Morals

George Orwell had written his novel “Animal Farm” in order to warn his readers for numerous reasons. In many parts of the novel, George Orwell clearly portrayed how ignorance was a very big part as to why the animals were so easily controlled. This In theory, lead to the conflicted problems the animals had about equality. In particularly, equality was the key Idea of the relation between the Russian Revolution and Animal Farm. Accordingly, George Orwell had expressed thoroughly how power can almost certainly be corruptive. Most importantly, it showed the definite danger of a naive working class.

One of main ideas one can learn from George Orwell is that the readers can be taught that they should be self-aware and not be ignorant as it presumably can be taken advantage of, frequently. Forthrightly, the animals allowed themselves to be used and treated in this way. In other words, ignorance can be easily fixed and frustratingly enough, they did almost nothing to fix this. Consequently, the animals were easily deceived and manipulated. For example, Boxer, who represented the loyal and working class of the attempt communism In the Soviet Union, had undeniably been taken advantage of.

Because of having the inability or unwillingness to question the authority and puzzling out the Implications of numerous possible actions to avoid the result that had occurred, Boxer preferred to draw a blind eye and repeated the words “Napoleon Is always right” (Chapter V). In addition, the pigs had the upper hand and could therefore control him, and the other animals smoothly without any problem whatsoever. This is also the moral of why George Orwell wrote Animal Farm as a fable. Animal Farm demonstrates how by being naive and ignorant can be used against and in turn suffer to the full extent of eyeing taken advantage on.

The common animals of Animal Farm had fought for equality, but easier said than done, it was proved that the outcome was not what they had in mind. At the beginning of the novel when Old Major (based on both Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin) had given his remarkable speech that had influenced the other animals to start “minimalism,” he had had created many of the Seven Commandments. George Orwell had used this chance to show the role of propaganda and how It could easily manipulate people. Coincidently, Squealer had the position of propaganda and hush George Orwell represents this through Squealer’s manipulation of the seven commandments.

Two of which were very significant throughout the novel. The phrase, “Four legs good, two legs bad” (Chapter Ill) explained the clear line between humans and animals despite the fact that not all animals use four legs. George Orwell had used this commandment to demonstrate how the upper-class abuses language to control the lower-class. It was observed that this certain instruction was in fact effective at first but soon developed into nothing more than a simple opinion s by the end of the novel, the phrase had changed to “Four legs good, two legs better” (Chapter X). Namely, this phrase displayed the overall bias prospective of the animals.

Similarly, another commandment “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others” (Chapter X), demonstrated the obvious unfairness of the pigs and the other animals. This was the consequence of the animal’s Ignorance as they did not take in the thought that the original commandment, “All animals are corruption on Animal Farm. All in all, considering Animal farm as an allegory, the evolve demonstrated that this form of inequality was also evident during the Russian Revolution as a consequence of having Joseph Stalin (Napoleon) and Leon Trotsky (Snowball) as the leaders.

George Orwell had clearly shown that power certainly corrupts throughout the novel. Unquestionably, the pigs were given absolute power and in return wrecked the ultimate plan of minimalism the animals, including Old Major, originally strives. Although, the leadership did have a positive effect at first, having driven the men away and all of the animals were working together for the moon good. The pigs started to exploit and abuse the position of authority they had over the other animals, where a rivalry was formed.

Ironically enough, the pigs continued on and on, and soon enough they were beginning to resemble the behavior of the men the animals had driven away. This suggested that George Orwell did in fact warn the readers that power can without a doubt be corruptive. As George Orwell wrote Animal Farm as a political satire and as a third prospective, the warning was expressed very straightforwardly in contrast to what the actual animals were hinging. Apart from that, the pigs’ manipulation of the other animals symbolized the windmill.

This is because while the animals worked a tremendous amount on the windmill despite the fact for the need of their own food and comfort, the pigs were the only ones who had gained in that entire period. They were the ones that were not participating and earned the money and therefore, their power, in particularly Napoleon, expanded like nothing other. To put it in an allegorical point of view, as Russia was behind in the Industrial Revolution, the huge projects that were undertaken in Soviet Russia was what the windmill represented.

Another example of the amount of power Napoleon had was when he had sold his most loyal companion for alcohol. This was quite a dilemma because before being carted off, Boxer served as the force that held Animal Farm together, and with Boxer’s absence, it represented that Animal Farm was no longer “equal,” and that Napoleon held complete authority. Overall, out of the number of reasons why George Orwell had written Animal Farm, it is believed that the novel can be viewed as a warning for numerous reasons.

