terribly on his job interview. 

Another Example 

Bob dropped his peanut butter sandwich in the tiger’s enclosure. He leaned over the fence to reach for his sandwich. He fell over the fence. A tiger approached Bob. The zookeeper ran between the stupid zoo customer and the wild beast. The zookeeper tore his rotator cuff. 

After Bob dropped his peanut butter sandwich in the tiger’s enclosure, he leaned over the fence to recover his sandwich and fell into the enclosure during which time he was approached by a hungry tiger, forcing the nearby zookeeper to run between Bob and wild beast. During the struggle, the zookeeper tore his rotator cuff. 

Don’t Do Subordination Overkill 

After Bob dropped his peanut butter sandwich in the tiger’s enclosure, he leaned over the fence to recover his sandwich and fell into the enclosure during which time he was approached by a hungry tiger forcing the nearby zookeeper to run between Bob and the wild beast in such a manner that the zookeeper tore his rotator cuff, which resulted in a prolonged disability leave and the loss of his job, a crisis that compelled the zookeeper to file a lawsuit against Bob for financial damages.

 

  

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Man's Search for Meaning Lesson 2 Updated Fall 2015: More to Life Than Happiness Essay

More to Life Than Happiness

Top Twenty Writing Errors 

According to Andrea A. Lunsford in The St. Martin’s Handbook, Eight Edition, there are 20 writing errors that merit “The Top 20.” 

One. Wrong word: Confusing one word for another.

Here's a list of wrong word usage.  

A full-bodied red wine compliments the Pasta Pomodoro. 

Compliment is a to say something nice about someone. 

Complement is to complete or match well with something. 

The BMW salesman excepted my counteroffer of 55K for the sports sedan. 

The word should be accepted. 

Kryptonite effects Superman in such a way that he loses his powers. 

Effect is a noun. Affect is a verb, so it should be the following: 

Kryptonite affects Superman in a such a way that he loses his powers. 

There superpowers were compromised by the Gamma rays. 

We need to use the possessive plural pronoun their. 

Two. Missing comma after an introductory phrase or clause

 

Terrified of slimy foods, Robert hid behind the restaurant’s dumpster. 

In spite of my aversion to rollercoasters, I attended the carnival with my family. 

Three. Incomplete documentation 

Noted dietician and nutritionist Mike Manderlin observes that, “Dieting is a mental illness.” 

It should read: 

Noted dietician and nutritionist Mike Manderlin observes that, “Dieting is a mental illness” (277). 

Four. Vague Pronoun Reference 

Focusing on the pecs during your Monday-Wednesday-Friday workouts is a way of giving you more time to work on your quads and glutes and specializing on the way they’re used in different exercises.

 

Before Jennifer screamed at Brittany, she came to the conclusion that she was justified in stealing her boyfriend. 

Five. Spelling (including homonyms, words that have same spelling but different meanings) 

No one came forward to bare witness to the crime. 

No one came forward to bear witness to the crime. 

Every where we went, we saw fast food restaurants. 

Everywhere we went, we saw fast food restaurants. 

Love is a disease. It’s sickness derives from its power to intoxicate and create capricious, short-term infatuation. 

Its sickness derives from its power to intoxicate and create capricious, short-term infatuation. 

Six. Mechanical error with a quotation 

In his best-selling book Love Is a Virus from Outer Space, noted psychologist Michael M. Manderlin asserts that, “Falling in love is a form of madness for which there is no cure”. 

In his best selling book Love Is a Virus from Outer Space, noted psychologist Michael M. Manderlin asserts that, “Falling in love is a form of madness for which there is no cure.” 

In his best selling book Love Is a Virus from Outer Space, noted psychologist Michael M. Manderlin asserts that, “Falling in love is a form of madness for which there is no cure” (18). 

“It forever stuns me that people make life decisions based on something as fickle and capricious as love”, Michael Manderlin writes (22). 

“It forever stuns me that people make life decisions based on something as fickle and capricious as love,” Michael Manderlin writes (22). 

Seven. Unnecessary comma 

I need to workout when at home, and while taking vacations. 

You do however use a comma if the comma is between two independent clauses: 

I need to workout at home, and when I go on vacations, I bring my yoga mat to hotels. 

I need to workout every day, because I’m addicted to the exercise-induced dopamine. 

You do however use a comma after a dependent clause beginning with because: 

Because I’m addicted to exercise-induced dopamine, I need to workout everyday. 

Peaches, that are green, taste hideous. 

The above is an example of an independent clause with a essential information or restrictive information. Not all peaches taste hideous, only green ones. The meaning of the entire sentence needs the dependent clause so there are no commas. 

However, if the clause is additional information, the clause is called nonessential or nonrestrictive, and we do use commas: 

Peaches, which are on sale at Whole Foods, are my favorite fruit. 

Eight. Unnecessary or missing capitalization 

Some Traditional Chinese Medicines containing Ephedraremain legal.

We only use capital letters for proper nouns, proper adjectives, first words of sentences, important words in titles, along with certain words indicating directions and family relationships. 

Nine. Missing word 

The site foreman discriminated women and promoted men with less experience. 

The site foreman discriminated against women and promoted men with less experience. 

Chris’ behavior becomes bizarre that his family asks for help. 

Chris’ behavior becomes so bizarre that his family asks for help. 

Ten. Faulty sentence structure 

The information which high school athletes are presented with mainly includes information on what credits needed to graduate and thinking about the college which athletes are trying to play for, and apply. 

A sentence that starts out with one kind of structure and then changes to another kind can confuse readers. Make sure that each sentence contains a subject and a verb, that subjects and predicates make sense together, and that comparisons have clear meanings. When you join elements (such as subjects or verb phrases) with a coordinating conjunction, make sure that the elements have parallel structures. 

The reason I prefer yoga at home to the gym is because I prefer privacy. 

I prefer yoga at home to the gym because of privacy. 

11. Missing Comma with a Nonrestrictive Element 

Marina who was the president of the club was the first to speak. 

The clause who was the president of the club does not affect the basic meaning of the sentence: Marina was the first to speak. 

A nonrestrictive element gives information not essential to the basic meaning of the sentence. Use commas to set off a nonrestrictive element. 

12. Unnecessary Shift in Verb Tense 

Priya was watching the great blue heron. Then she slips and falls into the swamp. 

Verbs that shift from one tense to another with no clear reason can confuse readers. 

13. Missing Comma in a Compound Sentence

 

Meredith waited for Samir and her sister grew impatient. 

Without the comma, a reader may think at first that Meredith waited for both Samir and her sister. 

A compound sentence consists of two or more parts that could each stand alone as a sentence. When the parts are joined by a coordinating conjunction, use a comma before the conjunction to indicate a pause between the two thoughts. 

14. Unnecessary or Missing Apostrophe (including its/it's) 

Overambitious parents can be very harmful to a childs well-being. 

The car is lying on it's side in the ditch. Its a white 2004 Passat.

 

To make a noun possessive, add either an apostrophe and an s (Ed's book) or an apostrophe alone (the boys' gym). Do not use an apostrophe in the possessive pronouns ours, yours, and hers. Useits to mean belong to it; use it's only when you mean it is or it has. 

15. Fused (run-on) sentence 

Klee's paintings seem simple, they are very sophisticated. 

She doubted the value of medication she decided to try it once. 

