The Decaying Evolution of Education...

[HudsonHawk]

i dont know... i wouldnt call it a straw man... you state a negation for a given premise, yet offer no alternative... leaving only the current state... or was there another component i missed?

I wasn't disagreeing with your premise that philosophers and ethicists could or should have a role in medical ethics or the legal system or what have you, only your assertion that they could absolutely do so without bias. Your counter about the status quo is arguing a point I have not advanced. That's the definition of a straw man.

At any rate, I don't think you missed any component, I think you read more into my comment than was intended.

 

[philosophygirl78]

I wasn't disagreeing with your premise that philosophers and ethicists could or should have a role in medical ethics or the legal system or what have you, only your assertion that they could absolutely do so without bias. Your counter about the status quo is arguing a point I have not advanced. That's the definition of a straw man.

At any rate, I don't think you missed any component, I think you read more into my comment than was intended.

 

[Lean'n'mean]

. or was there another component i missed?

Yes, your own bias in favor of philosphers & scholars.

 

[philosophygirl78]

Yes, your own bias in favor of philosphers & scholars.

 

[Bolero]

Comprehension and Tolerance and in that order,Required for Survival...

Achievement and Recognizing same is the Highest Order of The Meaning of Life....

 

[GHT]

Better stick to the hexes in future.

 

[philosophygirl78]

Comprehension and Tolerance and in that order,Required for Survival...

Achievement and Recognizing same is the Highest Order of The Meaning of Life....

That's deep @Bolero ... But what does it all mean???

 

[philosophygirl78]

Better stick to the hexes in future.

Oh,,, I got some hexes allright...

 

[philosophygirl78]

So... lots of opinions... lots of critique... which is all great!!!
But, no alternatives? hmmm....
Perhaps everything is ok the way it is?

 

[Fading Fast]

So... lots of opinions... lots of critique... which is all great!!!
But, no alternatives? hmmm....
Perhaps everything is ok the way it is?

Not having an alternative solution does not negate criticism of the apolitical philosopher / ethicist as final adjudicator. I, as I believe HH said above, think that bringing in people trained in ethics to be a voice at the table or help direct company and government decisions (plenty of ethnically blind ones being made by government officials, not just corporations) would be a positive.

I've seen it work where companies bring in outside experts in risk or legal matters who positively impact the discussion and decisions. I've also seen it impactful when senior management preaches and then acts in a moral way - it can change an entire company's behavior. I, perhaps more than others, do not believe the construct of our system of government or business is broken, but our cultural values need work.

If people want to be free to elect politicians - and not have dictators - and engage in commerce freely - and not be assigned a role by government - then some form of democracy, where ethnical issues are fought out politically, is the solution. What I think would help dramatically is for our cultural - what is accepted as common knowledge, as unspoken rules, as guideposts for behavior - to be improved. Was it better in the past - sometimes and sometimes not. There was a time a politician known to have cheated on his spouse or taxes would not be legally barred from running, but it would have been unacceptable to the public - clearly, today that is not the case. Even if we fall short of our highest standards, it helps if we set them high. What we have now is a low bar and, then, behavior that is lower.

I have no idea how a society resets its cultural standards, I've watched them being lowered over the years, but I don't know how we get them back up. What I doubt is that there is a magic bullet, but I think it will take a lot of hard work, small battles won, one at a time, in grinding fashion. Not everything has gone backwards. Maybe we are not where we want to be, but civil rights today are better than before the 1960s. Unfortunately, some values and standards are worse. We need, as a society, to figure out how to improve our standards like we have with civil rights and not let them slip like we have with acceptable behavior for public officials. I think that and not the construct of our institutions is the problem - and I freely admit that I don't know how to fix it.

 

[philosophygirl78]

Not having an alternative solution does not negate criticism of the apolitical philosopher / ethicist as final adjudicator. I, as I believe HH said above, think that bringing in people trained in ethics to be a voice at the table or help direct company and government decisions (plenty of ethnically blind ones being made by government officials, not just corporations) would be a positive.

