Recent orders
Moderator Tom Miller (2)
Moderator Tom Miller:
Good Evening. National attention has been focused on the problems of the American Negro for the past several weeks. Major civil rights legislation from President Kennedy is now before Congress; huge demonstrations have been held across the country. Violence has erupted in many places. Last week on Florida forum we discussed the racial situation with Governor George Wallace of Alabama who tried unsuccessfully to bar the entrance of two Negro students to the University of Alabama. This week, we have invited author and playwright, James Baldwin, to express his views in this growing controversy. Mr. Baldwin is the best-selling author of several books that reflect on racial conflict. He is offered his intellectual and moral support to the cause of the American Negro and, tonight, he has interrupted his schedule in Puerto Rico, where he is writing a play, to answer questions from our panel and studio audience. Questioning Mr. Baldwin tonight will be WCKT newsman Al Dempsey and Dr. Charlton Tebeau, chairman of the history department of the University of Miami. There will also be questions from our studio audience, after this message.
To begin tonight’s program, we will ask Mr. Baldwin to state briefly if he feels the racial conflict in Alabama and Mississippi could happen here in Florida.
James Baldwin:
“Well, in my view, which I think is the view, I think, of most American Negroes or the experience of most American Negroes, the situation in Alabama and Mississippi, which is spectacular and surprises the country, is nationwide. Not only could it happen in Florida, it could happen in New York or Chicago, Detroit or anywhere there is a significant Negro population. Because, until the day all the Negroes in this country, in one way or another, in different fashions, North or South, are kept in what is, in effect, prison. In the North, one lives in ghettos and, in the South, the situation is so intolerable as to become sinister not knowing for Mississippi or for Alabama, or for Florida,but for the whole future of this country. White people are surprised, I think, at the vehemence of the Negro feeling and the depth of the danger, but I don’t think it has caught any Negro by surprise. One has been in a terrible, terrible situation for a very, very long time.”
MODERATOR:
“Now, to our panel, Mr. Dempsey.”
Al Dempsey:
“Well, why could it happen? Why does it have to be violence? Why can’t it be something other than violence?
James Baldwin:
“Well, part of the reason is one is doing one’s best to avoid violence. One of the reasons it could happen that way is because for so long, four hundred years, the American republic, in general, has ignored and denied the whole situation that Negroes have operated within – to be a source of cheap labor, for example, north or south, is to be, in effect, oppressed. Now, the oppression is bad enough. But the myth that the country’s created about the object of the oppression: the myth about the negro being happy in his place, is something the republic has managed to believe and, so that in addition to the fact of the oppression, one has also the fact that within the country for one hundred years there’s been a way of life occurring in the country, which most of the country knows nothing about. And it’s reflected, for example, in the way Negroes talk to each other. It’s a kind of language which does not really exist on what we like to think of as a major level of the American culture.”
Al Dempsey:
“But hasn’t there been a lethargy on the part of the American negro for that 100 year period too, along with the white supremacy added to it?”
James Baldwin:
“Um, I don’t think so. No. I think that’s, again, part of the myth. One has to remember, after all – I may sound very rude – but you have to remember who writes the history books and toward what end? I have never known a lethargic Negro. I’ve known demoralized Negroes. But that is not the same thing. The truth is that the Negroes have been fighting for this hundred years to obtain their rights and the country has ignored it. And the technique of the country has been mainly to accommodate it or to contain it, but never really to change the situation. And what has happened in our time, in these last few years, is that it’s no longer possible to contain it and the technique of accommodation has broken down. For the first time, really, the situation is now in the open. No American can ignore it, as has been true, let us say up until 1954.
Al Dempsey:
“All right. Why did it happen? Why do you think it happened? In 1954.”
James Baldwin:
“Well, the one thing, what happened in the South is that when the Supreme Court desegregated schools, or tried to desegregate schools, the South, which until that time had really ignored pleas, on the part the NAACP or responsible Negro leaders, to do something about creating a situation in the South…they were not asking for desegregation but to honor the separate but equal clause. And, the schools of the South were not equal.