A fused sentence (also called a run-on) joins clauses that could each stand alone as a sentence with no punctuation or words to link them. Fused sentences must be either divided into separate sentences or joined by adding words or punctuation. 

16. Comma Splice 

I was strongly attracted to her, she was beautiful and funny. 

We hated the meat loaf, the cafeteria served it every Friday. 

A comma splice occurs when only a comma separates clauses that could each stand alone as a sentence. To correct a comma splice, you can insert a semicolon or period, connect the clauses with a word such as and or because, or restructure the sentence. 

17. Lack of pronoun/antecedent agreement 

Every student must provide their own uniform. 

Pronouns must agree with their antecedents in gender (male or female) and in number (singular or plural). Many indefinite pronouns, such as everyone and each, are always singular. When a singular antecedent can refer to a man or woman, either rewrite the sentence to make the antecedent plural or to eliminate the pronoun, or use his or her, he or she, and so on. When antecedents are joined by or or nor, the pronoun must agree with the closer antecedent. A collection noun such as team can be either singular or plural, depending on whether the members are seen as a group or individuals. 

18. Poorly Integrated Quotation 

A 1970s study of what makes food appetizing "Once it became apparent that the steak was actually blue and the fries were green, some people became ill" (Schlosser 565).

Corrected

In a 1970s study about what makes food appetizing, we read, "Once it became apparent that the steak was actually blue and the fries were green, some people became ill" (Schlosser 565).  

"Dumpster diving has serious drawbacks as a way of life" (Eighner 383). Finding edible food is especially tricky.

Corrected

"Dumpster diving has serious drawbacks as a way of life," we read in Eighner's book (383). One of the drawbacks is that finding food can be especially difficult.  

Quotations should fit smoothly into the surrounding sentence structure. They should be linked clearly to the writing around them (usually with a signal phrase) rather than dropped abruptly into the writing. 

19. Missing or Unnecessary Hyphen 

This paper looks at fictional and real life examples. 

A compound adjective modifying a noun that follows it requires a hyphen. 

The buyers want to fix-up the house and resell it. 

A two-word verb should not be hyphenated. A compound adjective that appears before a noun needs a hyphen. However, be careful not to hyphenate two-word verbs or word groups that serve as subject complements. 

20. Sentence Fragment 

No subject 

Marie Antoinette spent huge sums of money on herself and her favorites. And helped to bring on the French Revolution. 

No complete verb 

The aluminum boat sitting on its trailer. 

Beginning with a subordinating word 

We returned to the drugstore. Where we waited for our buddies. 

A sentence fragment is part of a sentence that is written as if it were a complete sentence. Reading your draft out loud, backwards, sentence by sentence, will help you spot sentence fragments.

 

 

 

Using Dialectical Method to Sharpen Your Thesis

Entertain oppositional ideas. We call this the dialectical method or dialectical argument. 

For example, a student said to me after class, “You don’t really believe in this Frankl nonsense, do you? I mean, you’re like me, right? You’re a meaning atheist.”

“A meaning atheist?”

“Yeah, man, you don’t believe in meaning.”

“But Frankl found meaning and he devoted to helping others find it,” I said.

“Come on, man, he just did that to make himself feel better. I mean, what was he going to do, tell himself that all that suffering he went through was for nothing?”

This led me to sit down and come up with an anti-meaning thesis (I don’t necessarily believe it, but I find it fascinating):

While Viktor Frankl is clearly a noble, wise, intelligent, and sincere man, his treatise on the search for meaning holds no water when we distance ourselves emotionally from Frankl’s plight and study the idea of meaning objectively. Sparing our brain the intoxication and bias born of pity, piety, and our natural sympathy for Frankl, we can see that Frankl’s claim that we must find meaning is erroneous. His belief in meaning is not a claim of fact; it is a rationale, a survival coping mechanism, if you will, that he created in order that he might convince himself that there was some “sense” or “meaning” to his unspeakable suffering. Secondly, Frankl conveniently omits millions upon millions of cases of suffering that are clearly senseless such as starving children and children born from drug-addicted mothers and sectarian brutality that results in the agonizing deaths of the innocent. Third, the widespread devastation of natural disasters annihilates entire populations so quickly they do not have the privilege to step back for even one second and contemplate the “meaning” of what has just happened to them.

Opposition to the Above

Our Frankl detractor who exacts his Frankl refutation with such verve and self-rectitude is perhaps a bit too full of his own rhetorical certitude to see the logical fallacies of his claims. First, he admits that Frankl created a “coping mechanism” to address his suffering, and if our Frankl detractor read the book carefully he would understand that it is precisely these coping mechanisms, Frankl claims, that give us meaning. The detractor’s second assertion, that hunger and brutality often render suffering to be senseless, does not contradict Frankl’s argument. To the contrary, Frankl argues that it is precisely why we live in a world where suffering can visit us without warning or sense that we must while we can cultivate a courageous attitude toward our own inevitable suffering and death.   The Frankl detractor would have us believe that Frankl fails because he has failed to prevent senseless suffering from visiting Planet Earth when in fact Frankl is arguing that we must radically change who we are to meet the very challenges that result from such suffering.

So, McMahon, which argument do you believe in?

My reply: It depends on when you ask me. It depends on how I feel. My thoughts on Frankl are tentative, not absolute. And critical thinkers tend to be more tentative, not absolute, which is a sign of lazy, non-thinking.

For Effective Critical Thinking, We Must Know the Main Ideas of the Text

Overview: The Thirteen Tenets (Principles) from Man’s Search for Meaning

Before we examine disingenuous and sincere nihilism, we should first look at nihilism’s opposite, the belief in meaning as laid out by Viktor Frankl, of which there are thirteen major tenets:

 