I've seen it work where companies bring in outside experts in risk or legal matters who positively impact the discussion and decisions. I've also seen it impactful when senior management preaches and then acts in a moral way - it can change an entire company's behavior. I, perhaps more than others, do not believe the construct of our system of government or business is broken, but our cultural values need work.

If people want to be free to elect politicians - and not have dictators - and engage in commerce freely - and not be assigned a role by government - then some form of democracy, where ethnical issues are fought out politically, is the solution. What I think would help dramatically is for our cultural - what is accepted as common knowledge, as unspoken rules, as guideposts for behavior - to be improved. Was it better in the past - sometimes and sometimes not. There was a time a politician known to have cheated on his spouse or taxes would not be legally barred from running, but it would have been unacceptable to the public - clearly, today that is not the case. Even if we fall short of our highest standards, it helps if we set them high. What we have now is a low bar and, then, behavior that is lower.

I have no idea how a society resets its cultural standards, I've watched them being lowered over the years, but I don't know how we get them back up. What I doubt is that there is a magic bullet, but I think it will take a lot of hard work, small battles won, one at a time, in grinding fashion. Not everything has gone backwards. Maybe we are not where we want to be, but civil rights today are better than before the 1960s. Unfortunately, some values and standards are worse. We need, as a society, to figure out how to improve our standards like we have with civil rights and not let them slip like we have with acceptable behavior for public officials. I think that and not the construct of our institutions is the problem - and I freely admit that I don't know how to fix it.

"final adjudicator" was never stated. Simply additional perspectives on the human condition as requirement for governance (corporate and governmental).

Mr. Hoover was actually the first president to bring the idea that later become Kaizen (for Japanese business), later to become Six Sigma (U.S. business) into U.S. government matters. I am a big Six Sigma fan. Its a shame it isn't used as much as it should be. Economists do adhere to its principles, but most companies should. In fact, it should be a required class in order to graduate with a Business Degree (the real ones and the online ones too).

 

[Fading Fast]

I have run several Six Sigma projects and it is a good tool when used for the right project in the right way - all the way through.

And fair point, "final adjudicator" was not your point and I unintentionally misrepresented your argument - my apologies. But I stand by the idea- as argued in an earlier post - that an ethicist will have a political bias as the two - ethics and politics - can't be untangled for most issues. That is why I made the leap to argue that she could not be a final arbitrator as she would just be another biased opinion amongst many. But she could bring a valuable perspective to the debate.

 

[HudsonHawk]

I have run several Six Sigma projects and it is a good tool when used for the right project in the right way - all the way through.

We use a variation of Six Sigma in our company and it's a huge priority. And it's a good tool. But it's only a tool, one of many in the tool box. My gripe with it is mostly people who see it as a cure for everything. When the only tool you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

 

[Fading Fast]

We use a variation of Six Sigma in our company and it's a huge priority. And it's a good tool. But it's only a tool, one of many in the tool box. My gripe with it is mostly people who see it as a cure for everything. When the only tool you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

I was trying to say what you said - but you said it better.

 

[LizzieMaine]

There was a time a politician known to have cheated on his spouse or taxes would not be legally barred from running, but it would have been unacceptable to the public - clearly, today that is not the case. Even if we fall short of our highest standards, it helps if we set them high. What we have now is a low bar and, then, behavior that is lower.

I'm not sure when that time was. Grover Cleveland was widely believed to have fathered an illegitimate child, and this story was a key point in the 1884 presidential campaign -- especially after Cleveland publicly admitted paying child support to the woman in the case. But he was elected just the same, as little children in the street chanted "MA! MA! MA! WHERE'S MY PA? GONE TO THE WHITE HOUSE -- HA! HA! HA!"

I don't think a candidate today could survive something like that.

(To say nothing of Mr. Harding, whose libertine adventures would have become public knowledge in 1920 had not his party paid blackmail to keep his mistress quiet. "Normalcy" indeed.)

 

[Bolero]

OMG...I'm doing some Bonsai Pruning presently but let me say this...

Drop and stop everything you are doing and engage in only the things that will bring you the meaningful thru Achievement and Accomplishment.