Now, this meant, after ’54, the South which had ignored the necessities on the part of Negroes to be educated suddenly what leaped into that breach is now building schools for Negroes to keep the schools segregated. And this meant, in effect, that if I were a college president in the Deep South at a state college, that I had lost my position. I could no longer bargain. I couldn’t…I no longer had to go to the governor to get a new dormitory or a new chemistry lab. The governor was all too anxious to give me a new chemistry lab. That meant that I no longer had any effect, no power whatever. I couldn’t guarantee the facility of my students. The bargaining table had suddenly disappeared. This is what really happened, I think.”
Al Dempsey:
“Well, that was 1954. This is 1963. All of a sudden we have violence. That’s what we’re talking about here. Are you Negro leaders, and let’s consider you one of the Negro leaders…Are Negro leaders encouraging conditions of violence?”
James Baldwin:
“No. No responsible Negro leader can possibly – all the people I work with I know, are working as hard as they know how to channelize an energy which they know is there in order for it not to become violence. But, to be candid, there is something amazing, really, in the fact that the Negro has not been violent sooner, you know? There is something very impressive, in my view, in the ways which Negroes have managed to deal with this situation. And, the kind of discipline, the kind of interior discipline demanded of an adolescent to sit-in and to boycott and to undergo all the things one has to undergo is an extraordinary thing. And, if it were true that was a new Negro, that he’d never been seen before, that would be a miracle.
What has really happened is these people have been coming a long, long time. In the 30’s, for example, people like Roy Wilkins in the South, as hobos tried to organize unions and being beaten, and clubbed, and murdered. The Republic ignored all this. But every Negro child growing up knew something about it. It is the Republic, I repeat, that has been captured by its own myth of the subservient Negro and now is surprised to discover that the myth was never true.”
Dr. Charlton W. Tebeau:
“Mr. Baldwin, are you saying possibly that if “separate but equal” facilities had been provided for Negroes, that none of this might have happened?”
James Baldwin:
“No, I am not saying that at all. I didn’t mean to suggest that. But I did mean to suggest that the NAACP at that point, was not at that point trying to change the law, really, but doing, again, what Negroes are always trying to do, which is try and save the children. To try to get, to invest the children in the morale, and you can’t teach a child if the situation in which he is studying is intolerable. We all know that. Now, it is also true that you cannot really – no Negro child who is going to a segregated school, which costs millions of dollars, is fooled about why he’s there. He’s there because white people want him there and no place else. And you cannot educate a child in that context, either. You see?”
Dr. Tebeau:
“It seems to me also that while you are asking white people to change their estimate of the Negro – raise their estimate of the Negro – you are also saying to the Negro he ought to do something to raise his estimate of himself. Isn’t that true?
James Baldwin:
“It’s one of the great problems, let me put it this way, of being an American Negro in the first place; that you are taught, really, the entire weight of the republic teaches you to despise yourself. All the standards, when you open your eyes and look at the world, you look out at it, there is nothing reflecting you. As far as we can tell, for example, from television programs, there are no Negroes at all, or most Hollywood productions. The country has arbitrarily declared that kinky hair, dark skin, wide nose, and big lips is a hideous thing to be afflicted with. Now, the Negro parent, in this case, let’s say I am a Negro parent, has to use everything he can find to counteract the republic’s attempt to diminish this child. It is inevitable then, that when a boy becomes 20 or a girl becomes 20, they are in great battle inside to release themselves from what the country calls them. Do you see? Now, this estimate of oneself is a very difficult thing to change, but this is a part of the battle one has got to do that and, incidentally, by no means incidentally, I think that white Americans, themselves, assume something else. They assume that I live in a segregated society and they don’t realize that they live in a segregated society – that we do – and that the white child is really just as victimized by this peculiar medieval system as any Negro child. And what is worse for the Black child, the white child doesn’t know it and his whole attitude towards the world and toward reality is romantic.”