1. The human condition is suffering and the only viable response to suffering is to find meaning. We must therefore acknowledge that there is a purpose in life, greater than the purpose we find in creative work and passive enjoyment, which “admits of but one possibility of high moral behavior: namely, in man’s attitude to his existence, an existence restricted by external forces.” It is imperative that we are motivated first and foremost by this higher purpose. Without a purpose, our life drags on day after day in a tiring monotony that we try to fill with consumerism, addictions, texting friends, etc.
2. “Man can preserve a vestige of spiritual freedom, of independence of mind, even in such terrible conditions of psychic and physical stress” as was endured in the concentration camps. Acknowledging this freedom, we must defy being a “plaything of circumstance” and thus we must understand that “there is a danger inherent in the teaching of man’s ‘nothingbutness,’ the theory that man is nothing but the result of biological, psychological and sociological conditions, or the product of heredity and environment. Such a view of man makes a neurotic believe what he is prone to believe anyway, namely, that he is the pawn and victim of outer influences or inner circumstances.” We are neither pawn nor victim. Rather, we possess an inner freedom that cannot be lost no matter how extreme the circumstances. This inner freedom allows us to be worthy of our suffering. And being worthy of our suffering is the ultimatum life presents us: Either be worthy of our suffering, or not. 
3. Life presents us with the moral imperative to treat our life as something of significance and consequence and the converse is also true: We must not despise our lives and treat our lives as if they were of no consequence at all. As Frankl writes: “And there were always choices to make. Every day, every hour, offered the opportunity make a decision, a decision which determined whether you would or would not submit to those powers which threatened to rob you of your very self, your inner freedom: which determined whether or not you would become the plaything of circumstance, renouncing freedom and dignity to become molded into the form of the typical inmate.”
4. There are moral absolutes in this world evidenced in part by Frankl dividing the world into two races of people, decent and indecent.
5. We have to do more than imagine a life of meaning; we must actually live it. Frankl writes: “Life ultimately means taking the responsibility to find the right answer to its problems and to fulfill the tasks which it constantly sets for each individual.” We are additionally accountable for the responsibilities life demands of us.
6. We must embrace suffering, the finiteness of life, and death to maximize and complete our life. “Suffering is an ineradicable part of life, even as fate and death. Without suffering and death human life cannot be complete.”
7. We must radically alter our attitude by changing our orientation from “What do I expect from life?” to “What does life expect from me?” This question brings up our number one responsibility in life, to embrace meaning when it knocks on our door. We don’t choose meaning; meaning chooses us.
8. There is no One Size Fits All Meaning. Every person’s meaning is specific to his or her circumstances.
9. We must confront the emotions that seem so overwhelming; otherwise those emotions will devour us. Quoting from Spinoza, Frankl writes: “Emotion, which is suffering, ceases to be suffering as soon as we form a clear and precise picture of it.” It’s another way of saying that when we confront our demons, they often lose their power over us.
10. We must not abuse and squander freedom by imitating our oppressors. For example, if our boss abuses us, we should not later in life abuse our workers when we ascend to positions of high authority.
11. Meaning cannot be found within ourselves; it must be found in the world. As Frankl writes: “By declaring that man is responsible and must actualize the potential meaning of his life, I wish to stress that the true meaning of life is to be discovered in the world rather than within man or his own psyche, as though it were a closed system. I have termed this constitutive characteristic “the self-transcendence of human existence.” It denotes the fact that being human always points, and is directed, to something, or someone, other than oneself—be it a meaning to fulfill or another human being to encounter. The more one forgets himself—by giving himself to a cause to serve or another person to love—the more human he is and the more he actualizes himself. What is called self-actualization is not an attainable aim at all, for the simple reason that the more one would strive for it, the more he would miss it. In other words, self-actualization is possible only as a side-effect of self-transcendence.”
12. No matter how despicable and worthless our lives have been, we are called to redeem ourselves by living out the essential rule of logotherapy: “Live as if you were living already for the second time and as if you had acted the first time as wrongly as you are about to act now!”
13. Only a few people are capable of reaching great spiritual heights but the difficulty and small percentage of people who do reach such great heights does not abnegate our responsibility for pursuing a life of higher meaning.

Frankl’s Central Argument in 3 Sentences

One. No matter the circumstances, we all have the free will and therefore the responsibility to choose a dignified, meaningful life in the face of even the worst suffering.

Two. Failure to create a meaningful life for ourselves will result in the existential vacuum or unbearable emptiness.

Three. Without meaning we will try to fill the gnawing void with misguided distractions that will destroy us.

Some might conclude that Frankl's world is binary or either/or: Either we connect to life with meaning or we fail to find meaning and suffer the despair and regret of disconnection.

Others might conclude that meaning, contrary to Frankl, exists on a sliding scale or is relative and that this nuanced view of meaning eludes Frankl's strident message.

 There are 3 points of view regarding Frankl’s message

1. Kool-Aid Drinkers or Cheerleaders: We embrace his message without having a specific understanding of it, so all we can do is recycle feel-good clichés and hackneyed truisms about living a meaningful life. People who become cheerleaders for a cause without rigorous questioning are called many things: true believers, homers, Kool-Aid Drinkers, clones, ditto-heads. Such people tend to be mediocrities or ciphers, nonentities, who wish to hide their vapid personalities by losing themselves in a cause that is larger and more glorious than they will ever be on their own.
2. Cynics or Nihilists: We dismiss the idea of meaning as a fool’s illusion, a societal construction. There is no meaning. We do what makes us happy, what makes us tick, what gets us out of bed in the morning. There is no moral absolute, just doing things relative to our happiness. Many cynics will simply see life as a cruel joke from which we must insulate ourselves with brain-numbing distractions and cheap thrills. Many nihilists will devote their lives to pleasure, hedonism, and egotism because there is no meaning. Some people argue that a lot of nihilists know there is meaning but deny it to justify a lazy, irresponsible, head-in-the-sand life. 
3. Open-Minded Skeptic: With a specific understanding of Frankl’s terms, the OMS may, or may not, accept some of Frankl’s message with certain conditions or caveats. This latter point of view is, in my opinion, the most reasonable and sophisticated for reasons we will now look at:

Evaluating Frankl’s Message Without Being His Cheerleader or a Cynic

The problem isn’t the message. Man's Search for Meaning contains a great message, indisputable in many ways. The problem is threefold:

The Problem of Specificity and Definition

Specificity: dealing with specific notions of meaning, free will, responsibility, to name a few. Without specifics, we’re simply rehashing feel-good clichés. As a result, the level of writing is fifth grade instead of college. We must avoid writing like fifth graders.

When dealing with terms like meaning, free will, responsibility, and other grandiose abstractions, we achieve specificity in several ways. Here are a few:

One. Be skeptical of clichés, overused terms and phrases like “think outside the box,” which is, ironically, so “inside the box.”  

Here’s an example of the term meaning being reduced to a cliché:  A man says, “My family is my meaning. Taking care of them, providing for them, that is my meaning. So don’t talk to me about meaning.”

This is a cliché that doesn’t mean anything. In fact, this man may work his butt off for his wife and children to the point that his life is one thing: MAMMAP—make as much money as possible. There’s good reason to make lots of money. It’s helpful, but it doesn’t define meaning. In fact, this man may be teaching his family that money is the elixir for all of life’s woes, thus afflicting his family with materialism and greed. In fact, this man may be addicted to work even as he becomes more and more emotionally disconnected from his family.

Here’s another example.

Someone says, “My faith in God gives me meaning.” That’s very possible, since in fact Frankl’s faith in God helped him find meaning in the concentration camps, but too many people engage in religious ritual and carry religious beliefs out of unquestioned habit. Meaning cannot be achieved by repetitious, unexamined behavior. Such behavior is mindless and being mindless cannot forge a path to meaning.

Here’s another example.

I derive meaning from my job, my career. We would be wise to gain meaning from our career, but too often our job title gives us a certain status and identity that becomes a mask.

Take away our job and often we lose our identity; there’s no meaningful core behind the title, just an emptiness. You hear about professional athletes all the time who retire from their sport and then live a life of moral dissolution, becoming drug addicts and alcoholics. You hear of people retiring from any job and going into a depression. A lot of people die shortly after retirement.

So we must be cautious of equating our job with meaning.

Two. Turn away from the absolute and move toward the relative by positioning the term on a scale. In other words, see the gray or nuance of a definition. Don’t use the term meaning in terms of black and white such as your life either has meaning or it has no meaning. Rather, consider the idea of meaning moving up and down a scale. 

We get into trouble when we talk about meaning as in Absolute Ultimate Meaning. Now we’ve turned meaning into this elusive Holy Grail, Elixir, or Chimera, a cure-all mirage.

Rather, we should look at meaning as relative on a scale. Instead of saying our life has meaning or does not meaning, we can say we are tending toward meaning or tending away from meaning.

