| ... |
... |
@@ -1,0
+1,29 @@ |
|
1 |
+Humans all have first-order desires such as wanting to smoke a cigarette, but unlike animals, we can mediate those desires through our volitions. When one takes actions towards a specific end, one postulates that one ought to permit to act – this makes a free volition a pre-requisite. Subjectivity and morality can’t be just a matter of passion, because whether a person identifies with their desires is regulated by volition. |
|
2 |
+Rahel Jaeggi ’14 (August 2014). “Alienation.” Columbia University Press. Translated by Frederick Neuhouser and Alan E. Smith. Edited by Frederick Neuhouser. Rahel Jaeggi is professor of social and political philosophy at the Humboldt University in Berlin. Her research focuses on ethics, social philosophy, political philosophy, philosophical anthropology, social ontology, and critical theory. |
|
3 |
+On the one...our initial example. |
|
4 |
+ |
|
5 |
+Analytics |
|
6 |
+ |
|
7 |
+The difference between a free volition and an unfree one is that the free volition has been appropriated as a relevant feature of the self. Appropriation is the process of when the self includes the world into the will – for example, a smoker that wants to quit smoking but can’t because of an addiction lacks the ability to appropriate because they can’t exercise their will to end smoking. Without appropriation, there can be no hope for social change or non-alienation since one lacks appropriation; they lack connection with the world, destroying any possibility of agency or participation in any activity. Without engagement with the world, freedom is useless. |
|
8 |
+Rahel Jaeggi 2 (August 2014). “Alienation.” Columbia University Press. Translated by Frederick Neuhouser and Alan E. Smith. Edited by Frederick Neuhouser. Rahel Jaeggi is professor of social and political philosophy at the Humboldt University in Berlin. Her research focuses on ethics, social philosophy, political philosophy, philosophical anthropology, social ontology, and critical theory. |
|
9 |
+The underlying idea...alienation diagnosed here.) |
|
10 |
+ |
|
11 |
+Analytics |
|
12 |
+ |
|
13 |
+Prefer the standard additionally: |
|
14 |
+ |
|
15 |
+Analytics |
|
16 |
+ |
|
17 |
+Second, rule following paradox – moral theories that impose absolute rules fail because there is nothing inherent to the rule nor in the interpretation of the rule that can determine how to follow the rule. There are an infinite number of different rules that are compatible with previous behavior and yet utterly distinct from the intended purpose. Thus, the rational assessment of ethical theories is incoherent because there is no plausible interpretation that can evaluate morality. Only my framework solves because while rules exist, individuals appropriate the rule into their volition and actualize it relevant to their desires. |
|
18 |
+Rahel Jaeggi 4(August 2014). “Alienation.” Columbia University Press. Translated by Frederick Neuhouser and Alan E. Smith. Edited by Frederick Neuhouser. Rahel Jaeggi is professor of social and political philosophy at the Humboldt University in Berlin. Her research focuses on ethics, social philosophy, political philosophy, philosophical anthropology, social ontology, and critical theory. |
|
19 |
+Now the standardization...preexisting role scripts. |
|
20 |
+ |
|
21 |
+Analytics |
|
22 |
+ |
|
23 |
+Impact Calculus: |
|
24 |
+ |
|
25 |
+Analytics |
|
26 |
+ |
|
27 |
+2 Ignore consequences/utilitarian impacts to the framework – focus on future simulations is alienating due its unpredictableness. |
|
28 |
+Rahel Jaeggi 5(August 2014). “Alienation.” Columbia University Press. Translated by Frederick Neuhouser and Alan E. Smith. Edited by Frederick Neuhouser. Rahel Jaeggi is professor of social and political philosophy at the Humboldt University in Berlin. Her research focuses on ethics, social philosophy, political philosophy, philosophical anthropology, social ontology, and critical theory. |
|
29 |
+The concept ofin a certain way. |