Dr. Tebeau:
“If I may have one more question… Why are you as doubtful as you are about what liberals are going to do for the cause of the Negro?”
James Baldwin:
“Because I’ve – I don’t mean to sound cruel – there are exceptions, but in general, my experience with liberals, they have attitudes, and they have all the proper attitudes. But they have no real convictions, and when the chips are down and you expect them to deliver and what you thought they felt they somehow are not there.”
Dr. Tebeau:
“Is that your estimate of the Kennedy administration to an extent?”
James Baldwin:
“My estimate of the Kennedy administration, part of my estimate of the Kennedy administration, is that, first of all, the Kennedy brothers, like almost all the white Americans, even with the best will in the world, know very little – in fact, I would hazard, until recently, virtually nothing about what we like to call the Negro problem. You know, most of the white Americans I’ve ever encountered – really, you know – had a Negro friend or a Negro maid or somebody in high school, but they never, you know, or rarely, after school was over or whatever, came to my kitchen. You know, we were segregated from the schoolhouse door. Therefore, he doesn’t know – he really does not know – what it was like for me to leave my house, leave school, and go back to Harlem. He doesn’t know how Negroes live and it comes as a great surprise to the Kennedy brothers and everybody else in the country, I’m certain, again, you know, that like most white Americans I’ve encountered, I am sure they have nothing against Negroes. That’s really not the question. The question really is a kind of apathy and ignorance, which is the price we pay for segregation. That’s what segregation means. You don’t know what is happening on the other side of the wall because you don’t want to know.”
SHARE THIS:
Modeling and Social Skills
Modeling and Social Skills
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Professor’s Name
Course
Date
Modeling and Social Skills
Introduction
Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) is a therapeutic technique that helps modify the behavior of an individual with autism disorder. The ABA can manage behaviour based on changing the environment to impact an individual behavior that leads to the production of positive actions and eradication of the negative moves. Notably, ABA analyzes the order of occurrence of the behavior of an individual with autism for the identification of the antidescent that comes before the behavior, the consequence, and the behavior itself. Behaviour is reinforced or discouraged by the aftermath action. Applying behaviour analysis is used to treat autism as a developmental disability that arises due to differences in the brain. An individual suffering from autism is often associated with difficulties in social interaction and communication through repetitive and restricted behaviors. As such, there is a need to ABA analysis as a practical therapeutic approach to improve the social behavior of an individual suffering from autism. This paper explains the critical elements involved in the overview of autism and ABA, the scientific field of ABA and its relationship to autism, the roles of behaviorally based interventions, and the principles or values guiding the decision-making processes of the interventions.
Critical Elements involved in Overviewing Autism and ABA
Task Analysis
Task analysis involves helping individuals with the autism spectrum disorder understand and modify their behaviors. It also entails assessing individuals’ and family members’ skills, preferences, and goals. The skill evaluation helps in the initial assessments, which are the foundation of the specific treatment goals. The skills include language, communication, social interactions, academic, and hygiene skills (Felzer-Kim et al., 2021). An individual with the audism understands basic skills by focusing on mastering individual steps in a complex process. After identifying steps and creating directions, an instructor devises a learning plan customized to the goals and needs of the student. Consequently, task annalist improves the quality of life for all the family members by inculcating strong communication skills, social interaction, and interpersonal relations, giving people with autism a chance to survive an independent life.
Scientific Field Of Task Analysis as ABA and its Relationship to Autism
Consistency
As a teaching method, task analysis is characterized by consistency where the reinforcement and presentations of a single learning approach get presented in every learning situation. Consistency relates to intervening in autism conditions by creating an environment of reinforcing the positive behavior in the learning approach for quick mastery of content (Felzer-Kim et al., 2021). Also, an autistic individual relives the negative thoughts through consistent provision of tasks.
Individualization
The task analysis bases its facts on individualization, where the tasks are varied as per the ability of an individual (Felzer-Kim et al., 2021). Treating an individual with autism as an individual enhances emotional wellbeing. It also helps in the progression of targets and easy preparation for transitions and changes.