Clear as a bell, the novel demonstrated that if one is ignorant it can undeniably be taken advantage of and be used against. It was also demonstrated that the idea of equality is most definitely harder to achieve than it is to dream of and that it was certainly unsuccessful throughout Animal Farm as the leaders were not clear-minded from the result of power. This is because George Orwell effectively proved that a great deal of power can truly be dreadfully corruptive. In conclusion, George Orwell wrote Animal Farm as a warning. Bibliography: Sparseness. Com – Animal Farm

Defining a Moral Character The journey through life is broad, but early on, people learn values and morals. Often times, these characteristics are influenced by daily experience and contact with others. Although developing morals and values may be difficult at times, adequate time and experience brings gratification. As it was for Huck Finn, the adventure through independence and experience brought knowledge of values including, responsibility, accountability, compassion, and gratefulness which ultimately helped Huck define his moral character.

In most situations, Huck was able to make decisions based on his perception of right and wrong, and learns life lessons in doing so. No matter what trial or tribulation he encountered, Huck was grateful he was not subject to Papp’s abuse. When he was caught trying to be a girl by Judith Loftus, he learned compassion when she still accepted him in her home.

Huck didn’t want to feel accountable for the death of the murders on the abandoned ship, so he did what he felt was necessary, and took on the responsibility of trying to see they were rescued. Stating, “…wishing I knowed who shot the man and what they done it for,” Huck sought and found meaning in most circumstances and understands every choice has its consequence (133). Whether or not to turn Jim in was something Huck toggled with constantly throughout his adventure.

He knew that Jim belonged to the widow Douglas who had done so much for him, but Huck still felt compassion for Jim, who he had developed a deep friendship with on account of their experiences together. Because of his bond with Jim, Huck did not want to feel guilty if something bad were to happen to his friend, but at the same time, he did not want to be held accountable for helping a runaway slave.

Altogether, the lessons Huck learned on his adventure were a contributor to the definition of his moral character. In the end, Huck acted on what he felt was right according to his set of developed morals and values, regardless of whether it was accepted by society or not. He later affirms his decision by stating “All right then, I’ll go to hell” as he ripped up the letter to Ms. Watson (239). Huck’s influence and experience led him to be a loyal friend, and a virtuous individual.

This analysis makes no pretences of keeping with the psychological and moral convictions that Heidegger ignored. His structural analysis is simply not complete enough to represent Dasein”s phenomenological orientation in the world without considering some aspects which are inherent to each Dasein such as a psychological history and a moral destination. Although speculation as to the reasons behind his choice to ignore such overwhelming attributes is forever possible, leaving out psychology and morality leaves Dasein with no soul. Dasein then is nothing more than a component of the world through other Dasein.

One can only Be when one”s Being is disclosed by Others until the they is escaped in Death. Heidegger doesn”t enjoy the negative connotation of the word escape in the context of relationships with Others, but this seems to be more important as a question of true existence, true realization of the authentic Self. I argue that the soul, the spirit, the essence of Dasein must be explained as well as the phenomena of existence in order to clarify the question “What does it mean to be (Dasein)? ” Through the soul, Dasein may bridge the gaps of loneliness that occur in the solitude of single existence amongst Others.

Psychology and morality provide excellent headquarters from which to launch this campaign in search of the soul of Dasein… How can one”s soul exhibit both concernful solicitude and care while experiencing existential loneliness in the face of Death? When looking at the temporality of Dasein”s existence, psychology corresponds to Heidegger”s concept of already-being as does morality to being-ahead-of-itself, in relation to the prospect of having a soul. Psychology and morality play such large roles in the creation of both the they-self and the authentic self that some definitions are in order.

Psychology explains the relationships between phenomena and both voluntary and involuntary behavior patterns. Behavior is the reaction of the subconscious with the conscious before decisions are made and actions taken. The sum of the behavioral limitations of these reactions, symbolically speaking, equals the finite potential of possibilities after already-being-in-the-world. Thus behavior displays an abundant importance when considering Dasein”s interpretation of events on an authentic as well as an inauthentic level.

It seems that Heidegger shies away from psychology because behavior can vary so much from one person to another and creates problems for his strictly structural analysis of being. Morality is also of great concern in a personal view of Heidegger”s Being and Time due to the touchy nature of his use of such terms as conscience and guilt to describe qualities that are present in all Dasein. Even though he attempts to use these words (guilt and conscience) without bringing extra baggage along with them, one cannot resist considering the implications that vernacular semantics suggest about the nature of Dasein.

Heidegger explains: “… he concept of moral guilt has been so little clarified ontologically… interpretations of this phenomenon could become prevalent and have remained so” (Blackwell, p. 328). If this is the case, moral guilt should hold a place in the discussion because it is so prevalent. He also uses his own fresher definition of guilt to explain his idea that guilt is merely the lack of something that should and could be. If guilt is the main impetus for authentic Being, then wouldn”t morality be immediately involved in the discussion as a source of guilt, or as the next step above the middle management provided by conscience?

For how else could one describe what should be other than in terms of a personal view of integrity towards living towards Others-otherwise stated as morality? Dasein defines what should be by looking forward to the possibility of being self-governed by an individual sense of what is correct behavior in the world into which one has been thrown. For Heidegger, the conscience alerts Dasein not only to failing to realize an authentic Being for one”s Self, but also provides a constant source of guilt that becomes manifested in anticipation towards Death.