Life is very, very, very short, Family and Friends are what count...

Make a Point of understanding everything effecting you and your life, then use a blend of tolerance and action to effect your being...

For a deeper mental relaxation, study Zen...

Here are a couple Juniper Chinesis "Shimpaku" that I have Trained and are now Fo Sale...Each is about 14"Hx8"W

 

[HudsonHawk]

I'm not sure when that time was. Grover Cleveland was widely believed to have fathered an illegitimate child, and this story was a key point in the 1884 presidential campaign -- especially after Cleveland publicly admitted paying child support to the woman in the case. But he was elected just the same, as little children in the street chanted "MA! MA! MA! WHERE'S MY PA? GONE TO THE WHITE HOUSE -- HA! HA! HA!"

I don't think a candidate today could survive something like that.

(To say nothing of Mr. Harding, whose libertine adventures would have become public knowledge in 1920 had not his party paid blackmail to keep his mistress quiet. "Normalcy" indeed.)

George Washington was rumored to have had an illegitimate child. Thomas Jefferson was known to have several. John Tyler was suspected of having up to 15. James Buchanan and Abraham Lincoln were generally believed to have had homosexual affairs. The election of 1828, perhaps the dirtiest in history, was all about whether or not Andrew Jackson's wife was a bigamist. Extra-marital affairs? American politics is steeped in the tradition.

 

[philosophygirl78]

George Washington was rumored to have had an illegitimate child. Thomas Jefferson was known to have several. John Tyler was suspected of having up to 15. James Buchanan and Abraham Lincoln were generally believed to have had homosexual affairs. The election of 1828, perhaps the dirtiest in history, was all about whether or not Andrew Jackson's wife was a bigamist. Extra-marital affairs? American politics is steeped in the tradition.

All civilizations have stories of such... Egyptian Baths, Greek Parties, etc etc. It's human nature. Especially in power positions.

 

[philosophygirl78]

We use a variation of Six Sigma in our company and it's a huge priority. And it's a good tool. But it's only a tool, one of many in the tool box. My gripe with it is mostly people who see it as a cure for everything. When the only tool you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

It's a balance. I design system processes as part of my role and I can vouch for that you can have the best workers that will fail without the right processes and likewise you can have the best systems in place but achieve nothing with less than average workers. In my case, I manage commercial real estate agents (they have ego issues), so it's a pain to integrate them, but once they do, their conversion and performance is notably better.

 

[Fading Fast]

I was referencing (in my mind) that when Gary Hart was caught with Donna Rice his campaign effectively ended. That said, it has been and ebb and flow over time where some things are acceptable and some things aren't. And there was a time when having smoked marijuana was a big deal, (Clinton came under a lot of pressure for that one back in '92), but today it wouldn't be an event (and I'm happy with that).

I have no illusions that the past was good and today is bad, but I do think our culture today is so cynical and expects so little that it gets exactly that. Whereas, if we push for higher standards - let's take out outright cheating like a congressman from NYC did with his taxes, but easily won reelection anyway - as acceptable culturally, i.e., people won't vote for him even if he's from your party, and see if we can built on that. I don't think dictatorships are the answer, I don't think there any magic bullet, but I think we can build better standards into our system overtime.

And we've done that. Today women and minorities can run for and win elected positions they never could have before, not because it was illegal then, but because our culture wasn't there. Tammany Hall was more corrupt than NYC government is today. My point is we can improve our system from within, but it's not about another rule or law (although sometimes we need those), but about what we - the people - will put up with.

From today, on the Republican side, if Chris Christie is found guilty of knowing about the "bridge" affair, then whether he is legally disqualified, I would love it if Republicans would reflect him. If Hillary's email issues turns out as some charge - that she serially lied about it and put public security at risk - then whether she is ever charged with a crime or not, I'd love it if Democrats would reflect her. What I'm trying to show is it shouldn't be about one side attacking the other candidate as "a crook," but both sides saying I won't even support my own candidate if he / she is crooked (even if technically not able to be charged). That will take a cultural change, but we've done it before.