Systematic Instruction
Most importantly, systematic instruction characterizes the task analysis, where the activities are divided into small steps to culminate the end goals. Scientific instruction is also a scientific process that involves experimentation until achieving success through setting the criteria for mastery (Baker et al., 2019). It improves the quality and quantity of understanding of an individual with autism.
Modelling and Discrete Trial Approaches
Moreover, there exist the modelling and discrete trial approaches, which the instructor used as a task analysis framework. The discrete trial instructions provide short, clear, and prompt instructions that help an individual complete the task through guidance on their response (Baker et al., 2019). The instructor removes the prompts and progresses gradually by offering immediate positive feedback on accurate responses and providing recommended guidance on incorrect responses. Modelling involves showing the individual target behavior and giving instruction for the behavior imitation. Through modelling, individuals with autism have exhibited self-help and social skills.
Chaining
Chaining as an instructional strategy in the applied behavior analysis theory involves recognizing an individual with autism as a requirement of task mastery. It also involves breaking the tasks into small steps and teaching the steps in sequences. Once an individual learns the initial skill, the next step involves showing an action (Radley & Dart, 2022). The technique is profitable in assisting children with autism in learning repetitive routine tasks like a bathroom, wearing clothes, and shoes. Notably, chaining helps the instructor and the family members teach the kids to perform complex, multi-step tasks by breaking them down into essential components.
Scientific Field of Chaining as an ABA and its relationship to autism
Total Task Chaining
The total task chaining approach involves working together with an individual with autism. The work should be step by step to break and prompt tasks as necessary (Radley & Dart, 2022). It also occurs where the instructor teaches the fundamental skill by giving the learner the support for the challenges.
Forward Chaining
Forward chaining involves showing an individual the criteria for doing the first step of the task independently. The instructor, therefore, prompts the child for the consequent task (Choi, 2019). After an individual child with autism has completed the first step independently without the prompt, he or she can independently complete the significant steps.
Backward Chaining
It involves the completion of all the steps with prompting. An instructor needs to save the individual child from completing the task. Backward chaining is advantageous depending on the taught skills. It links the independent task completion for immediate reinforcement and reward. In backward chaining, the child with autism is given the opportunity to complete the last step independently and the next to last step independently (Choi, 2019). As evidence-based ABA, the backward chaining enables an individual to reach their full potential by overcoming the autism challenges.
Roles of Behaviorally-Based Interventions and the Principles Guiding the Decision Making
The Roles of Task Analysis and its Principles Guiding the Decision making
Task analysis induces the new skills to replace the problem behaviors, making an individual with autism learn what to do rather than what not to do. Also, the task analysis improves cognitive skills by making an individual quickly learn academically. It continues to enable an individual child with autism to generalize skills and apply them in the classroom and outside environment (Felzer-Kim et al., 2021). Moreover, it teaches self-control and task monitoring for job-related and social capabilities. Through positive responses to individual behavior, the task analysis prevents unintentional rewards for the problematic behaviors. As such, an individual can comply with the specific task, acting as a motivation paradigm.
Role of Chaining and its Principles in Guiding the Decision Making
Chaining breaks the task into steps and teaches an individual with autism the steps and the sequences of undertaking the instructions. It is also essential in enabling the child with autism to learn routine and repetitive tasks (Radley & Dart, 2022). The principle of repetition enables the individual child with autism to correctly complete all the behaviors in sequence. Notably, through the predetermined accuracy standard, an individual can be taught the next step using reinforcement depending on the ability to finish the previous steps.
Conclusion
Overall, the applied behavior analysis approach enables the instructor to effectively give the therapeutic intervention to an individual suffering from autism. The intervention involves changing the behavior through reward and reinforcement. Chaining and task analysis are the primary applied behavior analysis that enables the instructor to extensively use the behavioral mechanism to mitigate the positive behavior exhibited by an individual with autism. The elements are characterized by the scientific approaches, which play an amicable role in moulding and enhancing the positive behavioral changes of an individual with autism.
