They way that you teach this material is unlike anything I have experienced so far at the University of Arkansas. I seriously love the engagement and relatability that you create in your classroom. I haven't been able to grasp the concepts that my last two philosophy professors have been pushing without external aid constantly because they can't do what you do. Thank you for all of these videos, it makes it so much easier for non-philosophy majors to understand.
I'm revising for my moral philosophy and this has made me really think much more about Ross' theories. An excellent video that really helped me understand things more clearly. Thanks so much!
Next week, I'll be releasing some additional Core Concept videos on the 5 prima facie duties I didn't get to previously -- there's Core Concept videos specifically on Fidelity and Reparation
No way....thats an actual blackboard with actual chalk. It's been awhile haha. Very helpful video, I really appreciate people like you who take the time to extend their knowledge beyond their class rooms.
I have a duty to myself to become as wise and prudent as I can, and as physically strong and competent as I can. This is the source of my human dignity. To become integrated and balanced is not a state that is achieved once, it takes effort and habit as a lifelong goal. at 9:27, Wow, I came to this conclusion by myself, in a sort assertive and reactionary way to the challenges that would seem to deny this. A philosophy degree was the best thing I did with my life. I sought the best of all things: wisdom. It gave me a an evalutory framework and a reason to trust my own judgement. It gave me a life long project that made a continuity through many painful and challenging episodes in my life, literally, it gave me a reason for living. While on some days, I may slip into the more cranky of philosophers, I am convinced that the contemplative life is the end of life, ( either as dialectic, or perhaps theosis of sorts...). Employment and education is the means to this. The end of life is to be...wise.
Mark Trumble Ross would put it in terms of a duty to improve oneself in terms of intelligence/knowledge and in terms of virtue. It's not a duty that tends to trump all the rest of them, though. . .
@@GregoryBSadler I have a question that I thought you might be able to answer. Essentially, Ross believes, unlike Kant, that actions are not always right and always wrong. He believes that we have set prima facie duties which we see as moral; however, the competitive moral urgency of another sudden action could override the morality of our prima facie duties. In certain cases, such as if we agreed to meet a friend but saw someone dying on the road, it would be immoral not to help the person on the side of the road, even though helping the person on the side of the road goes against our prima facie duty of fidelity. Is this correct?
@@carlashworth2904 Sort of. You still have the prima facie duty of fidelity. It hasn't gone away, and you might now have a duty of reparation (though in this case a mere "sorry" and explanation might be sufficient)
"If you make a promise, you ought to keep it.'' -- Well, not exactly. The whole problem of a prima facie duty is that it is not a duty, or an actual duty, but rather something related to duty, as Ross says. So, in making a promise, you ought to keep it unless there is an overriding duty whereby you would be morally justified in breaking the promise.
Yep. This is where Ross expresses himself in a way that's not particularly helpful, and not entirely consistent either. One indeed ought to -- in general -- keep promises. Another overriding duty that justifies not keeping it involves another "ought"
This seems like an interesting ethical system. It allows pleasure to oneself but is still a Deontology type ethical system. It is kind of making me change my hedonistic consequence type ethics.
Also it allows for Virtue by self improvement duty and isn't as rigid as Kant when it comes to some duties. Is there any other thinkers similar to this? Currently reading The Right and the Good.
What does Ross mean by “prima facie duties,” and how do these differ from “duty proper”? How does he think we should use our knowledge of prima facie duties to determine what our duty is in a particular situation?
![Megan Thee Stallion - Neva Play (feat. RM) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/TpYTyAaTRts/mqdefault.jpg)
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 78 | คู่เอก "ปกรณ์ vs ฟาบิโอ"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LSOmgl0Th2c/mqdefault.jpg)
They way that you teach this material is unlike anything I have experienced so far at the University of Arkansas. I seriously love the engagement and relatability that you create in your classroom. I haven't been able to grasp the concepts that my last two philosophy professors have been pushing without external aid constantly because they can't do what you do. Thank you for all of these videos, it makes it so much easier for non-philosophy majors to understand.
I'm sorry to read that you're not getting that engagement where you're going
I am always impressed with your student's engagement.