He says of Being-towards-Death: … nticipation reveals to Dasein its lostness in the they-self, and brings it face to face with the possibility of being itself, primarily unsupported by concernful solicitude, but of being itself, rather, in an impassioned freedom towards death-a freedom which has been released from the Illusions of the “they”, and which is factical, certain of itself, and anxious (Blackwell, p. 311). This passage summarizes Heidegger”s position of leaving the Others behind to pursue one”s own Death in whatever manner might suit one”s individual conceptualization of the inexplicable phenomenon of Death.

He calls this anticipatory resoluteness-a projection of possibilities for Dasein onto itself. His reference to concernful solicitude implies that some part of the they-self assumes responsibility for the well-being of Others with respect to their own personal care towards the world. Heidegger explains this as part of the idle talk respective to inauthenticity, but the sympathy one feels obliged to show another exceeds simple social convention and finds a home in the desire to assume some part of the loneliness shared by all Dasein.

In this way, we establish the connection of authentic existence with morality. Guilt in the face of inauthentic being is a key factor in Heidegger”s connection of anticipatory resoluteness towards Death. But, each Dasein has some sort of moral disposition which is a sort of goal for how one might define one”s-Self. Since this moral consideration is present, it is inescapable when examining the way Dasein arrives at its resolute decision of which possibilities will be executed. Thus morality corresponds to Heidegger”s Being-ahead-of-itself.

Not only does Dasein care about the guilt it experiences in the face of inauthentic Being, but it wishes to alleviate the same suffering in those it perceives to be troubled. Looking ahead, Dasein knows there will be sorrowful phenomena coming towards it and so feels the sting of the misfortunes of an Other as well. This sentimental sharing can be directed towards joy in that joy is a benefit to all Dasein when accepted, just as sorrow is a detriment to all Dasein when the burden is shouldered amongst their many lonely souls.

Psychology and morality depend mostly upon the ontical interpretation of events involving other Dasein-the Others. In the anonymous placement of Dasein amongst Others, Dasein falls into the inauthentic mode of being described by Heidegger as the they-self. The they-self is crucial to an understanding of how Dasein can transcend the ignorant (but not necessarily diminished) existing of average everyday life to find a seemingly more perplexing state called authentic existence.

Dasein”s they-self is primarily concerned with the events and requirements demanded of it through living in what is conceived as the present time with other people. This they-self is prevalent to all modes of Being which Dasein might exhibit in that one can never escape a certain degree of anonymity in one”s relations with others. The they-self revels in its proximity to the Others with which it may identify itself; however, the they-self also strives to keep a reasonable distance from the Others to avoid becoming lost as an individual entity.

The phenomenon of distancing one”s they-self from Others may happen consciously or unconsciously to Dasein. In the distancing and proximalizing of Dasein to Others and the collective they, Dasein psychologically constructs a social script that reads all of the lines that are “proper. ” The social script is simply a dialogue between Others and/or Dasein that corresponds to the different situations (this could also refer to the authentic Situation which Heidegger describes on pages 346-347) in which Dasein finds itself.

These social scripts are provided by the relationships to Others and are derived from idle talk and personal meditation on the questions which conscience brings to Dasein”s attention. Although critical observation is not necessary for proper psychological synthesis of social scripts, the implications of devouring past events and reinterpreting them for future reference is the fulcrum of the interrelatedness of psychology, morality, and temporality as these factors can be named as the shining stars from which the soul of Dasein will descend.

It is important to remember that no standard of morality may be set but rather all Dasein has an individual interpretation of it. One may follow traditional Judeo-Christian morality concerning the theological disdain held for physical pleasure and the propagation of guilt through admonitions of original sin. One may decide that the texts” readings are presented for personal interpretation. One may not have any real moral convictions whatever except for an amoral avoidance of pain and pursuit for pleasure.

In short, each Dasein must synthesize its own moral, amoral, or immoral disposition through the practice of making decisions based upon an individual character code of morality which is created from observation or experience of social interaction from the beginning of life. So, how does Heidegger leave the soul out of his analysis? Where is the connection? Morality, being a facet of existence concerned with the “I live my life in this way because it is right for me” is analogous to Heidegger”s “for-the-sake-of-which” that he uses to describe the structure of the world.

He says, “The “for-the-sake-of” always pertains to the being of Dasein, for which, in its being, that very being is an issue” (Blackwell, p. 116-117). Hubert Dreyfus” Being-in-the-World (commentary on Being and Time) says: Heidegger uses the term ‘for-the-sake-of-which” to call attention to the way human activity makes long-term sense, thus avoiding any intimation of a final goal. A for-the-sake-of-which, like being a father or being a professor, is not to be thought of as a goal I have in mind and can achieve. Indeed, it is not a goal at all, but rather a self-interpretation that informs and orders all my activities (Dreyfus, p. 5).