References
Baker, J. N., Rivera, C., Devine, S. M., & Mason, L. (2019). Creating a Task-Analysis for Teaching Emergent Literacy Skills to Students with Autism. Intervention in School Clinic, 54(3), 166. https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/teach-elementary-facpubs/42/Choi, J. (2019). A Comparison of forwarding and Backward Chaining on the Acquisition of Solitary Play Skills (Doctoral dissertation, The Chicago School of Professional Psychology). https://search.proquest.com/openview/1e5d22e0ae61cbb1eaaf2ba36786bb52/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=yFelzer-Kim, I. T., Campbell, H., Vallabheneni, N., Peterson, A., & Hauck, J. L. (2021). Working With Children With Autism in General Physical Education: Useful Applied Behavior Analysis Concepts. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 92(9), 50-55. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/07303084.2021.1977741Fisher, W. W., Piazza, C. C., & Roane, H. S. (Eds.). (2021). Handbook of applied behavior analysis. Guilford Publications. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=Xbb2DwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=Applied+Behavior+therapy+and+autism+management&ots=DV4eyYRhVe&sig=sj8R46I-HWC5D4MaiYQQ2Tih9PwRadley, K. C., & Dart, E. H. (2022). Other Behavior Analytic Strategies. Social Skills Teaching for Individuals with Autism (pp. 127-140). Springer, Cham. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-91665-7_11
Mills and Nietzsche take on Ethics and Morality
Morality
Contents
TOC o “1-3” h z u HYPERLINK l “_Toc378090093” Introduction PAGEREF _Toc378090093 h 1
HYPERLINK l “_Toc378090094” Nietzsche’s Genealogy of Morals Perspective PAGEREF _Toc378090094 h 2
HYPERLINK l “_Toc378090095” John Stuart Mill’s Utilitarian Perspective PAGEREF _Toc378090095 h 4
HYPERLINK l “_Toc378090096” Mills and Nietzsche take on Ethics and Morality PAGEREF _Toc378090096 h 6
Introduction
Morality definitions of good and its practicality in improvement of the quality of human life touch on a number of contested areas such as happiness, ethics and consequences. Philosophical deliberations of the moral value attached to the intentions of conduct within the confinements of definitions of goodness and happiness remain elusive and an open approach must inform a middle ground position on morality as a topic. Making comparisons of two of the most vocal morality philosophers to illustrate the need of a broader perspective in definition of other deeper concepts of morality such as righteousness and virtue underscores the sensitivity of the debate. On one hand, the position adopted by Nietzsche through the famous dichotomies defining the genesis of good, bad and evil formulate the essence of morality from the basics. Apparently, it would be difficult to discuss that whose origin or genesis cannot support its existence. On the other hand, the opinion of John Stuart Mill concerning morality raises the higher bar of morality through definition of virtue and its importance in life, for instance in religion (Smith 27).
Despite the fact that the approaches taken by the two philosophers distinguish their philosophical orientation through different concepts on the central theme, two concepts remain throughout their debate as demonstrated in this discourse. Both philosophers independently made astounding interpretations to morality, almost certainly taking a similar opinion on several elements than conflicting opinion. The centrality of morality in the work by Nietzsche and Mill illustrates the diversity of definition of the underlying interpretations such as through genealogy of morals, utilitarianism, egoism, righteousness and consequentialism.
Nietzsche’s Genealogy of Morals PerspectiveTracing the origin of the general meaning of good and bad from class differentiation between the powerful and the weak eventually leading to a systemic unquestionable belief of correct and wrong judgments presents Nietzsche’s opinion in a sharp reflection on morality. The First Essay depicts Nietzsche as a simplistic morality thinker in the way he relates the topic with the human society. Perhaps getting the basics rights in the definition of what morality entails gives Nietzsche the edge in laying the foundations of the debate. Morality interpretation of good through attaching benefit to the recipient of actions of others illustrates the perspective taken by Nietzsche, though he makes the observation to the effect that the terminology ‘good’ came later. Such an explanation adopts the utilitarian concept where the tag of benefit drives the definition of actions as good or bad (Geddes para.9).
