Philosophers have long used metaphors, like Hume’s “cement of the universe” and Ryle’s “ghost in the machine,” that conjure up images to convey their ideas. Recently, I have begun experimenting with using images projected onto a screen to incite students to join in an exploration of problems to be solved.
In Models and Metaphors, Max Black offers the following metaphor on metaphor:
Suppose that I look at the night sky through a piece of heavily smoked glass on which certain lines have been left clear. I shall see only the stars that can be made to lie on the lines previously prepared upon the screen, and the stars I do see will be seen as organized by the screen’s structure. We can think of metaphor as such a screen….
I posit that, like metaphor, a well-selected image serves as a screen that organizes thoughts. If I am right, then the image not only draws students into the process of constructing knowledge, but also aids them in that process.
Scroll down to be guided through a sample imagery-based lesson centered on the moral philosophy of W. D. Ross.
Click here to see my Ethics PowToons, including one on Ross’ Moral Pluralism. (It’s the third from the top on that page.) Also provided: Ross PowToon Transcript
In teams of three or four, students propose ways to shorten Ross’ list of seven prima facie duty types: fidelity, reparation, gratitude, justice, beneficence, self-improvement and non-maleficence. They are also asked to explain why Ross would resist their proposals. The aim of this lesson is for students to gain a better understanding of some of the moral considerations that ethical theorists have beared in mind when presenting or defending moral principles.
When the proposals below are presented in the follow-up, class-wide discussion, the corresponding images are projected on the screen, and students are given an extra minute or so to think through what would likely motivate Ross’ resistance. Students may opt to use the image for inspiration or disregard the image instead.
This lesson calls upon students to think through problems rather than dig through text for solutions. While other effective solutions will emerge, I do highlight the below solutions, each of which is directly supported by the text.
Proposal one: By modifying self-improvement so that it calls for increasing one’s own intelligence, virtue and pleasure, it can be rolled into beneficence.
Ross’ resistance: The role of morality is to put constraints on the pursuit of one’s own pleasure.
Ross’ own words: “…the doing of duty and the getting of pleasure for ourselves come by a natural association of ideas to be thought of as incompatible. This association of ideas… puts a check on… the tendency to pursue one’s own pleasure without thought of other considerations.” The Right and the Good (1930)
Proposal two: Reparation and gratitude can be rolled into justice.
Ross’ Resistance: Some of our moral duties are dependent on our personal histories. If I have wronged or received a kindness from someone, the duty of a fitting response falls squarely on my shoulders, not anyone else’s.
Ross’ own words: “The duty of justice… is a duty which we owe to all men alike…. But besides this general obligation, there are special obligations. They may arise, in the first place, incidentally, from acts which … create [them].” The inclusion of reparation and gratitude reflects “the highly personal character of duty.”
Proposal three: Beneficence and non-maleficence can be rolled into one – a duty of utility, perhaps.
Ross’ resistance: We ought to be very cautious about harming people to produce good for others. If we were forced to choose just one prima facie duty type as the basis of morality, then non-maleficence would be the right choice.
Ross’ own words: “…it seems to me that non-maleficence is apprehended as a duty distinct from that of beneficence, and as a duty of a more stringent character…. We should not in general consider it justifiable to kill one person in order to keep another alive, or to steal from one in order to give alms to another.”
Proposal: We can eliminate self-improvement outright, since the point of increasing one’s own intelligence and virtue is to fulfill the other prima facie duty types. For example, a duty of beneficence might require one to learn to cook to bring pleasure to others.
Ross’ resistance: Wisdom and virtue are intrinsically good, so the value of increasing one’s own intelligence is not purely instrumental. For example, learning about astronomy is valuable, even if others are not benefitted as a result.
Ross’ own words: Ross lists “virtue, knowledge, and pleasure” as “simple goods.” If he had held a purely hedonistic view, pleasure would have been his only simple good.
Colin Mathers Portfolio 