Why does Dasein feel a need to order its activities? What has the influence over Dasein to create this striving towards a higher existence? Although biologically dubious and philosophically unproven, the soul is the only possible answer. The spirit which moves Dasein, the essence that drives Dasein to seek something better, something higher is an inexplicable yet necessary part of the ontological structure of Dasein. Heidegger explains this phenomenon as Being-towards-Death. Authentic Being-towards-Death signifies Dasein realizing the temporality of its existence and looking-ahead with anticipatory resoluteness.

Anticipatory resoluteness is the act of projecting one”s ownmost potentiality for Being against the anxiety of nothingness which Death inspires. Explicitly, this is a realization of moving towards Death as a phenomenon central to existence itself. Authentic Dasein anticipates Death with a resoluteness derived from guilt. Anticipation correlates to authenticity in that it “brings Dasein face to face with a possibility [Being] which is constantly certain but which at any moment remains indefinite as to when that possibility will become an impossibility [Death]” (Blackwell, p. 56).

Inauthentic Being-towards-Death is denoted by Dasein exhibiting its typical average everyday falleness where the they-self sees Death as an impending event that will happen “someday in the future” without allowing the knowledge of this event to affect any of the “possibilities of Being” with which Dasein might be presented. If there is an effect on the possibilities of Being in respect to Death, it is very limited and not fully comprehending of the actual nature of Death.

In the inauthentic Being-Towards-Death the they-self never “dies” in the “existential” conception of Dasein because it is constantly too involved in the world around it to be concerned about its coming possibility-of-not-being-with-Others. Thus, one of the main reasons understanding Death is central to the authentic Being-one”s-Self boils down to understanding exactly how one”s-Self is related to Others. Experiencing Death from a second person point-of-view is psychologically riveting-traumatic, alienating, increasing existential awareness &c.

The looking ahead of Dasein to Death produces an anxiety towards nothingness-nullity-a lack of care that is inherent in not-Being-with-Others. Heidegger says, “Care itself, in its very essence, is permeated with nullity through and through” (Blackwell, p. 331). Lacking care yields guilt in the form of not being able to grasp the meaning of not-Being-with-Others. To make up for this guilt, Dasein moralizes its existence with respect to how life should be lived versus all other possibilities of how it could be lived.

Morality must then describe the relation of Being-one”s-Self through Others in relation to former psychological phenomena such as attending a funeral. Care, however, cannot be pure nullity as this undermines the entire structure of care in a nihilistic fashion. Heidegger is proposing that care is nothingness, thus eliminating its necessity and making it merely an arbitrary condition of Dasein. In contrast to this perspective, morality is not only looking ahead, but also compensation for the thrown loneliness of existence. Since no one can share in the phenomenon of Death, no one ever has a partner, friend, lover, or mate forever.

This inspires a moral sympathy that caters to social utility and also individual welfare. Others” Being-towards-Death can be contemplated by Dasein but never experienced. This links all Dasein by way of providing a moralized and honest care towards each other and is explained by the inexplicable concept of a unitary Soul composed of the psychologically crafted and morally directed souls of all Dasein who are locked in their thrown loneliness. This of course raises still more questions that must be answered before Dasein is fully elucidated.

Drew Lewis 11/13/11 Philosophy Determinism and its Moral Implications Q: There are powerful arguments that there is no such thing as free will. But people in ordinary life tend to presuppose there is free will when they talk about people deserving good or bad treatment, rewards and punishments. Some kinds of rewards and punishments encourage good behavior and discourage bad behavior, so those make sense even if there is no free will.

But what about punishments for crimes that are impossible to deter (like crimes of passion) or rewarding talents people can’t choose to have (like Olympic medals or Nobel prizes for science)? Do these practices still make sense if there is no free will? If not, how would it make sense to change our institutions? Our entire mental state is a product of the chemical and physical properties of our neurons at any given time, and changes are produced directly by communications within the central nervous system and between the peripheral and central nervous system.

To be astonished at this fact is to underestimate the design complexity and sheer number of neurons present in the body. To assert there is a magical force called free will is unfounded and illogical. Your mind is governed by the same laws which govern all other matter of which you have no control. Free will, however, remains a popular belief mainly because of its connections to religion and the perception of introspection. When we introspect it is easy to convince ourselves that there is something spiritual inside; our mind is spontaneous, indecisive, creative, and often irrational.

These qualities are, for the most part, absent in robotics, which supports a widely held belief that they can’t be synthesized. Determinism simply says that the mind can be predicted like a chemical reaction can be predicted; there is nothing special about our minds which hold them above physical laws. The mind is a complicated construct, and its vast number of interactions with the environment makes it impossible to predict. The simplest computer able to accurately model exactly what will occur in the human mind would be as complex as the universe itself.