For a clearer understanding of the origin of the concept of good in the society, Nietzsche takes the historical appearance of the expression ‘good’. Assigning the origin of good and bad as exclusively independent actions facilitates the drawing of the conclusion of morality, within the limitation of master and slave interpretation. Critics of this definition of origin of morality parameters would find fault in the practicality of the definitions before organized society where slave-master arrangement would be too complex and entirely inconceivable. Associating badness with excesses of power alone selectively brands higher classes as the vulnerable species in the relationship, whereas the opposite falls within logical transposition in a normal setting. As an illustration, the low classes are generally vulnerable to devise ways of defying class misfortunes such as hunger through seemingly bad interventions such as theft.
The construction of the ‘pathos of distance’ in the characterization of the spread of good and bad attributes among the classes facilitates the establishment of social balance. Exclusion of classes from a particular attribute would otherwise render the argument rather illogical since good and bad exists across the classes, at least from antiquity projections. The onus of illustrating the practicality of the genesis of good and bad satisfactorily demonstrates the reflective quality of the Nietzsche’s essay. Illustration of how the spread of bad among the traditionally good lower classes as the essay points out relies on radicalism that led to the transvaluation of perceived ideals and social morals. Rising against apparent marginalization by the power class bred evil among the low class that originally took the goodness tag. Justification of bad ‘values’ among the poor only implies that pulling the moral fiber too tight for it withstand leads to destruction of the morality perception (Lewis 458). The immoral content in the justification context cannot qualify badness to goodness under morality considerations. Nietzsche notes this concept by tagging the seemingly acceptable struggle as slave morality that is largely fueled by the survival instinct embraced to eliminate the marginalization. Opposition of the acceptable ‘morality’ forces among the two sides results in the entrenchment of the culture of good and bad. How discrete the powerful and powerless classes interact with the two values depends on the dominant mentality. Whereas the survival mentality among the lower classes triggers slave mentality and survival tactics thereon, the point of overlapping attributes of goodness and badness does not emerge clearly.
In view of the magnitude of levels of acceptance of the class perceptions, the analogy of powerful eagle class against the relatively weaker lambs within the inherent conflict identification demonstrates natural enmity that adds meaning to the characterization (Negri 12). Power as a fountain of goodness in the illustration adopted by Nietzsche’s first essay appears to form the standardization yardstick. The branding of the powerful as systemically bad and that they are only good if they exercise freedom of choice to decide to cross over the slave and master morality gap is debatable among the morality philosophers. In addition, attaching the origin of slave morality to religious class may indicate the apparent pursuit of solace in ‘purity’ of the class (Mwhalin para.9).
John Stuart Mill’s Utilitarian PerspectiveMill’s discussion on morality captures appropriateness of actions for the definition of morality, which is largely a utilitarian perspective as opposed to the egoistic approach adopted by Nietzsche. Righteousness attributes of the actor facilitates the determination of Mill’s c of morality. The valuation of utility in actions according to the postulations by Mill perhaps obtains credit from satisfaction and happiness. Intrinsic motivation towards pleasure and satisfaction as the center of valuation allows the opinion by Mills to attain definition aspects as those taken by Nietzsche. Explaining the role of goodness from the perceived benefits to reflect on morality demonstrates the philosopher’s connection with social perceptions where morality definitions take shape. Pleasure in terms of the mental satisfaction takes precedence over physical pleasure. Perception of pleasure makes importance to Mill if first accepted in the minds of the beneficiaries of the good thereon (Mill 11).
