3.1 Value profile: responsibility  (Page 10/10)

Questions:

• Which model of responsibility works best for you, Esther's "circle of duty" model where one starts with one's immediate surroundings or Jellyby's "telescopic" model where one focuses on the distant. Start by considering what would be the strength and weaknesses of each.
• Do you believe Skimpole is sincere in his project of avoiding responsibility. What kind of actions or thinking could Skimpole show that would give the lie to his claim that "I am only a child"?
• Richard places all of his hopes and dreams on the resolution of the lawsuit that encircles all the characters of Bleak House. Do you think this project sustainable? How could such a commitment render one less responsible, that is, less capable of response to relevance?
• Dickens seems to imply by his portrait of Jellyby and Esther that one can either attend to one's immediate surroundings or one can focus, telescopically, on what is distant. Is this "disjunction" necessarily the case? Can you think of anyone who has managed to combine both perspectives? Can you think of anyone else like either Esther or Jellyby? How are they able to balance these poles of responsibility?
• Dickens takes exception to two themes embodied in the lawyer Tulkinghorn. First, Tulkinghorn reduces moral responsibility to legal responsibility? What do you think Dickens finds wrong with this. Second, for Tulkinghorn, the goal of legal responsibility is to maintain social order. Tulkinghorn's conception of social order is, in many respects, Medieval. He finds social order in every person's finding their station or social position, remaining loyal to that station, and performing its attendant duties. When someone rises above their station, Tulkinghorn feels it his duty to put them back in their place. What do you find wrong with this project? Do you think this problem endemic to responsibility or merely to Tulkinghorn's particular view of responsibility?

Teaching responsibility: pedagogical strategies or eliciting a sense of moral responsibility--seac 2013

Works cited

Insert paragraph text here.

• Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, Book III, Chs 1-3.
• Baier, K. (1991). “Types of Responsibility.” In The Spectrum of Responsibility. Ed., French, P.A. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
• Borenstein, N. (April 1989). My Life as a NATO Collaborator. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. 14-20.
• Bradley, F. H. (1876, 1962). Ethical Studies, 2nd ed. Oxford UK: Oxford University Press: 4-10.
• Callahan, Daniel. “Goals for the Teaching of Ethics.” Ethics Teaching in Higher Education. Eds., Daniel Callahan and Sissela Bok. New York: Plenum Press, 1980: 61-94.
• Cases brought before the Disciplinary Tribunal can be found at the CIAPR Website
• Davis, M. (2001). Comment on the Case Study “Doing the Minimum”: Ordinary Responsible Care Is Not the Minimum for Engineers. Science and Engineering Ethics, 7(2): 286-290.
• Dewey, J. (1988/1922). Human Nature and Conduct. The Middle Works, 1899-1924, Vol 14. Boydston, Jo Ann, ed. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press: 132-133.
• Dewey, J. (2008/1938). Logic: The Theory of Inquiry. The Later Works: 1925-1953, Vol 12: 1938. Boydston, Jo Ann, ed. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press: 26, 30, 38-39.
• Feinberg, J. (1970). Doing and Deserving: Essays in the Theory of Responsibility. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Fessmire, S. (2003). John Dewey and Moral Imagination: Pragmatism in Ethics. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press: 69-91.
• Fingarette, H. (1971). The Meaning of Criminal Insanity. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press: 186-187.
• Fingarette, H. (1967). On Responsibility. New York: Basic books, INC.
• Fingarette, H. (1972). Confucius—The Secular as Sacred. New York: Harper Torchbook.
• Fingarette, H. (2004). Mapping Responsibility: Explorations in Mind, Law, Myth, and Culture. Peru, IL: Open Court Publishing Company.
• Flanagan, M., Howe, D., and Nissenbaum, H. (2008). “Embodying Values in Technology: Theory and Practice”. in Jeroem van den Hoven and Hohn Weckert (eds) Information Technology and Moral Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 322-353.
• French, P.A. (1984). Collective and Corporate Responsibility. New York: Columbia University Press: 155-156.
• French, P.A. (1986). “Principles of Responsibility, Shame, and the Corporation”. Shame, Responsibility and the Corporation, Hugh Curtler, ed. New York: Haven Publishing Corporation: 31.
• Frey, W. (2009). Teaching Virtue: Pedagogical Immplications of Moral Psychology. In Science and Engineering Ethics. (Published Online) DOI 10.1007/s11948-009-9164-z.
• Harris, Charles. (2008). “The Good Engineer: Giving Virtue its Due in Engineering Ethics”. Science and Engineering Ethics, 14: 153-164.
• Hart, H.L.A. (1968). “Responsibility and Retribution.” In Computers, Ethics and Social Values. Eds., Johnson, D.G. and Nissenbaum, H. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall: 514-525.
• Hickman, L. (1991). John Dewey’s Pragmatic Technology. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
• Huff, C. “Hughes Aircraft Case Materials”. ComputingCases.org website. http://www.computingcases.org/case_materials/hughes/hughes_case_intro.html (Accessed June 7, 2011)
• Huff, C., Barnard, L., and Frey, W. (2008). “Good computing: a pedagogically focused module of virtue in the practice of computing.” Information, Communication and Ethics in Society. 6(3): 305.
• Huff, C. and Frey, W. (2008). “The Hughes Whistleblowing Case”. Whistleblowing: Perspectives and Experiences. Reena Raj, ed. Nagarjuna Hills, Punjagutta, Hyderbad, India: Icfai University Press: 75-80.Computing Cases and Whistle-Blowing anthology.
• Johnson, M. (1986). The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination, and Reason. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press: 13-16.
• Johnson, M. (1993). Moral Imagination: Implications of Cognitive Science for Ethics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press: 241.
• Johnson, M. (2007). The Meaning of the Body: Aesthetics of Human Understanding. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press: 176-179.
• Lackoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and Its Challenge to Western Thought. New York: Basic Books: 281.
• Lapsley, D. K. (1996). Moral Psychology. Boulder, CO: Westview Press: 65, 67, 70-71.
• Orlikowski, W.J.. (2000). “Using Technology and Constituting Structures: A Practice Lens for Studying Technology in Organizations.” Organization Science, 11(4), July-August 2000: 404-428.
• Pinch, T.J. and Bijker, W. (2009). The Social Construction of Facts and Artifacts. In Technology and Society: Building Our Soociotechnical Future. Johnson, D.G. and Wetmore, J.M., Editors . Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press: 107-139.
• Pritchard, M. (1996). Reasonable Children: Moral Education and Moral Learning. Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas Press: 15.
• Rest, J., Narváez, D., Bebeau, M.J. and Thoma, S.J. (1999). Postconventional Moral Thinking: A Neo-Kohlbergian Approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers:
• Sherman, N. (1997). Making a Necessity of Virtue: Aristotle and Kant on Virtue. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press: 39-50; 145-150.
• Smith, A. (1760/1976)). The Theory of Moral Sentiments. Raphael, D.D., and Macfie, A.L., eds. New York: Oxford University Press: 3-30.
• Strawson, P.F. (1974/2008). “Freedom and Resentment”. Freedom and Resentment and Other Essays. London: Routledge: 1-28.
• Weber, R. N. (Spring 1997). “Manufacturing Gender in Commercial and Military Cockpit Design.” Science, Technology, and Human Values 22, no. 2: 235-253. In Technology and Society: Building Our Sociotechnical Future. Eds. Johnson, D. and Wetmore, J. (2009) Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press: 265-274.
• Whitbeck, C. (1998). Ethics in Engineering Practice and Research. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press: 53.
• Winner, L. (1978). Autonomous Technology: Technics-out-of-Control as a Theme in Political Thought. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
• Winter, S. (1990). “Bull Durham and the Uses of Theory.” Stanford Law Review 42: 639-693.