Because one does not have control over the functions inside one’s own brain, and because the functions in the brain determine thought process, no one has control of their thoughts. Determinism raises a number of interesting moral questions. Determinism is an unpopular theory mostly because its conclusion is misunderstood. Determinists can agree on a type of free will, which is simply defined on an individual acting or thinking in a healthy mental state and without influence. Given this situation an individual can be said to be thinking independently.

The individual, according to determinists, has no control over his thought process, but he is, by popular definition, using his free will and judgment. Even if it is intangible, the concept is none the less incredibly important. The complete rejection of free will would have devastating consequences. Without free will humans lose responsibility, and without responsibility humans lose justice, which is the purest and most righteous human construct. The theory of determinism uses logic not based on speculation, and as theories come, it is one of the most foolproof.

The important question to me is how to go about recognizing the truth of determinism without allowing it to affect life negatively. No one can say for sure whether complete recognition of determinism would be a good or bad, but I believe there is an overwhelming argument that the rejection of the concept of free will would have disastrous consequences. It brings up the interesting question if it is better to know the truth about something if it has negative consequences. Though I believe strongly in determinism, I treat my actions like I have control of them.

This attitude is important for my well-being for numerous reasons. If one does not have control one’s thoughts or actions, are rewards and punishments necessary or even beneficial? The answer is yes. A healthy mind needs rewards and punishments in every situation in order to grow and improve. Reinforcements increase the likelihood of an action and punishments tend to decrease the likelihood of an action. Taking away these vital signals in the brain would cause disaster for the psyche. As a child you are constantly being conditioned.

It’s the reason you have the gut reaction to think for a second before making a large purchase. It’s also the reason you work hard in school or at a job. Every time you were praised for a good grade or punished for a bad one, it ingrained in your mind what is ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ which in turn influences your motivation and attitude. The more reinforcement you receive the better conditioned you are to cope with your environment. We don’t, however, learn simply from reinforcements. A lot of trial and error is saved because we can observe others and learn from them.

Everyone tries to emulate those who they see being rewarded the most through a conscious or unconscious attraction to their reinforcement. These people are known to us as heroes. Inversely we also tend to try not to be like villains – those who fail to gain rewards or are excessively punished. This is why it is so important for us to reward athletes and scholars, even though they did not exhibit free will. As children, most people aspire to be firefighters, soldiers, astronauts, or police officers.

More than other professions, these are people who are presented to kids as heroes. The sole purpose of rewarding heroes might have the trivial goal of rewarding their good deeds, however it also has the noble effect of inspiring others to emulate them. By taking away the benefit of prestige, excellence fails to stand out from mediocrity. In psychology there is a subject called attribution. It is the study of what people attribute their experiences to. Some people blame themselves for things, and therefore are called internal attributers (as opposed to external attributers).

If a person believes that their experiences can be manipulated they are called dynamic attributers (as opposed to static attributers). In order to truly believe that your experience is a result of your actions and that you can also change those actions, you must also believe in a form of free will. Without free will you could not change your actions, nor can you be held accountable for them. Psychology has shown that people who attribute their experiences internally and dynamically are less likely to suffer from depression than all other attribution types.

In addition to depression many other types of psychological disorders such as mania are thought to be caused by static and external attribution. Free will is a defining theme in the punishment/reform debate dealing with prisons. If free will isn’t real the American prison system should operate solely for the purpose of reform and the isolation of those determined to be a danger to society. Without free will, punishment is trivial except for its uses as a reformation tool and as a deterrent to those thinking of committing a crime. In the case of life in prison or the death sentence there is no possibility for rehabilitation.

If a prisoner couldn’t be rehabilitated using a reasonable amount of resources, a determinist may accept the benefits of a life sentence or death penalty. Life sentences and death sentences are considered positive because they keep people who are dangerous isolated from those they could harm, while simultaneously serving as a warning to others to prevent them from committing acts which could prove them dangerous. It is hard, when comparing the life sentence with the death penalty, which is worse. Whichever causes the least harm to the individual in question would be the best option.

I personally believe it is more humane to end a human’s life painlessly (and as soon after conviction as possible) than to keep them locked in a cell until they die slowly of disease. It is likely that our ancestors were predisposed to the idea of free will and were favored because of it. The concept of free will gives you more motivation to hand down reinforcement, whether it is positive or negative, to those around you. It also helps you accept reinforcement from others. The concept of free will is a powerful force that keeps societies working correctly. Our entire legal and social system is based on the concept of free will.

Everything in society is interlocking, so if we try to change society to fit the new idea that free will is irrelevant we will find inconsistencies and injustice until a solution is found in a stable society not based on the recognition of free will. Societal upheaval would be ridiculous because it wouldn’t accomplish anything. Judgment using free will is second nature to us as humans. When asked about Hitler, a Holocaust survivor, even a determinist one, wouldn’t say, ‘He did terrible things but it wasn’t his fault because he has no control over what happens in his rain. ’ Determinist ideals can only go so far before they become eclipsed by human emotion; therefore it would be ill advised to try to change society to fit the new theory. As you can see, the theory of determinism has many interesting theoretical implications, but very little actual applications. Its theoretical implications could be the most important, however. Combined with nihilism and agnosticism, it forms a rounded view of the universe which is grounded in science and reason without confusion from religion or human emotion.