The importance of moral instincts in the determination of morality by an individual and the society forms the foundations of Mill’s postulates on goodness. Inherent tags of right or wrong do not form part of the postulates forwarded by Mills and he argues that only morality instincts assist the valuation of goodness in actions. The application of certain general rules established by instincts determines the perception of morality in the society. Existence of instincts in the minds of people deliberating on morality simplifies a rather complicated debate where opinions on the appropriate determination of morality clash. It therefore implies that the lack of written rules and regulations for the determination of morality leaves the opinion diversity as confusing as it is. Generally, accepted moral values compel the society to hold certain incidental principles of good and bad as the foundations of morality.
Mill’s attempts to demystify incorrect reception of utilitarianism as certain isolated critical views elaborates pleasure as the central motivation to acting as desired under morality principles. Just as Nietzsche approaches his essay by definition of the morality defining concepts of good and bad, Mills considers utility attachments of actions as the driving factors in his enumeration of morality. Pleasure and utility appear to represent closely related concepts from which the human race finds solutions to morality. Classification of pleasures based on their importance may prove determinant to the overall utility and value. According to the postulates forwarded by Mills, pleasures that take higher ranking from the beneficiaries have a higher utility and may compel decision making towards uptake of more pleasurable actions. It implies that the most dominant determinant in choosing pleasure considers quality over quantity. Mills explains that the most preferable pleasure in a smaller quantity would not ordinarily be traded for a higher amount of a lower ranking pleasure.
Utilitarianism perhaps confuses people who fail to distinguish true happiness from contentment that represents a lower quality of pleasure from a morality perspective (Mill 25). Contentment would overrule the value of morality lessons captures in Mills illustrations of the better version of pleasure. Mill reckons that being a dissatisfied human, scores highly in terms of value of pleasure when compared to being a satisfied animal. Alternatively, a wise person in spells of dissatisfactions ranks higher when compared to a fool with a feeling of satisfaction. Mills therefore considers the overall quality of pleasure as a determinant of the moral motivation that humans should have towards attaining a particular pleasure. Higher and lower levels of pleasure form the threshold of judgment that an individual must always contemplate on in order to discern how utility ranking elevates the motivation thereon. The concept of life and its dignity allow Mill’s arguments to expel lower forms of pleasure in qualification of the correct and appropriate pleasures under morality consideration. Morality and motivations of taking the most appropriate decision must be informed by the apparent quality of pleasure as opposed to the quantity. Happiness as an attainable human life motivation forms a central concept taken by Mill in explaining the role of pleasure informing moral decisions.
Virtue as a conglomerate of choosing proper decisions with an aim of attaining higher pleasures and happiness also stands out as an argument in Mill’s postulates. The importance of education towards attaining better responses in handling happiness and motivations thereon emerges in the considerations of utility as the driving motivation. Social arrangement also influences the nature of perceived pleasures in the society. It is important for Mill to illustrate the impact of selfishness in alienation of pleasure to other people and as a cause of unhappiness and dissatisfaction. Pain withstood as a motivation for greater benefit of the community receives a mention by Mill and martyrdom is employed in the illustration (Mill 36). A martyr seemingly sacrifices a single life for the satisfaction of the large group of people professing the cause of the martyr. Maintaining the attitude of happiness in pursuit of all activities undertaken forms the basis of morality under the utilitarian perspective.
Mills and Nietzsche take on Ethics and MoralityMills and Nietzsche have a number of opinions that nearly coincide with regard to the nature of ethical considerations that a society attaches to morality. The foundations and origins of morality perceptions form an important start for the discussion and the two philosophers make a deliberate dedication of basic definitions of goodness, badness, pleasure and happiness. In generating the background interaction of the society with the specified elements under morality concepts facilitates the establishment of a common ground for their arguments. The use of basic life settings in the development of the explanations shows that the two have a deeper understanding of ethical concepts in the society from the most basic perspectives. Nietzsche employs ancient slave-master setting while Mill adopts several animal and human relationships in understanding the motivation of actions towards definition of morality. Apparently, both employ qualitative distinction of actions in attaching morality and value of right judgment. Whereas Mill’s concepts on morality preceded Nietzsche in historic considerations, it is interesting to realize the similarity of the approach taken. Mill’s observation that the social arrangement elevates persons to make pleasure accessible to many more other people coincides with the concept that Nietzsche holds about those in power.