Examples of People Trending Away From Or Toward Meaning

A forty-five-year-old man, living with his mother, who sits in his pajamas all day while surfing the Internet and eating Hot Pockets is probably tending away from meaning. 

A woman who has devoted her life to rescuing dogs from cruel puppy mills is probably tending toward meaning. She’s probably trending toward meaning.

A wealthy doctor languishes in his unfurnished house two years after his wife left him, taking all the furniture with her. He’s probably low on the Meaning Scale, that is to say, he is trending away from meaning in his narcissistic self-pity.

Any kind of addictive behavior in which one is seeking oblivion and numbness and disengagement from others is probably tending away from meaning.   

Three. To strengthen your definition, put your term in a context or circumstance. 

Example:

Meaning: From Sloth to Creativity

When Tennessee Williams the playwright became famous, he gave up writing, holed himself up in a hotel suite and ordered room service, champagne, and prostitutes until about six months into his debauchery he realized he was going crazy. He left the hotel, went to Mexico, and wrote his masterpiece A Streetcar Named Desire. For him, meaning was about struggle, hard work, and vocation. He discovered an important truth about meaning: The creative energy inside him to fulfill his artistic gifts had to be used; otherwise it would turn inward and kill him with self-destructive behavior. This is a truth Frankl witnessed in the concentration camps.

Not all suffering leads to meaning

It’s difficult to imagine meaning existing at all in some circumstances. For example, a student came to my office to tell me she didn’t believe in meaning. This is an 18-year-old whose boyfriend drives a BMW M3. She explained that a starving 3-year-old girl in Ethiopia watching her family die of starvation and disease and knows she has just a few months left to live has no meaning. I think we can say that such a person finds little relevance in a discussion about meaning.

While there are no absolute definitions of meaning, or non-meaning, there are extreme circumstances that make us even wonder if meaning exists for everyone.

Four. Use negation, what the term is NOT. Abstractions like meaning, love, fulfillment, etc., can be effectively understood when we examine their negation, fallacies, and misguided definitions.

Examples of Negation:

Meaning is not talking about it. 

Why? Because with few exceptions, meaning is not talking about it. As we learned from the people of Thailand, if we live a rich life, we don’t think or talk too much. We’re too busy living. My cousin in Studio City seems like this. He’s a man with little thought or talk about meaning who lives a very full life.

However, Viktor Frankl was forced to think about meaning when he saw people lose or gain their humanity in the concentration camps. Under these extreme circumstances, he felt compelled to meditate on the effects of meaning, or its absence, in people’s lives. In other words, he’s earned the right to talk about meaning. 

Indeed, meaning is often not talking about meaning. Meaning is living life in a way that gives us hope for a better future and purpose. 

Meaning is not happiness and success.

Happiness and success can be taken from us at any time. As Frankl tells us, meaning is having the moral character to embrace suffering with courage.

In his book Frankl explains what meaning is NOT:

Meaning is not a panacea handed to you on a silver platter that instantly changes your life.

Meaning is not something your therapist can give you.

Meaning is not ONE THING that everyone finds.

Meaning is not something everyone is going to agree upon. The God of your religion that gives you meaning might very well be at war with the God of someone else’s religion.

 

Writing Against Frankl's Argument That We Must Find Meaning to Escape the Despair of the Existential Vacuum

McMahon's Doubts about Meaning:

We Can Have Life's 8 Human Needs Without Having Absolute Meaning and Therefore Argue for Frankl Lite: 

When I ask myself if there is meaning, I begin with fundamental human needs. They aren't meaning as described by Frankl, but most of us can be happy with them. They include the following: 

One. We need to believe in something larger than ourselves so we don't become crushed by the weight of our inclination for self-centeredness and narcisissism. 

We can't believe in just anything. There's a huge caveat or condition: This "thing" we believe in should be good, conducive to our maturity and dignity and the dignity and respect of others.We can't, for example, believe in killing others to achieve some political goal motivated by a lust for power. Then we are monsters like Pol Pot and Stalin and Hitler. 

If this thing is good, it doesn't necessarily create meaning. For example, if we develop an interest in martial arts, math, chess, bicycling, swimming, etc., all these things are good and help us get the focus of our self, but they aren't the Holy Grail of Meaning. 

Two. We need self-awareness, AKA the Third Eye or metacognition so that we can make more intelligent and moral choices rather than being dragged down by the reptilian, primitive, irrational part of our brain. But this too falls short of meaning. 

Three. We need humility to learn from our mistakes so we can become stronger and wiser. Again, humility is great, but not the same as meaning. 

Four. We need a good job that uses our skills and makes us feel needed and pays us so we can buy stuff we want and feel secure and comfortable. This is good, too, but it isn't meaning. 

Five. We need reproductive success. This means finding a mate whom we find desirable and attractive and a complement to our existence. This is great, but it isn't meaning. 

Six. We need a sense of belonging and meaningful friendships. This too is great, but it is not meaning. 

Seven. We need free time to play and enjoy recreation as a counterbalance to our hard work. Again, this is a need, but it isn't meaning. 

Eight. We need moral character, the kind that compels us to have respect for others and ourselves and to have a reverence for life. In fact, we don't find meaning outside of ourselves. Meaning is born from our moral character. 

We can have all these 8 things and achieve a certain satisfaction in our growth, maturity, and success and still not have meaning or at least not the heroic kind evidenced by Viktor Frankl in his book. 

As a result, we can have the 8 Essential Things and go through life happy enough without having meaning. Our life is full enough based on our moral growth, our work, our love life, our friendships, and our human connections that we don't seek any meaning beyond this. 

However, some of us can attain the 8 Essential Things and still suffer, to some degree or other, the existential vacuum, the sense of emptiness and restlessness that "life is good but there must be something More."There is a sense of the Beyond, of Mystery, and Enchantment. 

Some people seek this More in religion. 

Others seek this More in creativity, such as writing or the arts. 

Others seek this More with drugs, LSD, mushrooms, marijuana, etc. 

Others say there is no More, that we are biological creatures who can be reduced to sexual and survival instincts. 

Viktor Frankl says there is meaning in terms of our moral position, which is that we must fight to help others at the expense of our own safety and convenience. This is a morality rooted at the heart of his religion. 

His religion states that we must fight to help others at the expense of our safety and convenience; otherwise, we will become self-preservational animals, losing our souls to our most primitive urges. The consequence of not following the moral dictate described by Frankl in his book is that we will suffer moral dissolution and the existential vacuum. 

The challenge is that throughout human history something like less than 1 percent of the human race have chosen to live as heroically as Viktor Frankl. 

Most of us pacify ourselves sufficiently with the 8 Essential Things but fall short of Meaning as described by Viktor Frankl. For Frankl, meaning is an absolute. For most people meaning is relative to the 8 Essential Things.  

What's the biggest weakness of Frankl Lite?

None of the basic needs, except moral character, are reliable. Frankl, who underwent the torture and humiliation of a concentration camp, has a message: Everything can be taken from you.

However, the kind of meaning Frankl develops in himself, the very kind of meaning he defines in his book, cannot be taken away.