I believe that if philosophers can pursue this track of thought, devoid of spirituality and belief, philosophers can finally make progress in finding real answers. Determinism is still widely misunderstood. I was surprised how many of my classmates did not understand even the basic principles after spending time learning about it. The challenge philosophy faces is to present determinism, and other theories like it in a way which people can relate without losing the true meaning.

Of his early childhood, Obama recalled, “That my father looked nothing like the people around me—that he was black as pitch, my mother white as milk—barely registered in my mind. ” He described his struggles as a young adult to reconcile social perceptions of his multiracial heritage.  Reflecting later on his formative years in Honolulu, Obama wrote: “The opportunity that Hawaii offered—to experience a variety of cultures in a climate of mutual respect—became an integral part of my world view, and a basis for the values that I hold most dear.  Obama has also written and talked about using alcohol, marijuana and cocaine during his teenage years to “push questions of who I was out of my mind”.  At the 2008 Civil Forum on the Presidency, Obama identified his high-school drug use as his “greatest moral failure. ” Following high school, Obama moved to Los Angeles in 1979 to attend Occidental College.  After two years he transferred in 1981 to Columbia University in New York City, where he majored in political science with a specialization in international relations and graduated with a B.

A. in 1983. He worked for a year at the Business International Corporation, then at the New York Public Interest Research Group. Chicago community organizer and Harvard Law School After four years in New York City, Obama moved to Chicago, where he was hired as director of the Developing Communities Project (DCP), a church-based community organization originally comprising eight Catholic parishes in Greater Roseland (Roseland, West Pullman and Riverdale) on Chicago’s far South Side. He worked there as a community organizer from June 1985 to May 1988. During his three years as the DCP’s director, its staff grew from one to thirteen and its annual budget grew from $70,000 to $400,000. He helped set up a job training program, a college preparatory tutoring program, and a tenants’ rights organization in Altgeld Gardens.  Obama also worked as a consultant and instructor for the Gamaliel Foundation, a community organizing institute. In mid-1988, he traveled for the first time in Europe for three weeks and then for five weeks in Kenya, where he met many of his paternal relatives for the first time. 34] He returned in August 2006 in a visit to his father’s birthplace, a village near Kisumu in rural western Kenya.

In late 1988, Obama entered Harvard Law School. He was selected as an editor of the Harvard Law Review at the end of his first year, and president of the journal in his second year.  During his summers, he returned to Chicago, where he worked as a summer associate at the law firms of Sidley Austin in 1989 and Hopkins & Sutter in 1990.  After graduating with a Juris Doctor (J. D. magna cum laude[39] from Harvard in 1991, he returned to Chicago.  Obama’s election as the first black president of the Harvard Law Review gained national media attention and led to a publishing contract and advance for a book about race relations, which evolved into a personal memoir. The manuscript was published in mid-1995 as Dreams from My Father.

University of Chicago Law School and civil rights attorney In 1991, Obama accepted a two-year position as Visiting Law and Government Fellow at the University of Chicago Law School to work on his first book. He then served as a professor at the University of Chicago Law School for twelve years; as a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996, and as a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004 teaching constitutional law. From April to October 1992, Obama directed Illinois’s Project Vote, a voter registration drive with ten staffers and seven hundred volunteer registrars; it achieved its goal of registering 150,000 of 400,000 unregistered African Americans in the state, and led to Crain’s Chicago Business naming Obama to its 1993 list of “40 under Forty” powers to be. In 1993 he joined Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland, a 13-attorney law firm specializing in civil rights litigation and neighborhood economic development, where he was an associate for three years from 1993 to 1996, then of counsel from 1996 to 2004, with his law license becoming inactive in 2002.

From 1994 to 2002, Obama served on the boards of directors of the Woods Fund of Chicago, which in 1985 had been the first foundation to fund the Developing Communities Project, and of the Joyce Foundation. He served on the board of directors of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge from 1995 to 2002, as founding president and chairman of the board of directors from 1995 to 1999. Political career: 1996–2008 State Senator: 1997–2004 Main article: Illinois Senate career of Barack Obama Obama was elected to the Illinois Senate in 1996, succeeding State Senator Alice Palmer as Senator from Illinois’s 13th District, which at that time pned Chicago South Side neighborhoods from Hyde Park – Kenwood south to South Shore and west to Chicago Lawn.  Once elected, Obama gained bipartisan support for legislation reforming ethics and health care laws. He sponsored a law increasing tax credits for low-income workers, negotiated welfare reform, and promoted increased subsidies for childcare.  In 2001, as co-chairman of the bipartisan Joint Committee on Administrative Rules, Obama supported Republican Governor Ryan’s payday loan regulations and predatory mortgage lending regulations aimed at averting home foreclosures.  Obama was reelected to the Illinois Senate in 1998, defeating Republican Yesse Yehudah in the general election, and was reelected again in 2002. In 2000, he lost a Democratic primary run for the U. S. House of Representatives to four-term incumbent Bobby Rush by a margin of two to one.