I'm revising for my moral philosophy and this has made me really think much more about Ross' theories. An excellent video that really helped me understand things more clearly. Thanks so much!
Next week, I'll be releasing some additional Core Concept videos on the 5 prima facie duties I didn't get to previously -- there's Core Concept videos specifically on Fidelity and Reparation
You are a phenomenal professor! I wish my philosophy profs were more like this!
Glad you enjoy the videos
helpful for my exam tomorrow, thanks!
No way....thats an actual blackboard with actual chalk. It's been awhile haha. Very helpful video, I really appreciate people like you who take the time to extend their knowledge beyond their class rooms.
Yes, most of my videos use chalkboards. Whiteboards aren't quite so nice.
Good to know. Glad it helped
Thank you so much! You're definitely helping me with my exam! My philosophy teacher doesn't teach very well.
Glad the video was helpful for you. Yes, there's unfortunately quite a few philosophy profs whose teaching needs a bit of work. . . .
I have a duty to myself to become as wise and prudent as I can, and as physically strong and competent as I can. This is the source of my human dignity. To become integrated and balanced is not a state that is achieved once, it takes effort and habit as a lifelong goal. at 9:27, Wow, I came to this conclusion by myself, in a sort assertive and reactionary way to the challenges that would seem to deny this. A philosophy degree was the best thing I did with my life. I sought the best of all things: wisdom. It gave me a an evalutory framework and a reason to trust my own judgement. It gave me a life long project that made a continuity through many painful and challenging episodes in my life, literally, it gave me a reason for living. While on some days, I may slip into the more cranky of philosophers, I am convinced that the contemplative life is the end of life, ( either as dialectic, or perhaps theosis of sorts...). Employment and education is the means to this. The end of life is to be...wise.
Mark Trumble Ross would put it in terms of a duty to improve oneself in terms of intelligence/knowledge and in terms of virtue. It's not a duty that tends to trump all the rest of them, though. . .
Helped out a lot, thanks! The textbook didn't go into detail about these concepts
Glad it was useful
@@GregoryBSadler I have a question that I thought you might be able to answer. Essentially, Ross believes, unlike Kant, that actions are not always right and always wrong. He believes that we have set prima facie duties which we see as moral; however, the competitive moral urgency of another sudden action could override the morality of our prima facie duties. In certain cases, such as if we agreed to meet a friend but saw someone dying on the road, it would be immoral not to help the person on the side of the road, even though helping the person on the side of the road goes against our prima facie duty of fidelity. Is this correct?
@@carlashworth2904 Sort of. You still have the prima facie duty of fidelity. It hasn't gone away, and you might now have a duty of reparation (though in this case a mere "sorry" and explanation might be sufficient)
You're welcome
new Core Concept video, continuing discussions of Ross
"If you make a promise, you ought to keep it.'' -- Well, not exactly. The whole problem of a prima facie duty is that it is not a duty, or an actual duty, but rather something related to duty, as Ross says. So, in making a promise, you ought to keep it unless there is an overriding duty whereby you would be morally justified in breaking the promise.
Yep. This is where Ross expresses himself in a way that's not particularly helpful, and not entirely consistent either.
One indeed ought to -- in general -- keep promises. Another overriding duty that justifies not keeping it involves another "ought"
Thank you
You're welcome
Do you have any lectures on the strengths and weaknesses of Ross's theory?
What you see is what you get
This seems like an interesting ethical system. It allows pleasure to oneself but is still a Deontology type ethical system.
It is kind of making me change my hedonistic consequence type ethics.
Well at least reconsider it
Also it allows for Virtue by self improvement duty and isn't as rigid as Kant when it comes to some duties. Is there any other thinkers similar to this? Currently reading The Right and the Good.
There's others who develop intuitionist-style ethics, Robert Audi for example
What does Ross mean by “prima facie duties,” and how do these differ from “duty proper”? How does he think we should use our knowledge of prima facie duties to determine what our duty is in a particular situation?
th-cam.com/video/OV_T8Emyf6I/w-d-xo.html
@@GregoryBSadler Thank you :)
I genuinely thought he wasn’t talking to anyone and he was just putting on a show until 2:05
Well, they are more willing to take a stab at things some days more than others. . .
Where do you teach?
part time at Marist College