 

All Essay Options for Acting Out Culture Unit 1

Option 1

Writing Assignment modified from #5 Writing in our text Acting Out Culture:

"Instead of religious sins plaguing our conscience," Asma declares," we now have the transgressions of leaving the water running, leaving the lights on, failing to recycle, and using plastic grocery bags instead of paper" (27). Write a longer essay (1,000 words) in which you identify and evaluate the comparison Asma is making here. According to Asma, what are the key differences between the "religious sins"of the past and the "transgressions" that characterize everyday life today? And what larger point is he trying to make here about the way our understanding of "sin" has changed? Then take a closer look at each of the "transgressions" he lists here. To what extent, in your view, is it valid to feel "guilty" about each? Is it helpful, necessary, and/or right for these oversights to "plague our conscience"? Why or why not?

Option 2

Essay Topic for a Cause and Effect Analysis Thesis:

Develop a thesis that answers the following question: What are the causes behind the pathological relationship between celebrities and their admirers? 

Sample Thesis

As "Faces in the Mirror" shows us, celebrity worship is a sick symbiotic relationship between celebrity and fanboy characterized by ____________, ____________, ___________, and _____________. 

Thesis that disagrees with the above:

While there may be some fanboys who take their celebrity worship too far, celebrity culture is good for us since celebrities give us necessary distractions from our boring lives, they gives us beauty and fashion for which we can aspire, they give us glamour which points to a higher reality than the plain reality society tells us we have to live in, and they give us a shared interest which allows us "normal folk" to bond with one another. 

Option 3:

Compare the themes in "The Faces in the Mirror" with the themes of celebrity in Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu's masterpiece film Birdman (2014). 

Option 4:

Support, refute, or complicate the argument that Ty Burr's "Faces in the Mirror" and Michael Sandel's "Markets and Morals" complement the theme of human degradation and "moral vacancy" in an age of excessive marketing and pathological self-promotion. 

Option 5:

Defend, refute, or complicate the assertion that critical patriotism, the kind that Dyson attributes to great African American thinkers, is a superior variety of patriotism to the white jingoism described in the essay. 

Option 6:

Support, refute, or complicate the assertion, based on the context of Brooks' essay "People Like Us", that humans are hard-wired away from diversity and toward sameness.  

Sample:

Brooks is accurate to say that we are hard-wired to live in our Same Tribe because we are a lazy people evidenced by _____________, _____________, ______________, and ____________________.

We should not denigrate ourselves for hanging out with people who are "just like us." We do so for survival reasons, which include _______________, _____________, ____________, and ______________. 

Option 7

Develop a thesis that addresses the tribalism discussed in David Brooks' essay "People Like Us" and the "scientific racism" discussed in Debra J. Dickerson's "The Great White Way." 

Option 8

Address “The Great White Way” by developing a thesis that analyzes how race is more of a social fantasy than it is an objective reality.

Sample Thesis

"The Great White Way" makes the persuasive case that race is a canard and a social construction that has nothing to do with scientific reality and everything to do with privilege evidenced by __________, ____________, ______________, and ________________. 

Sample Thesis

"The Great White Way" and the Rachel Dolezal controversy both reinforce the idea that race is an arbitrary social construction, an insane fantasy, and an anti-humanitarian fiction designed to give a false order of things, to provide a rationale for exploitation,  and to reinforce our base tendencies for tribalism. 

Related Readings

"There Is No Such Thing As Race"

"Race Is a Social Concept, Not a Scientific One"

"Race Finished"

"Does Race Exist?"

Option 9

“The Flip Side of Internet Fame” has many things in common with Ty Burr’s “The Faces in the Mirror.” Identify some of those commonalities.

Essay Prompt

Compare our obsession with celebrity and our obsession with viral videos. What common pathologies can you identify that fuel these obsessions? 

Both essays address the disparity between a real person and the public persona.

Both essays address our preference for public persona over reality.

Both essays suggest that there is something morally bankrupt and perhaps even insane about a culture that obsesses over false images at the expense of preserving the humanity of real people.

Both essays suggest that a certain kind of loneliness, disconnection, and lack of empathy inform the sick obsession with public or fake personas over reality.

Both essays tap into the toxic energy from the "mobocracy." A mobocracy is a mob that is so desperate for connection and unity that they will resort to irrational hatred of a scapegoat to achieve their goal. 

Both essays show that the mobocracy is a pathological juggernaut evidenced by ____________, ____________, _____________, and _______________. 

Option 10

Essay Prompt

In the context of "The Faces in the Mirror" and "The Flip Side of Internet Fame," what is the connection between how we view ourselves and how others view us? How does the Internet alter this dynamic?

Social media encourages what David Brooks calls "The Big Me," a state of self-aggrandizement that results in solipsism, narcissism, bipolar moodiness, and depression. 

Option 11

Essay Prompt

Defend, refute, or complicate the notion that online shaming is so catastrophic and prevalent that we need to add free speech restrictions that would discourage online shaming. What would those restrictions be? How would we enforce those restrictions? Would those restrictions be justified? Explain.

While I agree with those who point out the catastrophes that ensue from online shaming, it would be impractical to draw free speech boundaries on the Internet because _____________, _____________, _______________, and _________________. 

Option 12

Essay Prompt

Write a causal analysis of public shaming in the context of "The Flip Side of Internet Fame."

Option 13

Essay Option: 

Defend or refute Peter Singer’s position that there are moral grounds for infanticide or “mercy killings.” Here is how the assignment looks for a 4-page essay: 

Write a 4-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 3 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 we 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 _______________________________.  

Option 14

Essay Option

Is Virginia Heffernan's attention-span myth a confirmation or challenge of Duhigg's thesis about the power of habit? 

Sample Thesis

Heffernan's essay poses a weak challenge to Duhigg's because Heffernan fails to _____________, ____________, _______________, and __________________. 

Option 15

Addressing "Should We Ditch the Idea of Privacy," develop an argumentative thesis about how we should change our attitudes toward privacy, or not, in a world of increasing digital connectivity.  

Option 16

Comparing "The Flip Side of the Internet" and "#Me," develop a thesis that supports or refutes the authors' skepticism about the alleged benefits of social media. Develop counterarguments that you can address in the final part of your essay. 

 

 

 

English 1A Lesson for September 21, 2015

 

For September 30, you need to turn in a 4-page essay (with a fifth page Works Cited) based on ONE of the following options.

 

Option 1

 

Writing Assignment modified from #5 Writing in our text Acting Out Culture:

 

"Instead of religious sins plaguing our conscience," Asma declares," we now have the transgressions of leaving the water running, leaving the lights on, failing to recycle, and using plastic grocery bags instead of paper" (27). Write a longer essay (1,000 words) in which you identify and evaluate the comparison Asma is making here. According to Asma, what are the key differences between the "religious sins"of the past and the "transgressions" that characterize everyday life today? And what larger point is he trying to make here about the way our understanding of "sin" has changed? Then take a closer look at each of the "transgressions" he lists here. To what extent, in your view, is it valid to feel "guilty" about each? Is it helpful, necessary, and/or right for these oversights to "plague our conscience"? Why or why not?

 

Option 2

 

Essay Topic for a Cause and Effect Analysis Thesis:

 

Develop a thesis that answers the following question: What are the causes behind the pathological relationship between celebrities and their admirers? 

 

Sample Thesis

 

As "Faces in the Mirror" shows us, celebrity worship is a sick symbiotic relationship between celebrity and fanboy characterized by ____________, ____________, ___________, and _____________. 