In January 2003, Obama became chairman of the Illinois Senate’s Health and Human Services Committee when Democrats, after a decade in the minority, regained a majority. He sponsored and led unanimous, bipartisan passage of legislation to monitor racial profiling by requiring police to record the race of drivers they detained, and legislation making Illinois the first state to mandate videotaping of homicide interrogations. During his 2004 general election campaign for U.S. Senate, police representatives credited Obama for his active engagement with police organizations in enacting death penalty reforms. Obama resigned from the Illinois Senate in November 2004 following his election to the U. S. Senate. 2004 U. S. Senate campaign See also: United States Senate election in Illinois, 2004 In May 2002, Obama commissioned a poll to assess his prospects in a 2004 U. S. Senate race; he created a campaign committee, began raising funds and lined up political media consultant David Axelrod by August 2002, and formally announced his candidacy in January 2003.  Decisions by Republican incumbent Peter Fitzgerald and his Democratic predecessor Carol Moseley Braun not to contest the race launched wide-open Democratic and Republican primary contests involving fifteen candidates. In the March 2004 primary election, Obama won in an unexpected landslide—which overnight made him a rising star within the national Democratic Party, started speculation about a presidential future, and led to the reissue of his memoir, Dreams from My Father. In July 2004, Obama delivered the keynote address at the 2004 Democratic National Convention in Boston, Massachusetts, and it was seen by 9. million viewers. His speech was well received and elevated his status within the Democratic Party. Obama’s expected opponent in the general election, Republican primary winner Jack Ryan, withdrew from the race in June 2004. Six weeks later, Alan Keyes accepted the Illinois Republican Party’s nomination to replace Ryan. In the November 2004 general election, Obama won with 70% of the vote. U. S. Senator: 2005–2008 Main article: United States Senate career of Barack Obama

Obama was sworn in as a senator on January 4, 2005, at which time he became the only Senate member of the Congressional Black Caucus. CQ Weekly characterized him as a “loyal Democrat” based on analysis of all Senate votes in 2005–2007. The National Journal ranked him among the “most liberal” senators during 2005 through 2007. He enjoyed high popularity as senator with a 72% approval in Illinois. Obama announced on November 13, 2008 that he would resign his Senate seat on November 16, 2008, before the start of the lame-duck session, to focus on his transition period for the presidency.

Cultural considerations in moral and ethical reasoning The sound development of moral reasoning and ethics is an integral part of the growth and maturation of a healthy and productive human being. Without morals and ethics, a person cannot exist within society’s boundaries and would be doomed to be forever barred from its hallowed walls for as long as that person did not conform to the societal norms of having the ability to morally reason and implement a set of ethics. But morals and ethics, as necessary as they are, are relative and not absolute (Brink, 1989).

This means that what a particular society constitutes as moral behavior is actually very much like beauty and in the eye of the beholder. The society in which an individual grows up in and is a member of dictates the type of societal rules that must be accepted as part of the price of membership. However, it does not take into account the various cultural differences that must affect which ethics and morals are adhered to in a particular place. Ethics are generally defined as the principles of morally acceptable conduct of individuals, and a person’s belief about right and wrong behaviors (Cosmides & Tooby, 2004).

It is evident however, that the difference in cultures around the world make it quite clear that moral reasoning and ethics are directly influenced by the cultures in which they are developed (Boyd & Richerson, 2005). Behavior that is unacceptable in the U. S. is perfectly acceptable elsewhere in the world. For example, polygamy is accepted in most African societies, and even encouraged, but in the U. S. it is not only considered morally reprehensible, but also criminal. Homosexuality is accepted and even celebrated in the U. S. et woe betides the person trying to engage in this behavior in the Middle East, where it is considered a moral abomination (Haidt & Hersh, 2001). It is clear that there is no universal standard for moral reasoning not with culture, religion, and even environment playing roles in how it will occur (Wright, 1994).

Therefore, it is of utmost importance to teach developing humans how to evaluate critically their own views on morality and that of others in order to preserve a balance in their world view no matter where they are. They must be taught an openness that allows for them to discuss omfortably moral matters with many types of people in order to gain a clearer picture of the world. By honing reasoning skills one can better evaluate ethical and moral statements or judgments (Gigerenzer & Goldstein, 1996) and this will help to describe the negatives and the positives of a situation and ultimately take us a step closer to understanding our world and the various subsets of which it is made up of.