However, in order for the persons in power to make such an important beneficial impact in the lives of the majority, a significant descent from the master morality seemingly oppressing the powerless must prevail. Both positions taken by the philosophers illustrate the importance of social order and power stratification that is presented in the arguments propagated but in a different way. In view of the role of morality as a value as opposed to vices on the lower side of rating, the two philosophers hold the opinion that the quality of life of human beings depends on the quality of perceived satisfaction. Nietzsche defines the context of the powerful class as a higher and pleasurable position that the powerless would easily fight to attain. Mill on the other hand illustrates the better position from a more complicated qualitative analysis that raises the standards set by Nietzsche. As an illustration, Mill explains the superiority of suffering persons bearing wisdom when compared to contented fools without particular urgency of leaving the comfort zone. Although both perspectives employ different happiness qualification standards, it is clear that the issue of morality and ethics originates from the social interpretation of the actions taken. Extrapolation of the struggles by the powerless class in the Nietzsche essay and effective transposition onto the position taken by Mill coincides with the motivation to attain higher pleasures.
Nietzsche takes an egoistic deliberation of moral values and employs the theme of class superiority to define the origin of morality perceptions among the classes. By depicting the class tag as a determinant of the quality of morality, Nietzsche takes a different perspective from Mills in enumeration of morality. Nietzsche’s essays consider the quality of morality from an apparent dichotomy of considerations of good and bad from the genesis perspective whereas Mill employs a generally open approach without dichotomy restrictions. Mill delivers happiness and pleasure analysis from a position that avoids egoism but a comprehensive characterization of the state of reasoning behind the valuation of pleasure as either higher or lower status (Mill 42). Depicting the attainment of pleasure as well as actions targeting attainment of freedom from pain as most powerful drive towards making life meaningful establishes Mill’s approach.
Comparing Nietzsche and Mill in explanation of the quality of goodness attained in the end of actions, both highlight the valuation in a different attempt. Nietzsche brands the powerless as the origin of bad and evil and illustrates contentment between the classes as illustrated in the acceptance in the analogy of the eagles and lambs. The apparent acceptance by the classes that the tag of either bad or good exists creates a scrappy concept of individual role of embracing ethics in the society. Perhaps due to the restriction of the dichotomous design of the classes, Nietzsche fails to forge a convincing argument to support the unfair branding of power as a determinant of origin of immorality. In terms of the level of influence, that each of the philosophers has on the other, it is clear that the two employ independent conceptualization of morality and no clear relationship is witnessed. Apparently, there is a huge difference in the root argument adopted where one employs egoistic argument while the other employs a different approach.
Works Cited
Geddes, Dan. “Towards an Evaluation of Nietzsche Genealogy of Morals,” 2012, Web. (4 August, 2012) HYPERLINK “http://www.thesatirist.com/books/GenealogyofMorals.html” http://www.thesatirist.com/books/GenealogyofMorals.html
HYPERLINK “http://chasingsophia.wordpress.com/2008/02/26/lewis-david-k-counterfactual-dependence-and-times-arrow-nous-vol-13-no-4-special-issue-on-counterfactuals-and-laws-nov-1979-pp-455-476/” Lewis, K. David. “Counterfactual Dependence and Time’s Arrow.” Nous, 13.4(1979):455-476.
Mill, J. Stuart. Utilitarianism, New York, NY: Barnes and Noble, 2007. Print
Mwhalin, Christopher. “Nietzsche, F. “First Essay: ‘Good and Bad,’ ‘Good and Evil’” in On the Genealogy of Morals,” 2008. Web. (4 August, 2012) HYPERLINK “http://chasingsophia.wordpress.com/2008/03/” http://chasingsophia.wordpress.com/2008/03/
Negri, Paul. The Genealogy of Morals, New York, NY: Dover Publications, 2003. Print
Smith, Douglas. On the Genealogy of Morals, On the Genealogy of Morals, New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1996. Print