 

Thesis that disagrees with the above:

 

While there may be some fanboys who take their celebrity worship too far, celebrity culture is good for us since celebrities give us necessary distractions from our boring lives, they gives us beauty and fashion for which we can aspire, they give us glamour which points to a higher reality than the plain reality society tells us we have to live in, and they give us a shared interest which allows us "normal folk" to bond with one another. 

 

Option 3:

 

Compare the themes in "The Faces in the Mirror" with the themes of celebrity in Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu's masterpiece film Birdman (2014). 

 

Option 4:

 

Support, refute, or complicate the argument that Ty Burr's "Faces in the Mirror" and Michael Sandel's "Markets and Morals" complement the theme of human degradation and "moral vacancy" in an age of excessive marketing and pathological self-promotion. 

 

Option 5:

 

Defend, refute, or complicate the assertion that critical patriotism, the kind that Dyson attributes to great African American thinkers, is a superior variety of patriotism to the white jingoism described in the essay. 

 

Option 6:

 

Support, refute, or complicate the assertion, based on the context of Brooks' essay "People Like Us", that humans are hard-wired away from diversity and toward sameness.  

 

Sample:

 

Brooks is accurate to say that we are hard-wired to live in our Same Tribe because we are a lazy people evidenced by _____________, _____________, ______________, and ____________________.

 

We should not denigrate ourselves for hanging out with people who are "just like us." We do so for survival reasons, which include _______________, _____________, ____________, and ______________. 

 

Option 7

 

Develop a thesis that addresses the tribalism discussed in David Brooks' essay "People Like Us" and the "scientific racism" discussed in Debra J. Dickerson's "The Great White Way." 

 

Option 8

 

Address “The Great White Way” by developing a thesis that analyzes how race is more of a social fantasy than it is an objective reality.

 

Sample Thesis

 

"The Great White Way" makes the persuasive case that race is a canard and a social construction that has nothing to do with scientific reality and everything to do with privilege evidenced by __________, ____________, ______________, and ________________. 

 

Sample Thesis

 

"The Great White Way" and the Rachel Dolezal controversy both reinforce the idea that race is an arbitrary social construction, an insane fantasy, and an anti-humanitarian fiction designed to give a false order of things, to provide a rationale for exploitation,  and to reinforce our base tendencies for tribalism. 

 

Related Readings

 

"There Is No Such Thing As Race"

 

"Race Is a Social Concept, Not a Scientific One"

 

"Race Finished"

 

"Does Race Exist?"

 

Option 9

 

“The Flip Side of Internet Fame” has many things in common with Ty Burr’s “The Faces in the Mirror.” Identify some of those commonalities.

 

Essay Prompt

 

Compare our obsession with celebrity and our obsession with viral videos. What common pathologies can you identify that fuel these obsessions? 

 

Both essays address the disparity between a real person and the public persona.

 

Both essays address our preference for public persona over reality.

 

Both essays suggest that there is something morally bankrupt and perhaps even insane about a culture that obsesses over false images at the expense of preserving the humanity of real people.

 

Both essays suggest that a certain kind of loneliness, disconnection, and lack of empathy inform the sick obsession with public or fake personas over reality.

 

Both essays tap into the toxic energy from the "mobocracy." A mobocracy is a mob that is so desperate for connection and unity that they will resort to irrational hatred of a scapegoat to achieve their goal. 

 

Both essays show that the mobocracy is a pathological juggernaut evidenced by ____________, ____________, _____________, and _______________. 

 

Option 10

 

Essay Prompt

 

In the context of "The Faces in the Mirror" and "The Flip Side of Internet Fame," what is the connection between how we view ourselves and how others view us? How does the Internet alter this dynamic?

 

Social media encourages what David Brooks calls "The Big Me," a state of self-aggrandizement that results in solipsism, narcissism, bipolar moodiness, and depression. 

 

Option 11

 

Essay Prompt

 

Defend, refute, or complicate the notion that online shaming is so catastrophic and prevalent that we need to add free speech restrictions that would discourage online shaming. What would those restrictions be? How would we enforce those restrictions? Would those restrictions be justified? Explain.

 

While I agree with those who point out the catastrophes that ensue from online shaming, it would be impractical to draw free speech boundaries on the Internet because _____________, _____________, _______________, and _________________. 

 

Option 12

 

Essay Prompt

 

Write a causal analysis of public shaming in the context of "The Flip Side of Internet Fame."

 

Option 13

 

Essay Option: 

 

Defend or refute Peter Singer’s position that there are moral grounds for infanticide or “mercy killings.” Here is how the assignment looks for a 4-page essay: 

 

Write a 4-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 3 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 we 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 _______________________________.  

 

Option 14

 

Essay Option

 

Is Virginia Heffernan's attention-span myth a confirmation or challenge of Duhigg's thesis about the power of habit? 

 

Sample Thesis

 

Heffernan's essay poses a weak challenge to Duhigg's because Heffernan fails to _____________, ____________, _______________, and __________________. 

 

Option 15

 

Addressing "Should We Ditch the Idea of Privacy," develop an argumentative thesis about how we should change our attitudes toward privacy, or not, in a world of increasing digital connectivity.  

 

Option 16

 

Comparing "The Flip Side of the Internet" and "#Me," develop a thesis that supports or refutes the authors' skepticism about the alleged benefits of social media. Develop counterarguments that you can address in the final part of your essay.  

 

 

 

"People Like Us,” by David Brooks

One. What explains our hunger for sameness in terms of the people we surround ourselves with?

We’re anxious and alienated from “people who aren’t like us.” We’d rather feel connection and comfort from being with “members of our tribe,” be it in education, politics, class aspirations, etc. We want to be around people who share our values and our way of seeing the world.

Such tribalism is both comforting and effective in making us happy.  

Here’s the killer fact we don’t want to confront: We’re happier by remaining in our tribe. We don’t want to be around people who don’t share our values. 

Why?

Because we are hard-wired to be self-segregating based on interests and values. 

If we’re hipsters, we want to live in a community of hipsters. 

If we’re suburban consumers, we want to be around suburban consumers. 

If we’re creative, we want to be around a community of artists. 

People who shop at Trader Joe’s are of a certain educated and political ilk. 

People who shop at Whole Foods are of a certain educated and political ilk. 

People who don’t vaccinate their children hang out with other likeminded parents. 

People who watch Fox News hang out with Fox News viewers. 

People who watch MSNBC hang with MSNBC viewers. 

People who like luxury watches create online watch communities. 

The Internet with its millions of blogs is all about consolidating people of common interests. The same can be said with YouTube and its over 500 million channels. 

If you’re a college graduate the chances are your friends will be college graduates. 

If you’re not college educated, the chances are your friends won’t be either. 

If you’re fat, your friends probably are also. 

If you’re skinny, your friends probably are also.

If you're beautiful, your friends probably also enjoy a fair amount of pulchritude. 

If you’re an MMA fighter or enthusiast, your friends probably are also. 

If you’re a vegan, so are your friends. 

If you’re sympathetic to civil rights and equal justice, you probably don’t have friends who harbor racist views. 

If you’re against guns, you probably don’t hang out with outspoken members of the NRA. 

If you’re an atheist, especially an outspoken one, you probably don’t have a lot of Christian friends. 