References Boyd R. , & Richerson, P. J. (2005). The origin and evolution of cultures. New York: Oxford University Press. Brink, D. (1989). Moral realism and the foundations of ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cosmides, L. , & Tooby, J. (2000). Knowing thyself: The evolutionary psychology of moral reasoning and moral sentiments. Unpublished manuscript. Gigerenzer, G. (2004). Fast and frugal heuristics: The tools of bounded rationality. In D. Koehler & N. Harvey (Eds), Handbook of judgment and decision making (pp. 62-68). Oxford: Blackwell. Haidt, J. , &Joseph, C. (2004). Sexual morality: The cultures and reasons of liberals and conservatives. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31 191-221. Wright, R. (1994). The moral animal: Why we are the way we are. New York: Pantheon.

Unless you have managed to avoid all public places for the past few weeks, you have more than likely experienced the worldwide phenomena that is , either as a player or as an unfortunate bystander who has been bumped on the sidewalk by one.

While the game itself is entertaining and provides a number of , Pokémon Go has been, for me anyway, a gateway of understanding into the growing subculture of technology developers and hackers.

Recently, a group of former Dropbox developers reached out to tell me about , an “advanced Pokémon Go bot (simple computer programs used to perform highly repetitive operations) that lets you in one click.”

Angela Li, one of the app co-founders, explained further that, without ever leaving the comfort of your couch, your Pokémon Go account, or “,” could now instantly be transported digitally to anywhere — New York, London, Tokyo — in search of Pokémon.

Related:

It turns out that and has even been made . Since the game’s launch, a host of applications have been built with the specific goal of hacking the (the developed of Pokémon Go) application. The most popular of these apps, many of which are , were , .

InstaPokéGo, however, was the first app that allowed users to bypass the geo-locating feature of Pokémon Go to capture Pokémon and collect items without actually physically being where they were located.

Clearly, this is cheating — at least on the surface. It is, in fact, where I have discovered a significant moral dilemma.

After creating my own Pokémon Go trainer to test the bot myself (for investigative interests only, of course), I was quite easily able to raise my trainer to level eight in just two days. To put this in perspective, my 10 year-old son, spent weeks in the hot summer sun — riding, walking and sweating —  to achieve a level 18.

Needless to say, he was ecstatic to hear about the shortcut, especially when he realized that my trainer had found and captured a very rare Pokémon, , which is only available in certain regions.

And while I should have used this experience as a valuable teaching lesson, explaining to my young and impressionable son that these kinds of activities are outright cheating and should be avoided, I could not help but also be excited for the idea that such a “hack” was even possible.

Related:

Personally, the idea of “hacking,” not just in technology but in life, is a valuable life skill, and one that I try to instill with my kids. We should all aspire to some level of , as it can provide us with the freedom and time to enjoy things we love. Hacking the Pokémon Go app demonstrates the power of this mindset.

So the bigger question to ask is whether bots are creating a cheating culture? The answer is complicated, so I went to the source.

I spoke with Steve Bartel, ex-Dropbox employee and co-founder of InstaPokéGo. Bartel explained that the application was developed by a team of ex-Dropbox developers during a Dropbox hackathon. The group of 20-something developers, who are working on a number of different technology projects post-Dropbox, simply wanted to create an app that bettered the user experience and provided a value to players.

According to Bartel, hacking and developing a bot for the world’s most popular game seemed like a natural choice.

More important, bots are a that are already starting to filter into our lives. Bartel’s fellow co-founder, Chris Varenhorst, went on to say, “As bots get smarter, they have the potential to change the way we interact with technology. Bots are already being deployed to automate simple customer service tasks. People and investors around the worlds are excited about the potential of chat bots.”

Fellow co-founder Dima Ryazanov also points out, “For the first time ever, bots are starting to be able to understand simple requests, leading to a whole new way of interacting with technology. For example, bots have the ability to book travel, shop, and schedule meetings for you. The list goes on and on.”

When I asked Bartel if he thought InstaPokéGo was cheating, he laughed — though not in a maniacal, cyber-villain movie-character way one might expect. He emphasized that his group of developer friends and he meant no harm in their project. They never charged for the service, and while they accepted donations, moneys were used to improve server capacity. There was no profit motive. The team have in fact taken careful measures to warn individuals that using the bots could get them banned from the game.

Related:

And, as it became apparent that Niantic was and , the team simply shut down the website. Of course, not before InstaPokéGo players from 174 countries ran over 350,000 bots, capturing 3.3 million Pokémon and collecting 32 million items from Pokéstops. Overall trainers gained 1.9 billion experience points — the equivalent of 10.6 years of game time.

All in one week of being online.

So while some (ok, most) would consider this cheating, I think the lesson we all need to learn is that hacking is just becoming part of our vernacular and our lives, and we can choose to combat it or embrace it. Fortunately for us, there is probably a bot that can help is with that decision too.