If you think skinny jeans on men look stupid, you probably don’t have a lot of male friends who wear skinny jeans. 

Foodies hang out with foodies.

Coffee connoisseurs hang out with coffee connoisseurs. 

Gamers hang out with gamers. 

Sommeliers hang out with sommeliers. 

If you're a gourmand who gorges on camembert, you probably hang out with other gourmands who wallow in camembert. 

If you're a member of the cognoscenti, you probably hang out exclusively with other members of the cognoscenti. 

If you're a Morrissey freak, you probably hang out with other Morrissey freaks. 

We want to live in a bubble with people just like us. We feel comfortable being insulated from the “outside world.” 

So let’s get real: There is no diversity. There’s only sameness. 

Writing Response

Support, refute, or complicate the assertion, based on the context of Brooks' essay, that humans are hard-wired away from diversity and toward sameness.  

Sample:

Brooks is accurate to say that we are hard-wired to live in our Same Tribe because we are a lazy people evidenced by _____________, _____________, ______________, and ____________________.

We should not denigrate ourselves for hanging out with people who are "just like us." We do so for survival reasons, which include _______________, _____________, ____________, and ______________. 

 

“The Great White Way” by Debra J. Dickerson  

One. In the first paragraph, Dickerson writes that the president will struggle to explain what race is to space aliens. She suggests that no one knows what race is, yet it is the “central drama” of America.  

Why is race, which is such a vague and confusing term, our nation’s obsession?  

Because on one hand, "race" has determined privilege for some and exploitation for others.

But on the other hand, "race" is a canard, an invention with no basis for reality.

It was the invention of white supremacists to justify the aggrandizement of one race and the exploitation of others.

People of color have traditionally been excluded from the American Dream and there is a history of genocide, slavery, and Jim Crow (segregation and racism), human rights violations that were rooted in the idea of race.  

Genocide, slavery, and Jim Crow were justified by white people who, intoxicated by the doctrine of White Supremacy, felt entitled to treat others in the horrid manner of racism and all its resulting evils.  

In our contemporary society, we enslave migrant workers in tents up and down the agricultural worksites of California and elsewhere.  

In the United States, we imprison black and brown men for the same crimes as whites at a ratio of 10:1.  

So race, even in its vague definition, is still a hot-button issue and points to a crisis of injustice and moral bankruptcy.  

Two. What does Dickerson mean when she writes that “race is an arbitrary system for establishing hierarchy and privilege”?  

The creators of White Supremacy, who escaped the tyranny of European kings knew the value of freedom. But they loved money more than freedom and they only valued freedom for themselves, not others.  

White profiteering sociopaths who were envious of the profits slave traders were making in Britain, Spain, Portugal, and elsewhere, wanted a piece of the action, but they knew the white Christian peasants and farmers were too religious and too caught up in the command "Love thy neighbor as thyself" to embrace slavery, so the white sociopath conmen insidiously put White Supremacy, the belief that God and Jesus are white and that the world was made for white people, into the white peasants' Bibles and soon enough the peasants and farmers drank enough of this White Supremacy or "evil Kool-Aid," as I'm fond of calling it, and they were on board with the white conmen.

Here's an important point: The white conmen were too clever to be fooled by race. They knew that race doesn't exist, that race is a canard and they used race as a canard to fool the white peasants.

The white peasants actually believed in the Kool-Aid the conmen gave them.

I don't know if there's a Hell, but if there is one with descending levels of torment, it would seem the conmen who knew race was a canard all along would go in the deepest part of Hell.

The peasants would still go to Hell because there's no excuse for their "complicit ignorance," as I like to call it, but they're not as diabolical as the white sociopaths who invented White Supremacy for their own profit.

Review of White Supremacy

White Supremacy is an evil religion, a hybrid of Christianity and white superiority narratives, which states whites were put on Earth lord over everyone else in any manner they saw fit.  

The Inventors of White Supremacy Didn't Believe in It Themselves But Created It to get poor Christian farmers to "get on board" with slavery.

The creators of White Supremacy didn’t even believe in it. They were cynics who created a false religion because they knew the masses of white people would “drink the Kool-Aid” and become converts to White Supremacy as slavery became a powerful economic engine that made America into a super power. 

In the United States, there was no such thing as "race" until slavery came along.

Before the false religion of White Supremacy, people did not have a consciousness of race or skin color. Race and skin color were inventions, or if you will, an elaborate fiction or fairy tale designed to justify genocide, slavery, and Jim Crow.  

White farmers and slave owners drank the Kool-Aid and saw themselves as “good Christians” even as they exacted cruelty upon people of color. They were able to use White Supremacy (“I’m just doing what the good Lord ordained me to do.”) to assuage their conscience and perform heinous acts, which constituted the most depraved human rights violations. 

Three. What attitudes did white Americans feel toward European immigrants from Ireland to Greece? 

They were looked upon as subhumans that would takeover America as “mongrel hordes” unless the white Americans started breeding more. 

There was a racial hierarchy with Anglo Europeans at the top, Italians, Slavs, Greeks, and Irish at the middle, and brown and black people relegated to the bottom. 

Hostility was so bad against non-Anglo Europeans that 11 Italians were lynched in Louisiana in 1891. 

The Anglo whites wanted to assimilate the southern Europeans into more jobs and get their votes, so they “promoted Southern Europeans to whiteness,” whiteness being equivalent to the gold card of freedom, respect, and privilege. 

This privilege gave “fascist-leaning Italians” full respect while patriotic Japanese were put into internment camps. 

One of the horrid things about southern Italians becoming full white Americans was in sharing white Americans’ hate and disdain for people of color. For example, we read that Italian Americans took delight in beating up black people. 

This was their sick rite of passage into “being fully white.” 

Four. How was FDR’s New Deal and Truman’s Fair Deal a sort of affirmative action for whites only? 

The states could decide who got the New Deal money and it always went to poor whites, never to blacks. White liberals in the north allowed southern states to do with the New Deal as they liked, state by state. There was no federal enforcement so that all people benefited. 

During the Depression, relief only went to poor whites. Poor blacks received nothing. 

Blacks were not eligible for Social Security until the 1950s. 

These injustices, which happened 70 years ago, give weight to the argument for affirmative action, Dickerson argues. 

We did have affirmative action for the poor, Dickerson reminds us, but 70 years ago, it was only the white poor who received it. 

Essay Options  

Develop a thesis that addresses the tribalism discussed in David Brooks' essay "People Like Us" and the "scientific racism" discussed in Debra J. Dickerson's "The Great White Way."  

Sample Thesis

Brooks' and Dickerson's essays show that tribalism is a double-edged sword that brings out both our best and worst traits evidenced by ______________, ______________, _______________, and _____________________. 

Sample Thesis

Brooks' and Dickerson's essay compel us to be cautious of tribalism because it inclines us to _____________, _____________, _____________, and _________________. 

Brooks' and Dickerson's essay compel us to suppress our tribalistic tendencies because _____________, ____________, _____________, and ________________. 

While Dickerson's essay reveals the evil injustice that too often results from tribalism, Brooks' essay shows that tribalism can be a force for good evidenced by ___________, ___________, __________, and ________________. 

Another Essay Option

Address “The Great White Way” by developing a thesis that analyzes how race is more of a social fantasy than it is an objective reality.

Sample Thesis

"The Great White Way" makes the persuasive case that race is a canard and a social construction that has nothing to do with scientific reality and everything to do with privilege evidenced by __________, ____________, ______________, and ________________. 

Sample Thesis

"The Great White Way" and the Rachel Dolezal controversy both reinforce the idea that race is an arbitrary social construction, an insane fantasy, and an anti-humanitarian fiction designed to give a false order of things, to provide a rationale for exploitation,  and to reinforce our base tendencies for tribalism. 

Related Readings

"There Is No Such Thing As Race"

"Race Is a Social Concept, Not a Scientific One"

"Race Finished"

"Does Race Exist?"

 

Topic of Race: Rachel Dolezal

"I am black, and Rachel Dolezal is not" by Rebecca Carroll, Dame

"Black Like Who? Rachel Dolezal's Harmful Masquerade" 

"Rachel Dolezal's Unintended Gift to America" 

Defining race has been in the national news since fraud Rachel Dolezal has been exposed for the mountebank and pathological narcissist that she is. 

 

Essay Prompt

In a 4-5-page essay with 3 sources, defend or refute the proposition that Rachel Dolezal's racial identity is not authentic self-expression but the pathology of a confused fraud.

Subordination and Coordination (Complex and Compound Sentences)

Complex Sentence

A complex sentence has two clauses. One clause is dependent or subordinate; the other clause is independent, that is to say, the independent clause is the complete sentence.

Examples:

While I was tanning in Hermosa Beach, I noticed the clouds were playing hide and seek.

Because I have a tendency to eat entire pizzas, inhaling them within seconds, I must avoid that fattening food.

Whenever I’m driving my car and I see people texting while driving, I stop my car on the side of the road.

I have to workout every day because I am addicted to exercise-induced dopamine.

I feel overcome with a combination of romantic melancholy and giddy excitement whenever there is a thunderstorm.

We use subordination to show cause and effect. To create subordinate clauses, we must use a subordinate conjunction:

The essential ingredient in a complex sentence is the subordinate conjunction:

after although as because before even if even though if in order that

once provided that rather than since so that than that though unless

until when whenever where whereas wherever whether while why

 

I workout too much.  I have tenderness in my elbow.

Because I workout too much, I suffer tenderness in my elbow.

My elbow hurts. I’m working out.

Even though my elbow hurts, I’m working out.

We use coordination to show equal rank of ideas. To combine sentences with coordination we use FANBOYS (for, and, nor, but, or, yet, so)

The calculus class has been cancelled. We will have to do something else.

The calculus class has been cancelled, so we will have to do something else.

I want more pecan pie. They only have apple pie.

I want more pecan pie, but they only have apple pie.

Using FANBOYS creates compound sentences

Angelo loves to buy a new radio every week, but his wife doesn’t like it.

You have high cholesterol, so you have to take statins.

I am tempted to eat all the rocky road ice cream, yet I will force myself to nibble on carrots and celery.

I want to go to the Middle Eastern restaurant today, and I want to see a movie afterwards.

I really like the comfort of elastic-waist pants, but wearing them makes me feel like an old man.

Both subordination and coordination combine sentences into smoother, clearer sentences.

The following four sentences are made smoother and clearer with the help of subordination:

McMahon felt gluttonous. He inhaled five pizzas. He felt his waist press against his denim waistband in a cruel, unforgiving fashion. He felt an acute ache in his stomach.

Because McMahon felt gluttonous, he inhaled five pizzas upon which he felt his waist press against his denim waistband resulting in an acute stomachache.

Another Example

Joe ate too much heavily salted popcorn. The saltiness made him thirsty. He consumed several gallons of water before bedtime. He was up going to the bathroom all night. He got a bad night’s sleep. He performed terribly during his job interview. 

Due to his foolish consumption of salted popcorn, Joe was so thirsty he drank several gallons of water before bedtime, which caused him to go to the bathroom all night, interfering with his night’s sleep and causing him to do terribly on his job interview.

Another Example

Bob dropped his peanut butter sandwich in the tiger’s enclosure. He leaned over the fence to reach for his sandwich. He fell over the fence. A tiger approached Bob. The zookeeper ran between the stupid zoo customer and the wild beast. The zookeeper tore his rotator cuff.

After Bob dropped his peanut butter sandwich in the tiger’s enclosure, he leaned over the fence to recover his sandwich and fell into the enclosure during which time he was approached by a hungry tiger, forcing the nearby zookeeper to run between Bob and wild beast. During the struggle, the zookeeper tore his rotator cuff.

 

Don’t Do Subordination Overkill

After Bob dropped his peanut butter sandwich in the tiger’s enclosure, he leaned over the fence to recover his sandwich and fell into the enclosure during which time he was approached by a hungry tiger forcing the nearby zookeeper to run between Bob and the wild beast in such a manner that the zookeeper tore his rotator cuff, which resulted in a prolonged disability leave and the loss of his job, a crisis that compelled the zookeeper to file a lawsuit against Bob for financial damages.

 

 

  

“Unspeakable Conversations” by Harriet McBryde Johnson 

One. How does Johnson effectively get our attention in her essay’s introduction? 

“He insists he doesn’t want to kill me.” 

Two. What kind of hubris (excessive pride) and arrogance inform Singer’s philosophy to kill deformed babies? 

He seems to know that the “suffering” disabled babies go through, and the parents’ suffering, justifies killing them. 

Is there a definitive suffering scale, and even if there were, would such a scale justify the killing of certain kinds of babies? 

Additionally, Singer argues that “individuals with cognitive impairments so severe that he doesn’t consider them persons” should not live. 

Again, how do we definitively measure such perceived impairments, and even if such a measurement were available, could we justify this practice of killing people? 

Again, his insanely mathematical formula used to justify infanticide is an oversimplification. As HMJ writes, “the presence or absence of a disability doesn’t predict quality of life.” Her brother Mac who is not disabled has flaws and gifts “that cannot be measured on the same scale.” 

For Singer, a disabled baby is “worse off” than a healthy baby so the disabled baby should be killed. But what does it mean to say someone is “worse off”? What about a healthy baby who as a toddler proves that he is a sociopath who tortures cats and dogs? He gets to live? 

At another point of debate, Singer says healthy children can have fun at the beach but disabled children cannot and therefore they should be put to death. Does this make sense? “You, child, are unable to have fun. Now die.” 

I’m less shocked by the stupidity and evil of the argument (because there will always be madmen spewing made theories) than by the fact that Singer is a venerated philosopher who is a hired professor at Princeton. 

Three. How does HBJ's appearance present challenges, some of which are for her insufferable? 

People assume she needs pity. 

They assume her life is horrible. 

They assume she is in immense pain. 

They assume she needs to be treated like a child or patronized like a slow person. 

They don’t see her. They see stereotypes based on her appearance. 

 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 of Rethinking 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,  basketball player 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 hemophiliac 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, and 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. 

 Essay Option: 

Defend or refute Peter Singer’s position that there are moral grounds for infanticide or “mercy killings.” Here is how the assignment looks for a 5-page essay: 

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 5 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 we 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 _______________________________.  

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” 

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).  

 

 

Most Recent 1A Lesson for Fall 2015: Green Guilt

Here is today's lesson, September 9, 2015: "Green Guilt" and Common Grammar Problems.